- This topic has 80 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by Ex-SD.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 18, 2007 at 8:41 AM #100820November 18, 2007 at 9:40 AM #100719kev374Participant
median home prices are usually 2-3 times median income. In case of SoCal I believe it is around 3.
November 18, 2007 at 9:40 AM #100801kev374Participantmedian home prices are usually 2-3 times median income. In case of SoCal I believe it is around 3.
November 18, 2007 at 9:40 AM #100818kev374Participantmedian home prices are usually 2-3 times median income. In case of SoCal I believe it is around 3.
November 18, 2007 at 9:40 AM #100833kev374Participantmedian home prices are usually 2-3 times median income. In case of SoCal I believe it is around 3.
November 18, 2007 at 9:40 AM #100835kev374Participantmedian home prices are usually 2-3 times median income. In case of SoCal I believe it is around 3.
November 18, 2007 at 12:54 PM #100779EugeneParticipantThere’s no point talking about ratios of home price to income or home price to rent. You are ignoring a big factor – interest rates. $59,000 income will support higher home prices with 6% rates than with 8% rates. A more meaningful measure is the ratio of a median home payment to a median family income. It was historically around 15% in areas with lots of free land and maybe 25% in highly desirable places with limited land like San Diego or Bay Area. (Before the age of creative financing, it couldn’t even climb much higher than 28% because you couldn’t qualify for a mortgage if your payments were more than 28% of your income!)
2000-2001 prices in Temecula are possible but improbable. Interest rates are lower and incomes are much higher today than in 2001. Overbuilding won’t matter much because San Diego will always be there to deal with excess inventory.
November 18, 2007 at 12:54 PM #100863EugeneParticipantThere’s no point talking about ratios of home price to income or home price to rent. You are ignoring a big factor – interest rates. $59,000 income will support higher home prices with 6% rates than with 8% rates. A more meaningful measure is the ratio of a median home payment to a median family income. It was historically around 15% in areas with lots of free land and maybe 25% in highly desirable places with limited land like San Diego or Bay Area. (Before the age of creative financing, it couldn’t even climb much higher than 28% because you couldn’t qualify for a mortgage if your payments were more than 28% of your income!)
2000-2001 prices in Temecula are possible but improbable. Interest rates are lower and incomes are much higher today than in 2001. Overbuilding won’t matter much because San Diego will always be there to deal with excess inventory.
November 18, 2007 at 12:54 PM #100876EugeneParticipantThere’s no point talking about ratios of home price to income or home price to rent. You are ignoring a big factor – interest rates. $59,000 income will support higher home prices with 6% rates than with 8% rates. A more meaningful measure is the ratio of a median home payment to a median family income. It was historically around 15% in areas with lots of free land and maybe 25% in highly desirable places with limited land like San Diego or Bay Area. (Before the age of creative financing, it couldn’t even climb much higher than 28% because you couldn’t qualify for a mortgage if your payments were more than 28% of your income!)
2000-2001 prices in Temecula are possible but improbable. Interest rates are lower and incomes are much higher today than in 2001. Overbuilding won’t matter much because San Diego will always be there to deal with excess inventory.
November 18, 2007 at 12:54 PM #100892EugeneParticipantThere’s no point talking about ratios of home price to income or home price to rent. You are ignoring a big factor – interest rates. $59,000 income will support higher home prices with 6% rates than with 8% rates. A more meaningful measure is the ratio of a median home payment to a median family income. It was historically around 15% in areas with lots of free land and maybe 25% in highly desirable places with limited land like San Diego or Bay Area. (Before the age of creative financing, it couldn’t even climb much higher than 28% because you couldn’t qualify for a mortgage if your payments were more than 28% of your income!)
2000-2001 prices in Temecula are possible but improbable. Interest rates are lower and incomes are much higher today than in 2001. Overbuilding won’t matter much because San Diego will always be there to deal with excess inventory.
November 18, 2007 at 12:54 PM #100895EugeneParticipantThere’s no point talking about ratios of home price to income or home price to rent. You are ignoring a big factor – interest rates. $59,000 income will support higher home prices with 6% rates than with 8% rates. A more meaningful measure is the ratio of a median home payment to a median family income. It was historically around 15% in areas with lots of free land and maybe 25% in highly desirable places with limited land like San Diego or Bay Area. (Before the age of creative financing, it couldn’t even climb much higher than 28% because you couldn’t qualify for a mortgage if your payments were more than 28% of your income!)
2000-2001 prices in Temecula are possible but improbable. Interest rates are lower and incomes are much higher today than in 2001. Overbuilding won’t matter much because San Diego will always be there to deal with excess inventory.
November 18, 2007 at 1:55 PM #100794pizzamanParticipantOK esmith we’ll do it your way. I plugged these numbers into the handy dandy money.com What can I afford? calculator. Income 69,000, Down payment 50,000, Interest rate 6%, Taxes and insurance $4000 and the magic # is $262,000. So there you have it the median home price in Temecula using traditional lending standards should be $262,000 (at 28% DTI) which was roughly where it stood in the middle of 2002.
So next summer when the median hits $260,000 I’m going to buy a house (because renting sucks) and hope that we don’t overshoot and end up with 2001 prices. I feel so much better now that I have a plan.
November 18, 2007 at 1:55 PM #100878pizzamanParticipantOK esmith we’ll do it your way. I plugged these numbers into the handy dandy money.com What can I afford? calculator. Income 69,000, Down payment 50,000, Interest rate 6%, Taxes and insurance $4000 and the magic # is $262,000. So there you have it the median home price in Temecula using traditional lending standards should be $262,000 (at 28% DTI) which was roughly where it stood in the middle of 2002.
So next summer when the median hits $260,000 I’m going to buy a house (because renting sucks) and hope that we don’t overshoot and end up with 2001 prices. I feel so much better now that I have a plan.
November 18, 2007 at 1:55 PM #100891pizzamanParticipantOK esmith we’ll do it your way. I plugged these numbers into the handy dandy money.com What can I afford? calculator. Income 69,000, Down payment 50,000, Interest rate 6%, Taxes and insurance $4000 and the magic # is $262,000. So there you have it the median home price in Temecula using traditional lending standards should be $262,000 (at 28% DTI) which was roughly where it stood in the middle of 2002.
So next summer when the median hits $260,000 I’m going to buy a house (because renting sucks) and hope that we don’t overshoot and end up with 2001 prices. I feel so much better now that I have a plan.
November 18, 2007 at 1:55 PM #100908pizzamanParticipantOK esmith we’ll do it your way. I plugged these numbers into the handy dandy money.com What can I afford? calculator. Income 69,000, Down payment 50,000, Interest rate 6%, Taxes and insurance $4000 and the magic # is $262,000. So there you have it the median home price in Temecula using traditional lending standards should be $262,000 (at 28% DTI) which was roughly where it stood in the middle of 2002.
So next summer when the median hits $260,000 I’m going to buy a house (because renting sucks) and hope that we don’t overshoot and end up with 2001 prices. I feel so much better now that I have a plan.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.