- This topic has 237 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 2 months ago by
NotCranky.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 13, 2007 at 10:44 AM #116216December 13, 2007 at 11:24 AM #116078
bigmoneysalsa
ParticipantGood stuff FSD, whybuy. So it seems like the last bottom was around 4.6 * median income. Not affordable by conservative measures, but way better than anything we’ve seen in a while.
Is there any good reason to think we won’t get down to at least 5 * income at the next bottom? I don’t see any.
sdrealtor, don’t get me wrong I agree with your overarching point that prices aren’t determined by incomes. SD is an expensive place to buy, but it’s also an expensive place to rent. Ultimately its the PE ratio that shows how out of whack prices are. I wish people would focus more on that than on incomes.
December 13, 2007 at 11:24 AM #116209bigmoneysalsa
ParticipantGood stuff FSD, whybuy. So it seems like the last bottom was around 4.6 * median income. Not affordable by conservative measures, but way better than anything we’ve seen in a while.
Is there any good reason to think we won’t get down to at least 5 * income at the next bottom? I don’t see any.
sdrealtor, don’t get me wrong I agree with your overarching point that prices aren’t determined by incomes. SD is an expensive place to buy, but it’s also an expensive place to rent. Ultimately its the PE ratio that shows how out of whack prices are. I wish people would focus more on that than on incomes.
December 13, 2007 at 11:24 AM #116242bigmoneysalsa
ParticipantGood stuff FSD, whybuy. So it seems like the last bottom was around 4.6 * median income. Not affordable by conservative measures, but way better than anything we’ve seen in a while.
Is there any good reason to think we won’t get down to at least 5 * income at the next bottom? I don’t see any.
sdrealtor, don’t get me wrong I agree with your overarching point that prices aren’t determined by incomes. SD is an expensive place to buy, but it’s also an expensive place to rent. Ultimately its the PE ratio that shows how out of whack prices are. I wish people would focus more on that than on incomes.
December 13, 2007 at 11:24 AM #116243bigmoneysalsa
ParticipantGood stuff FSD, whybuy. So it seems like the last bottom was around 4.6 * median income. Not affordable by conservative measures, but way better than anything we’ve seen in a while.
Is there any good reason to think we won’t get down to at least 5 * income at the next bottom? I don’t see any.
sdrealtor, don’t get me wrong I agree with your overarching point that prices aren’t determined by incomes. SD is an expensive place to buy, but it’s also an expensive place to rent. Ultimately its the PE ratio that shows how out of whack prices are. I wish people would focus more on that than on incomes.
December 13, 2007 at 11:24 AM #116286bigmoneysalsa
ParticipantGood stuff FSD, whybuy. So it seems like the last bottom was around 4.6 * median income. Not affordable by conservative measures, but way better than anything we’ve seen in a while.
Is there any good reason to think we won’t get down to at least 5 * income at the next bottom? I don’t see any.
sdrealtor, don’t get me wrong I agree with your overarching point that prices aren’t determined by incomes. SD is an expensive place to buy, but it’s also an expensive place to rent. Ultimately its the PE ratio that shows how out of whack prices are. I wish people would focus more on that than on incomes.
December 13, 2007 at 11:24 AM #116287bigmoneysalsa
ParticipantGood stuff FSD, whybuy. So it seems like the last bottom was around 4.6 * median income. Not affordable by conservative measures, but way better than anything we’ve seen in a while.
Is there any good reason to think we won’t get down to at least 5 * income at the next bottom? I don’t see any.
sdrealtor, don’t get me wrong I agree with your overarching point that prices aren’t determined by incomes. SD is an expensive place to buy, but it’s also an expensive place to rent. Ultimately its the PE ratio that shows how out of whack prices are. I wish people would focus more on that than on incomes.
December 13, 2007 at 11:24 AM #116299bigmoneysalsa
ParticipantGood stuff FSD, whybuy. So it seems like the last bottom was around 4.6 * median income. Not affordable by conservative measures, but way better than anything we’ve seen in a while.
Is there any good reason to think we won’t get down to at least 5 * income at the next bottom? I don’t see any.
sdrealtor, don’t get me wrong I agree with your overarching point that prices aren’t determined by incomes. SD is an expensive place to buy, but it’s also an expensive place to rent. Ultimately its the PE ratio that shows how out of whack prices are. I wish people would focus more on that than on incomes.
December 13, 2007 at 11:44 AM #116125(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participantbigmoneysalsa –
I also like comparing ownership carrying costs to rent as the best metric.
I think 5x median family income would put us around 350-400K for the median house price.
That’s also consistent with rent/buy equilibrium for a lot of places in San Diego.
December 13, 2007 at 11:44 AM #116255(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participantbigmoneysalsa –
I also like comparing ownership carrying costs to rent as the best metric.
I think 5x median family income would put us around 350-400K for the median house price.
That’s also consistent with rent/buy equilibrium for a lot of places in San Diego.
December 13, 2007 at 11:44 AM #116288(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participantbigmoneysalsa –
I also like comparing ownership carrying costs to rent as the best metric.
I think 5x median family income would put us around 350-400K for the median house price.
That’s also consistent with rent/buy equilibrium for a lot of places in San Diego.
December 13, 2007 at 11:44 AM #116331(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participantbigmoneysalsa –
I also like comparing ownership carrying costs to rent as the best metric.
I think 5x median family income would put us around 350-400K for the median house price.
That’s also consistent with rent/buy equilibrium for a lot of places in San Diego.
December 13, 2007 at 11:44 AM #116343(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participantbigmoneysalsa –
I also like comparing ownership carrying costs to rent as the best metric.
I think 5x median family income would put us around 350-400K for the median house price.
That’s also consistent with rent/buy equilibrium for a lot of places in San Diego.
December 13, 2007 at 11:45 AM #116130sdrealtor
ParticipantBMS,
I agree only entered the fray to debunk the myth that median income HH’s should be able to buy the median priced home and that prices MUST return to that level.December 13, 2007 at 11:45 AM #116260sdrealtor
ParticipantBMS,
I agree only entered the fray to debunk the myth that median income HH’s should be able to buy the median priced home and that prices MUST return to that level. -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.