File under Bizarre: “Housing Markets that Will Be Strongest by 2014”

[davelj]

These appreciation forecasts are utterly bizarre. I would divide them by 4 and be glad they hit those marks (and, yes, I realize they’re cumulative).

http://realestate.yahoo.com/promo/housing-markets-that-will-be-strongest-by-2014

[Rich Toscano]

It’s pretty impressive that they can predict price changes four years from now within 1/10th of a percent.

[Rich Toscano]

It’s pretty impressive that they can predict price changes four years from now within 1/10th of a percent.

[Rich Toscano]

It’s pretty impressive that they can predict price changes four years from now within 1/10th of a percent.

[Rich Toscano]

It’s pretty impressive that they can predict price changes four years from now within 1/10th of a percent.

[Rich Toscano]

It’s pretty impressive that they can predict price changes four years from now within 1/10th of a percent.

[bearishgurl]

I agree with some of the “predictions” in the article. Napa County, CA (and its neighboring counties) will be (and already is to some extent) a retirement haven for baby boomers. Mendocino County (still relatively expensive) has been on my own “retirement list” for four years now as I have some great memories as a child visiting there.

Carson City, NV is a relative nondescript “armpit” IMO, but its VERY close proximity (short drive straight uphill) to South Lake Tahoe NV/CA and its low cost of housing (much less than Lake Tahoe) makes it desireable to those who WANT to retire near Lake Tahoe for little $$ or buy rental property for Lake Tahoe resort workers.

Bend, OR has seen its share of ups and downs over the past 25 years but has a great ski resort, fantastic views, lower-priced housing than other ski areas and is also a popular retirement choice.

IMO, all the the areas mentioned in the initial article will grow somewhat due to massive baby-boomer retirements EXCEPT for Michigan. Not sure why that one is there but it may be due to how extraordinarily cheap it is to buy there right now.

Cheyenne, WY is spectacular (deer, foxes and coyotes venturing into your backyard RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN). But the wind and weather there for 9.5 months per year is among the most brutal in the country and can be absolutely horrific.

Since many retirement accounts have been partially decimated by fluctuations in the stock market, I see a massive wave of boomers selling and downsizing/retiring wherever their “station in life” affords them. This is the sole reason for the “eclectic” predictions here, IMO.

[bearishgurl]

I agree with some of the “predictions” in the article. Napa County, CA (and its neighboring counties) will be (and already is to some extent) a retirement haven for baby boomers. Mendocino County (still relatively expensive) has been on my own “retirement list” for four years now as I have some great memories as a child visiting there.

Carson City, NV is a relative nondescript “armpit” IMO, but its VERY close proximity (short drive straight uphill) to South Lake Tahoe NV/CA and its low cost of housing (much less than Lake Tahoe) makes it desireable to those who WANT to retire near Lake Tahoe for little $$ or buy rental property for Lake Tahoe resort workers.

Bend, OR has seen its share of ups and downs over the past 25 years but has a great ski resort, fantastic views, lower-priced housing than other ski areas and is also a popular retirement choice.

IMO, all the the areas mentioned in the initial article will grow somewhat due to massive baby-boomer retirements EXCEPT for Michigan. Not sure why that one is there but it may be due to how extraordinarily cheap it is to buy there right now.

Cheyenne, WY is spectacular (deer, foxes and coyotes venturing into your backyard RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN). But the wind and weather there for 9.5 months per year is among the most brutal in the country and can be absolutely horrific.

Since many retirement accounts have been partially decimated by fluctuations in the stock market, I see a massive wave of boomers selling and downsizing/retiring wherever their “station in life” affords them. This is the sole reason for the “eclectic” predictions here, IMO.

[bearishgurl]

I agree with some of the “predictions” in the article. Napa County, CA (and its neighboring counties) will be (and already is to some extent) a retirement haven for baby boomers. Mendocino County (still relatively expensive) has been on my own “retirement list” for four years now as I have some great memories as a child visiting there.

Carson City, NV is a relative nondescript “armpit” IMO, but its VERY close proximity (short drive straight uphill) to South Lake Tahoe NV/CA and its low cost of housing (much less than Lake Tahoe) makes it desireable to those who WANT to retire near Lake Tahoe for little $$ or buy rental property for Lake Tahoe resort workers.

Bend, OR has seen its share of ups and downs over the past 25 years but has a great ski resort, fantastic views, lower-priced housing than other ski areas and is also a popular retirement choice.

IMO, all the the areas mentioned in the initial article will grow somewhat due to massive baby-boomer retirements EXCEPT for Michigan. Not sure why that one is there but it may be due to how extraordinarily cheap it is to buy there right now.

Cheyenne, WY is spectacular (deer, foxes and coyotes venturing into your backyard RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN). But the wind and weather there for 9.5 months per year is among the most brutal in the country and can be absolutely horrific.

Since many retirement accounts have been partially decimated by fluctuations in the stock market, I see a massive wave of boomers selling and downsizing/retiring wherever their “station in life” affords them. This is the sole reason for the “eclectic” predictions here, IMO.

[bearishgurl]

I agree with some of the “predictions” in the article. Napa County, CA (and its neighboring counties) will be (and already is to some extent) a retirement haven for baby boomers. Mendocino County (still relatively expensive) has been on my own “retirement list” for four years now as I have some great memories as a child visiting there.

Carson City, NV is a relative nondescript “armpit” IMO, but its VERY close proximity (short drive straight uphill) to South Lake Tahoe NV/CA and its low cost of housing (much less than Lake Tahoe) makes it desireable to those who WANT to retire near Lake Tahoe for little $$ or buy rental property for Lake Tahoe resort workers.

Bend, OR has seen its share of ups and downs over the past 25 years but has a great ski resort, fantastic views, lower-priced housing than other ski areas and is also a popular retirement choice.

IMO, all the the areas mentioned in the initial article will grow somewhat due to massive baby-boomer retirements EXCEPT for Michigan. Not sure why that one is there but it may be due to how extraordinarily cheap it is to buy there right now.

Cheyenne, WY is spectacular (deer, foxes and coyotes venturing into your backyard RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN). But the wind and weather there for 9.5 months per year is among the most brutal in the country and can be absolutely horrific.

Since many retirement accounts have been partially decimated by fluctuations in the stock market, I see a massive wave of boomers selling and downsizing/retiring wherever their “station in life” affords them. This is the sole reason for the “eclectic” predictions here, IMO.

[bearishgurl]

I agree with some of the “predictions” in the article. Napa County, CA (and its neighboring counties) will be (and already is to some extent) a retirement haven for baby boomers. Mendocino County (still relatively expensive) has been on my own “retirement list” for four years now as I have some great memories as a child visiting there.

Carson City, NV is a relative nondescript “armpit” IMO, but its VERY close proximity (short drive straight uphill) to South Lake Tahoe NV/CA and its low cost of housing (much less than Lake Tahoe) makes it desireable to those who WANT to retire near Lake Tahoe for little $$ or buy rental property for Lake Tahoe resort workers.

Bend, OR has seen its share of ups and downs over the past 25 years but has a great ski resort, fantastic views, lower-priced housing than other ski areas and is also a popular retirement choice.

IMO, all the the areas mentioned in the initial article will grow somewhat due to massive baby-boomer retirements EXCEPT for Michigan. Not sure why that one is there but it may be due to how extraordinarily cheap it is to buy there right now.

Cheyenne, WY is spectacular (deer, foxes and coyotes venturing into your backyard RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN). But the wind and weather there for 9.5 months per year is among the most brutal in the country and can be absolutely horrific.

Since many retirement accounts have been partially decimated by fluctuations in the stock market, I see a massive wave of boomers selling and downsizing/retiring wherever their “station in life” affords them. This is the sole reason for the “eclectic” predictions here, IMO.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Once again the source of the “data” in the article is FISERV. This is the same company that
predicted a 1.3% decline in San Diego from April 2007 to April 2008. Completely missed the boat on that one.
They are also the same source as the recent U-T article discussed here …
http://piggington.com/housing_price_drop_in_county_predicted

Their predicitons are complete and utter nonsense IMHO.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Once again the source of the “data” in the article is FISERV. This is the same company that
predicted a 1.3% decline in San Diego from April 2007 to April 2008. Completely missed the boat on that one.
They are also the same source as the recent U-T article discussed here …
http://piggington.com/housing_price_drop_in_county_predicted

Their predicitons are complete and utter nonsense IMHO.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Once again the source of the “data” in the article is FISERV. This is the same company that
predicted a 1.3% decline in San Diego from April 2007 to April 2008. Completely missed the boat on that one.
They are also the same source as the recent U-T article discussed here …
http://piggington.com/housing_price_drop_in_county_predicted

Their predicitons are complete and utter nonsense IMHO.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Once again the source of the “data” in the article is FISERV. This is the same company that
predicted a 1.3% decline in San Diego from April 2007 to April 2008. Completely missed the boat on that one.
They are also the same source as the recent U-T article discussed here …
http://piggington.com/housing_price_drop_in_county_predicted

Their predicitons are complete and utter nonsense IMHO.

[Author]

Posts