- This topic has 13 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 11 months ago by lindismith.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 16, 2006 at 2:42 PM #7925November 16, 2006 at 3:58 PM #40155kev374Participant
This time the whole thing is going to be much more severe due to the introduction of all the suicide mortgages going bust within the next 1-2 yrs. If homes could decline 35% in the last downturn there is no reason to rule out a 40-50% decline.
November 16, 2006 at 4:11 PM #40157BobbyDParticipantI could not agree with you more!
November 16, 2006 at 4:14 PM #40158Diego MamaniParticipant35% is not the price drop, but rather, the share of sales in Mar-May 1995 that resulted in a loss.
November 16, 2006 at 5:17 PM #40160kev374ParticipantDiego, my cousins condo bought in 1990 for $207,000 declined 33.8% to $137,000 by 1995, this was in the upscale area of Rancho Palos Verdes 😉 so it’s not speculation but fact that values dropped that much! Current value at zillow is $660,000 (about 200k off!) and a comp sold a few months for $450,000.
November 16, 2006 at 5:28 PM #40162PDParticipantI lived in a townhouse in Aliso Viejo (OC). My landlord paid $170,000 (I don’t know how close that was to the peak) for it and offered to sell it to us for $130,000 in 1994.
November 16, 2006 at 7:40 PM #40173Diego MamaniParticipantKev, I agree with you. I was just clarifying the meaning of 35% in the original post. Yes, condos can easily drop 35%, if not more.
Back in 1999-2000 I used to live in a nice 1/1 condo in Point Loma, my rent was $600 (which was below market). I think my landlord had bought it in 1987 or so for $50K, and by 1999 it was worth $65K or $70K, at most. My guess is that the same condo was probably worth $70K in 1990 at the peak of the boom.
November 17, 2006 at 2:21 PM #40210The-ShovelerParticipantNor_LA-Temcu-SD-Guy
What I don’t get is all these Realtors and housing market guru’s keep saying , Buyers are waiting of the side lines,
There’s no one waiting on the Side line guy’s . There at the bottom of the price wall looking up wondering how the hell they could really afford these thing’s.
November 17, 2006 at 3:24 PM #40214no_such_realityParticipantSomething will make it different this time.
In 1994, you could stomach losing $20,000 and get out. You fore go the next car and pay it off over five years.
With homes in OC having a median of $625,000, that “average” loss likley will climb to $70K or so and could easily push six figures. People won’t be able to stomach and walk away with a $100,000 loss.
That’s a bankruptcy level loss which changes the game.
November 17, 2006 at 10:47 PM #40239powaysellerParticipantI read some other archived Dataquick articles today, and saw Ocean Beach median fell 30%, while Poway’s median only fell 10%. Lowest price drops were in Lakeside, Santee, Chula Vista South.
November 18, 2006 at 10:30 AM #40255barnaby33ParticipantUm PS, no way did Poway only fall ten percent. I personally lived through that one. Someone is cooking the numbers. It was much worse than that. Even inflation adjusted. Poway was a total speculative boom/bust market in the late 80’s and early 90’s.
Josh
November 18, 2006 at 12:49 PM #40268powaysellerParticipantAccording to Dataquick’s chart, the price change from the 88-91 high to the 91-97 low, based on resale price/square foot was -10.3% for Poway, Lakeside, Santee, and over -30% for Ocean Beach and Point Loma. How do we explain Dataquick’s numbers? They are not median (which is skewed by sales of bigger homes), but median price/sq ft.
November 20, 2006 at 10:51 AM #40358sdcellarParticipantI know nothing of prices in any of those areas during the nineties, but one thing that probably does throw off price per square foot for areas like Poway and Lakeside is the diversity in properties. You have very small to very large lots, horse properties, view lots, not view lots, and I don’t know what else.
Certainly, there are diverse properties in OB/Point Loma, just not as diverse.
Enough of a difference to explain the metrics? I have no idea.
November 20, 2006 at 2:14 PM #40366lindismithParticipantIn ’88-91, there was very little development out there, and what there was, was not the high-end stuff you see out there today.
Poway was considered ‘the sticks’. (spelling?)
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.