- This topic has 510 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 7 months ago by
sdrealtor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 12, 2011 at 3:29 PM #696151May 12, 2011 at 3:40 PM #694963
davelj
Participant[quote=walterwhite]after all this effort to prop up the housing market, doesn’t it just seem like there has to be a catch; like, we’ll lower the limit, but give you a tax credit for the difference, or these are the new rules, but if we begin to notice it has any bad effect, we’ll immediately revoke them and go back where we were, or some other freaky shenanigans.[/quote]
I think the lower conforming limits will stick without a catch. There’s just not a lot of political support for high conforming limits, and now that Fannie/Freddie are owned by We the People, this is a political issue. The median house price in the U.S. is only ~$150K currently (and it’s ~$300K in San Diego County) . There’s very little political will to help out that ~5% of folks who are buying a $680K+ home. Nor should there be.
May 12, 2011 at 3:40 PM #695050Participant[quote=walterwhite]after all this effort to prop up the housing market, doesn’t it just seem like there has to be a catch; like, we’ll lower the limit, but give you a tax credit for the difference, or these are the new rules, but if we begin to notice it has any bad effect, we’ll immediately revoke them and go back where we were, or some other freaky shenanigans.[/quote]
I think the lower conforming limits will stick without a catch. There’s just not a lot of political support for high conforming limits, and now that Fannie/Freddie are owned by We the People, this is a political issue. The median house price in the U.S. is only ~$150K currently (and it’s ~$300K in San Diego County) . There’s very little political will to help out that ~5% of folks who are buying a $680K+ home. Nor should there be.
May 12, 2011 at 3:40 PM #695653Participant[quote=walterwhite]after all this effort to prop up the housing market, doesn’t it just seem like there has to be a catch; like, we’ll lower the limit, but give you a tax credit for the difference, or these are the new rules, but if we begin to notice it has any bad effect, we’ll immediately revoke them and go back where we were, or some other freaky shenanigans.[/quote]
I think the lower conforming limits will stick without a catch. There’s just not a lot of political support for high conforming limits, and now that Fannie/Freddie are owned by We the People, this is a political issue. The median house price in the U.S. is only ~$150K currently (and it’s ~$300K in San Diego County) . There’s very little political will to help out that ~5% of folks who are buying a $680K+ home. Nor should there be.
May 12, 2011 at 3:40 PM #695802Participant[quote=walterwhite]after all this effort to prop up the housing market, doesn’t it just seem like there has to be a catch; like, we’ll lower the limit, but give you a tax credit for the difference, or these are the new rules, but if we begin to notice it has any bad effect, we’ll immediately revoke them and go back where we were, or some other freaky shenanigans.[/quote]
I think the lower conforming limits will stick without a catch. There’s just not a lot of political support for high conforming limits, and now that Fannie/Freddie are owned by We the People, this is a political issue. The median house price in the U.S. is only ~$150K currently (and it’s ~$300K in San Diego County) . There’s very little political will to help out that ~5% of folks who are buying a $680K+ home. Nor should there be.
May 12, 2011 at 3:40 PM #696156Participant[quote=walterwhite]after all this effort to prop up the housing market, doesn’t it just seem like there has to be a catch; like, we’ll lower the limit, but give you a tax credit for the difference, or these are the new rules, but if we begin to notice it has any bad effect, we’ll immediately revoke them and go back where we were, or some other freaky shenanigans.[/quote]
I think the lower conforming limits will stick without a catch. There’s just not a lot of political support for high conforming limits, and now that Fannie/Freddie are owned by We the People, this is a political issue. The median house price in the U.S. is only ~$150K currently (and it’s ~$300K in San Diego County) . There’s very little political will to help out that ~5% of folks who are buying a $680K+ home. Nor should there be.
May 13, 2011 at 9:10 AM #695117Ren
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]ER, I don’t see how there could be a “trickle down” effect of lowered values to La Playa San Diego (92106) or Del Mar Village because a homeowner in SantaLuz (92127) or Scripps Ranch San Diego (92131) lost their (valued at over $680K) property to foreclosure.[/quote]
I know this isn’t exactly on topic but… what some of the more bullish among you are forgetting is that there is no wall around the nicer areas. The change from less desirable to better neighborhoods can be very gradual, and the sale of a nice 4/3 in a slightly less desirable neighborhood is a comp for a similar 4/3 a half mile away in a slightly nicer neighborhood. That house is a comp for a 4/3 in an even nicer neighborhood another half mile away. Repeat a dozen times until you’re smack in the middle of one of our magical coastal communities, and the same size 4/3 is worth twice what the first house is – but it was affected by that first sale, period. There is no appraisal force field around La Jolla.
Like many others, I’m willing to pay a lot more to live in south Carlsbad than Vista. A LOT more. Those areas will always command a premium, and may even be close to their bottom – but what you can’t argue is that those areas aren’t affected by price drops in less desirable areas. Of course it depends on how much people (like me) are willing and able to pay for a nice area (that’s why they command a premium in the first place), but ultimately the sale price also depends on the appraisal and comps (and therefore indirectly, government intervention). No, a big drop in a less desireable area is not going to pound the prices in a nice area, because nicer areas fluctuate less, and rise and fall at different rates. But it does make some impact. That’s all I’m sayin’.
It’s okay to admit that – it doesn’t change the fact that Del Mar is still waaaaay better than Escondido and may be close to being priced right.
Yes, I’m becoming more bullish in my old age.
May 13, 2011 at 9:10 AM #695205Participant[quote=bearishgurl]ER, I don’t see how there could be a “trickle down” effect of lowered values to La Playa San Diego (92106) or Del Mar Village because a homeowner in SantaLuz (92127) or Scripps Ranch San Diego (92131) lost their (valued at over $680K) property to foreclosure.[/quote]
I know this isn’t exactly on topic but… what some of the more bullish among you are forgetting is that there is no wall around the nicer areas. The change from less desirable to better neighborhoods can be very gradual, and the sale of a nice 4/3 in a slightly less desirable neighborhood is a comp for a similar 4/3 a half mile away in a slightly nicer neighborhood. That house is a comp for a 4/3 in an even nicer neighborhood another half mile away. Repeat a dozen times until you’re smack in the middle of one of our magical coastal communities, and the same size 4/3 is worth twice what the first house is – but it was affected by that first sale, period. There is no appraisal force field around La Jolla.
Like many others, I’m willing to pay a lot more to live in south Carlsbad than Vista. A LOT more. Those areas will always command a premium, and may even be close to their bottom – but what you can’t argue is that those areas aren’t affected by price drops in less desirable areas. Of course it depends on how much people (like me) are willing and able to pay for a nice area (that’s why they command a premium in the first place), but ultimately the sale price also depends on the appraisal and comps (and therefore indirectly, government intervention). No, a big drop in a less desireable area is not going to pound the prices in a nice area, because nicer areas fluctuate less, and rise and fall at different rates. But it does make some impact. That’s all I’m sayin’.
It’s okay to admit that – it doesn’t change the fact that Del Mar is still waaaaay better than Escondido and may be close to being priced right.
Yes, I’m becoming more bullish in my old age.
May 13, 2011 at 9:10 AM #695806Participant[quote=bearishgurl]ER, I don’t see how there could be a “trickle down” effect of lowered values to La Playa San Diego (92106) or Del Mar Village because a homeowner in SantaLuz (92127) or Scripps Ranch San Diego (92131) lost their (valued at over $680K) property to foreclosure.[/quote]
I know this isn’t exactly on topic but… what some of the more bullish among you are forgetting is that there is no wall around the nicer areas. The change from less desirable to better neighborhoods can be very gradual, and the sale of a nice 4/3 in a slightly less desirable neighborhood is a comp for a similar 4/3 a half mile away in a slightly nicer neighborhood. That house is a comp for a 4/3 in an even nicer neighborhood another half mile away. Repeat a dozen times until you’re smack in the middle of one of our magical coastal communities, and the same size 4/3 is worth twice what the first house is – but it was affected by that first sale, period. There is no appraisal force field around La Jolla.
Like many others, I’m willing to pay a lot more to live in south Carlsbad than Vista. A LOT more. Those areas will always command a premium, and may even be close to their bottom – but what you can’t argue is that those areas aren’t affected by price drops in less desirable areas. Of course it depends on how much people (like me) are willing and able to pay for a nice area (that’s why they command a premium in the first place), but ultimately the sale price also depends on the appraisal and comps (and therefore indirectly, government intervention). No, a big drop in a less desireable area is not going to pound the prices in a nice area, because nicer areas fluctuate less, and rise and fall at different rates. But it does make some impact. That’s all I’m sayin’.
It’s okay to admit that – it doesn’t change the fact that Del Mar is still waaaaay better than Escondido and may be close to being priced right.
Yes, I’m becoming more bullish in my old age.
May 13, 2011 at 9:10 AM #695954Participant[quote=bearishgurl]ER, I don’t see how there could be a “trickle down” effect of lowered values to La Playa San Diego (92106) or Del Mar Village because a homeowner in SantaLuz (92127) or Scripps Ranch San Diego (92131) lost their (valued at over $680K) property to foreclosure.[/quote]
I know this isn’t exactly on topic but… what some of the more bullish among you are forgetting is that there is no wall around the nicer areas. The change from less desirable to better neighborhoods can be very gradual, and the sale of a nice 4/3 in a slightly less desirable neighborhood is a comp for a similar 4/3 a half mile away in a slightly nicer neighborhood. That house is a comp for a 4/3 in an even nicer neighborhood another half mile away. Repeat a dozen times until you’re smack in the middle of one of our magical coastal communities, and the same size 4/3 is worth twice what the first house is – but it was affected by that first sale, period. There is no appraisal force field around La Jolla.
Like many others, I’m willing to pay a lot more to live in south Carlsbad than Vista. A LOT more. Those areas will always command a premium, and may even be close to their bottom – but what you can’t argue is that those areas aren’t affected by price drops in less desirable areas. Of course it depends on how much people (like me) are willing and able to pay for a nice area (that’s why they command a premium in the first place), but ultimately the sale price also depends on the appraisal and comps (and therefore indirectly, government intervention). No, a big drop in a less desireable area is not going to pound the prices in a nice area, because nicer areas fluctuate less, and rise and fall at different rates. But it does make some impact. That’s all I’m sayin’.
It’s okay to admit that – it doesn’t change the fact that Del Mar is still waaaaay better than Escondido and may be close to being priced right.
Yes, I’m becoming more bullish in my old age.
May 13, 2011 at 9:10 AM #696308Participant[quote=bearishgurl]ER, I don’t see how there could be a “trickle down” effect of lowered values to La Playa San Diego (92106) or Del Mar Village because a homeowner in SantaLuz (92127) or Scripps Ranch San Diego (92131) lost their (valued at over $680K) property to foreclosure.[/quote]
I know this isn’t exactly on topic but… what some of the more bullish among you are forgetting is that there is no wall around the nicer areas. The change from less desirable to better neighborhoods can be very gradual, and the sale of a nice 4/3 in a slightly less desirable neighborhood is a comp for a similar 4/3 a half mile away in a slightly nicer neighborhood. That house is a comp for a 4/3 in an even nicer neighborhood another half mile away. Repeat a dozen times until you’re smack in the middle of one of our magical coastal communities, and the same size 4/3 is worth twice what the first house is – but it was affected by that first sale, period. There is no appraisal force field around La Jolla.
Like many others, I’m willing to pay a lot more to live in south Carlsbad than Vista. A LOT more. Those areas will always command a premium, and may even be close to their bottom – but what you can’t argue is that those areas aren’t affected by price drops in less desirable areas. Of course it depends on how much people (like me) are willing and able to pay for a nice area (that’s why they command a premium in the first place), but ultimately the sale price also depends on the appraisal and comps (and therefore indirectly, government intervention). No, a big drop in a less desireable area is not going to pound the prices in a nice area, because nicer areas fluctuate less, and rise and fall at different rates. But it does make some impact. That’s all I’m sayin’.
It’s okay to admit that – it doesn’t change the fact that Del Mar is still waaaaay better than Escondido and may be close to being priced right.
Yes, I’m becoming more bullish in my old age.
May 13, 2011 at 10:11 AM #695127bearishgurl
Participant[quote=Ren] . . . Like many others, I’m willing to pay a lot more to live in south Carlsbad than Vista. A LOT more. Those areas will always command a premium, and may even be close to their bottom – but what you can’t argue is that those areas aren’t affected by price drops in less desirable areas. Of course it depends on how much people (like me) are willing and able to pay for a nice area (that’s why they command a premium in the first place), but ultimately the sale price also depends on the appraisal and comps (and therefore indirectly, government intervention). No, a big drop in a less desireable area is not going to pound the prices in a nice area, because nicer areas fluctuate less, and rise and fall at different rates. But it does make some impact. That’s all I’m sayin’.
It’s okay to admit that – it doesn’t change the fact that Del Mar is still waaaaay better than Escondido and may be close to being priced right.
Yes, I’m becoming more bullish in my old age.[/quote]
Ren, I understand what you’re saying here. I’m not even particularly “bullish.” But the property you are planning to buy in South Carlsbad in the future will be on tract, no? I don’t believe the way you’re describing it here is the way appraisals are done in the real world. First of all, there could be geographical barriers to using a sold comp from =>6 blocks away (ie freeways, canyons, zip codes, etc). I don’t see sold comps from a different tract used for appraisal purposes to value a property on a certain tract unless there are no recent comparable sales on the SUBJECT’s tract for them to use for a comparable sale.
I’m simply stating that “custom” properties in highly sought-after coastal/urban enclaves and also situated on acreages will not be affected much, if at all, by the lowering of the GSE’s guarantee. For example, it is more difficult for an appraiser to find sold comps for a “custom” property which may have sit-down views at a rare angle, lots of built in mahogany in excellent condition, a particular lot configuation (in an urban area) allowing for concealed boat parking, a Mills Act contract in place, a specially-ordered $50K roof, a garage with a 12′ high garage door to park “toys” in, and the list goes on. The appraiser here will have to make a lot of adjustments to arrive at a value. For this reason, custom properties’ values are “subjective.” In the eyes of the right buyer, they are worth more. There are thousands of these properties in SD County. Their appraisals do not have anything to do with what happens on a tract – even a tract six blocks away.
The buyers who buy the customs in coveted areas and the buyers who buy in a tract even just 6 blocks away are two completely different animals.
May 13, 2011 at 10:11 AM #695215Participant[quote=Ren] . . . Like many others, I’m willing to pay a lot more to live in south Carlsbad than Vista. A LOT more. Those areas will always command a premium, and may even be close to their bottom – but what you can’t argue is that those areas aren’t affected by price drops in less desirable areas. Of course it depends on how much people (like me) are willing and able to pay for a nice area (that’s why they command a premium in the first place), but ultimately the sale price also depends on the appraisal and comps (and therefore indirectly, government intervention). No, a big drop in a less desireable area is not going to pound the prices in a nice area, because nicer areas fluctuate less, and rise and fall at different rates. But it does make some impact. That’s all I’m sayin’.
It’s okay to admit that – it doesn’t change the fact that Del Mar is still waaaaay better than Escondido and may be close to being priced right.
Yes, I’m becoming more bullish in my old age.[/quote]
Ren, I understand what you’re saying here. I’m not even particularly “bullish.” But the property you are planning to buy in South Carlsbad in the future will be on tract, no? I don’t believe the way you’re describing it here is the way appraisals are done in the real world. First of all, there could be geographical barriers to using a sold comp from =>6 blocks away (ie freeways, canyons, zip codes, etc). I don’t see sold comps from a different tract used for appraisal purposes to value a property on a certain tract unless there are no recent comparable sales on the SUBJECT’s tract for them to use for a comparable sale.
I’m simply stating that “custom” properties in highly sought-after coastal/urban enclaves and also situated on acreages will not be affected much, if at all, by the lowering of the GSE’s guarantee. For example, it is more difficult for an appraiser to find sold comps for a “custom” property which may have sit-down views at a rare angle, lots of built in mahogany in excellent condition, a particular lot configuation (in an urban area) allowing for concealed boat parking, a Mills Act contract in place, a specially-ordered $50K roof, a garage with a 12′ high garage door to park “toys” in, and the list goes on. The appraiser here will have to make a lot of adjustments to arrive at a value. For this reason, custom properties’ values are “subjective.” In the eyes of the right buyer, they are worth more. There are thousands of these properties in SD County. Their appraisals do not have anything to do with what happens on a tract – even a tract six blocks away.
The buyers who buy the customs in coveted areas and the buyers who buy in a tract even just 6 blocks away are two completely different animals.
May 13, 2011 at 10:11 AM #695816Participant[quote=Ren] . . . Like many others, I’m willing to pay a lot more to live in south Carlsbad than Vista. A LOT more. Those areas will always command a premium, and may even be close to their bottom – but what you can’t argue is that those areas aren’t affected by price drops in less desirable areas. Of course it depends on how much people (like me) are willing and able to pay for a nice area (that’s why they command a premium in the first place), but ultimately the sale price also depends on the appraisal and comps (and therefore indirectly, government intervention). No, a big drop in a less desireable area is not going to pound the prices in a nice area, because nicer areas fluctuate less, and rise and fall at different rates. But it does make some impact. That’s all I’m sayin’.
It’s okay to admit that – it doesn’t change the fact that Del Mar is still waaaaay better than Escondido and may be close to being priced right.
Yes, I’m becoming more bullish in my old age.[/quote]
Ren, I understand what you’re saying here. I’m not even particularly “bullish.” But the property you are planning to buy in South Carlsbad in the future will be on tract, no? I don’t believe the way you’re describing it here is the way appraisals are done in the real world. First of all, there could be geographical barriers to using a sold comp from =>6 blocks away (ie freeways, canyons, zip codes, etc). I don’t see sold comps from a different tract used for appraisal purposes to value a property on a certain tract unless there are no recent comparable sales on the SUBJECT’s tract for them to use for a comparable sale.
I’m simply stating that “custom” properties in highly sought-after coastal/urban enclaves and also situated on acreages will not be affected much, if at all, by the lowering of the GSE’s guarantee. For example, it is more difficult for an appraiser to find sold comps for a “custom” property which may have sit-down views at a rare angle, lots of built in mahogany in excellent condition, a particular lot configuation (in an urban area) allowing for concealed boat parking, a Mills Act contract in place, a specially-ordered $50K roof, a garage with a 12′ high garage door to park “toys” in, and the list goes on. The appraiser here will have to make a lot of adjustments to arrive at a value. For this reason, custom properties’ values are “subjective.” In the eyes of the right buyer, they are worth more. There are thousands of these properties in SD County. Their appraisals do not have anything to do with what happens on a tract – even a tract six blocks away.
The buyers who buy the customs in coveted areas and the buyers who buy in a tract even just 6 blocks away are two completely different animals.
May 13, 2011 at 10:11 AM #695964Participant[quote=Ren] . . . Like many others, I’m willing to pay a lot more to live in south Carlsbad than Vista. A LOT more. Those areas will always command a premium, and may even be close to their bottom – but what you can’t argue is that those areas aren’t affected by price drops in less desirable areas. Of course it depends on how much people (like me) are willing and able to pay for a nice area (that’s why they command a premium in the first place), but ultimately the sale price also depends on the appraisal and comps (and therefore indirectly, government intervention). No, a big drop in a less desireable area is not going to pound the prices in a nice area, because nicer areas fluctuate less, and rise and fall at different rates. But it does make some impact. That’s all I’m sayin’.
It’s okay to admit that – it doesn’t change the fact that Del Mar is still waaaaay better than Escondido and may be close to being priced right.
Yes, I’m becoming more bullish in my old age.[/quote]
Ren, I understand what you’re saying here. I’m not even particularly “bullish.” But the property you are planning to buy in South Carlsbad in the future will be on tract, no? I don’t believe the way you’re describing it here is the way appraisals are done in the real world. First of all, there could be geographical barriers to using a sold comp from =>6 blocks away (ie freeways, canyons, zip codes, etc). I don’t see sold comps from a different tract used for appraisal purposes to value a property on a certain tract unless there are no recent comparable sales on the SUBJECT’s tract for them to use for a comparable sale.
I’m simply stating that “custom” properties in highly sought-after coastal/urban enclaves and also situated on acreages will not be affected much, if at all, by the lowering of the GSE’s guarantee. For example, it is more difficult for an appraiser to find sold comps for a “custom” property which may have sit-down views at a rare angle, lots of built in mahogany in excellent condition, a particular lot configuation (in an urban area) allowing for concealed boat parking, a Mills Act contract in place, a specially-ordered $50K roof, a garage with a 12′ high garage door to park “toys” in, and the list goes on. The appraiser here will have to make a lot of adjustments to arrive at a value. For this reason, custom properties’ values are “subjective.” In the eyes of the right buyer, they are worth more. There are thousands of these properties in SD County. Their appraisals do not have anything to do with what happens on a tract – even a tract six blocks away.
The buyers who buy the customs in coveted areas and the buyers who buy in a tract even just 6 blocks away are two completely different animals.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.