Cielo

[cielore]

Does anyone have a guess as to the percentage increase in land values over the original selling price? I am told that the initial offering sold out in 36 hrs in 2003. I also understand that the parent company either has or is preparing to release another 50+ homesites on higher terrain above the original development. This cant bode well for existing lot owners. Also, the fact that 5yrs after opening the vast majority of this development remains empty dirt is a definite neg IMHO. Even if I bought a lot at fire sale pricing tomorrow my quality of living and resalevalue have got to be significantly lowered by the empty dirt everywhere. I think you need a 5-10 yr horizon and a lot of patience to consider building here IMHO. Thoughts?

[raptorduck]

I don’t know about your question on the numbers with respect to value etc, but I personally don’t get the value proposition of the higher elevation lots. They are indeed considered more valuable. But it takes so long to get up to the 1,400′ elevation and the views so vast as to loose the intricacy of detail, that I would never buy that high up. Down below, you have existing homes with amazing views, but not so high that you loose the detail, or so inconvenient that you dred the drive up to your house, particularly in the rain.

I saw a few amazing high quality homes up high, but preferred the very good quality homes below that I liked as striking a nice balance between view and convenience.

But then again, when I consdidered purchasing there, it was not as an investment, but as a long term home. Of course, life brings surprises so appreciation is still important to me, so I would expect your point to indeed contribute to the price pressures there. Which is one reason why I have been careful with offer prices there.

Sellers there, they seem to think the opposite of privatebanker that Cielo is not RSF and appear to feel that only Cielo is RSF with the prices they are asking right now, which really stand out as overpriced when you compare them to similarly sized homes in other parts of RSF (whether real or imagined).

[raptorduck]

I don’t know about your question on the numbers with respect to value etc, but I personally don’t get the value proposition of the higher elevation lots. They are indeed considered more valuable. But it takes so long to get up to the 1,400′ elevation and the views so vast as to loose the intricacy of detail, that I would never buy that high up. Down below, you have existing homes with amazing views, but not so high that you loose the detail, or so inconvenient that you dred the drive up to your house, particularly in the rain.

I saw a few amazing high quality homes up high, but preferred the very good quality homes below that I liked as striking a nice balance between view and convenience.

But then again, when I consdidered purchasing there, it was not as an investment, but as a long term home. Of course, life brings surprises so appreciation is still important to me, so I would expect your point to indeed contribute to the price pressures there. Which is one reason why I have been careful with offer prices there.

Sellers there, they seem to think the opposite of privatebanker that Cielo is not RSF and appear to feel that only Cielo is RSF with the prices they are asking right now, which really stand out as overpriced when you compare them to similarly sized homes in other parts of RSF (whether real or imagined).

[raptorduck]

I don’t know about your question on the numbers with respect to value etc, but I personally don’t get the value proposition of the higher elevation lots. They are indeed considered more valuable. But it takes so long to get up to the 1,400′ elevation and the views so vast as to loose the intricacy of detail, that I would never buy that high up. Down below, you have existing homes with amazing views, but not so high that you loose the detail, or so inconvenient that you dred the drive up to your house, particularly in the rain.

I saw a few amazing high quality homes up high, but preferred the very good quality homes below that I liked as striking a nice balance between view and convenience.

But then again, when I consdidered purchasing there, it was not as an investment, but as a long term home. Of course, life brings surprises so appreciation is still important to me, so I would expect your point to indeed contribute to the price pressures there. Which is one reason why I have been careful with offer prices there.

Sellers there, they seem to think the opposite of privatebanker that Cielo is not RSF and appear to feel that only Cielo is RSF with the prices they are asking right now, which really stand out as overpriced when you compare them to similarly sized homes in other parts of RSF (whether real or imagined).

[raptorduck]

I don’t know about your question on the numbers with respect to value etc, but I personally don’t get the value proposition of the higher elevation lots. They are indeed considered more valuable. But it takes so long to get up to the 1,400′ elevation and the views so vast as to loose the intricacy of detail, that I would never buy that high up. Down below, you have existing homes with amazing views, but not so high that you loose the detail, or so inconvenient that you dred the drive up to your house, particularly in the rain.

I saw a few amazing high quality homes up high, but preferred the very good quality homes below that I liked as striking a nice balance between view and convenience.

But then again, when I consdidered purchasing there, it was not as an investment, but as a long term home. Of course, life brings surprises so appreciation is still important to me, so I would expect your point to indeed contribute to the price pressures there. Which is one reason why I have been careful with offer prices there.

Sellers there, they seem to think the opposite of privatebanker that Cielo is not RSF and appear to feel that only Cielo is RSF with the prices they are asking right now, which really stand out as overpriced when you compare them to similarly sized homes in other parts of RSF (whether real or imagined).

[raptorduck]

I don’t know about your question on the numbers with respect to value etc, but I personally don’t get the value proposition of the higher elevation lots. They are indeed considered more valuable. But it takes so long to get up to the 1,400′ elevation and the views so vast as to loose the intricacy of detail, that I would never buy that high up. Down below, you have existing homes with amazing views, but not so high that you loose the detail, or so inconvenient that you dred the drive up to your house, particularly in the rain.

I saw a few amazing high quality homes up high, but preferred the very good quality homes below that I liked as striking a nice balance between view and convenience.

But then again, when I consdidered purchasing there, it was not as an investment, but as a long term home. Of course, life brings surprises so appreciation is still important to me, so I would expect your point to indeed contribute to the price pressures there. Which is one reason why I have been careful with offer prices there.

Sellers there, they seem to think the opposite of privatebanker that Cielo is not RSF and appear to feel that only Cielo is RSF with the prices they are asking right now, which really stand out as overpriced when you compare them to similarly sized homes in other parts of RSF (whether real or imagined).

[cielore]

I’m not sure higher is better either. But the developer certainly has a lower cost basis with regard to retail pricing and can sweeten the pot with incentives unlike the lot speculators. Also generally more supply can only depress prices further. This will be a spectacular place to live in 15yrs but right now seems like driving thru a quarry in my uneducated opinion. Your commentary on the pricing attitude of Cielo sellers is spot on.

[cielore]

I’m not sure higher is better either. But the developer certainly has a lower cost basis with regard to retail pricing and can sweeten the pot with incentives unlike the lot speculators. Also generally more supply can only depress prices further. This will be a spectacular place to live in 15yrs but right now seems like driving thru a quarry in my uneducated opinion. Your commentary on the pricing attitude of Cielo sellers is spot on.

[cielore]

I’m not sure higher is better either. But the developer certainly has a lower cost basis with regard to retail pricing and can sweeten the pot with incentives unlike the lot speculators. Also generally more supply can only depress prices further. This will be a spectacular place to live in 15yrs but right now seems like driving thru a quarry in my uneducated opinion. Your commentary on the pricing attitude of Cielo sellers is spot on.

[cielore]

I’m not sure higher is better either. But the developer certainly has a lower cost basis with regard to retail pricing and can sweeten the pot with incentives unlike the lot speculators. Also generally more supply can only depress prices further. This will be a spectacular place to live in 15yrs but right now seems like driving thru a quarry in my uneducated opinion. Your commentary on the pricing attitude of Cielo sellers is spot on.

[cielore]

I’m not sure higher is better either. But the developer certainly has a lower cost basis with regard to retail pricing and can sweeten the pot with incentives unlike the lot speculators. Also generally more supply can only depress prices further. This will be a spectacular place to live in 15yrs but right now seems like driving thru a quarry in my uneducated opinion. Your commentary on the pricing attitude of Cielo sellers is spot on.

[Author]

Posts