Home sales continue plunge

[sdduuuude]

[quote=sdrealtor]DZ
I never said anything about2000 nominal prices causing a depression so that one isnt mine. I dont think we will see them in the better areas except on very high end properties but that is another matter.

The sarcasm is because, every time something like this appears in the news a bunch of posters show up with the I told you so’s and the same tired arguments. Each of these arguments look great on paper and have for quite a while but what looks good on paper and what happens on the streets are not the same. I look at it all with skepticism, both the good news and the bad news. Right down the middle with a stagnant economy is where we have been and where we are headed.

My post summing it all up was to save everyone from posting the same stuff that they have been for years.[/quote]

Saying the government is going to kick the can down the road is a way to be right until you are dead wrong.

I’m not saying it’s gonna happen this year or next or the next, but eventually you get to the end of the road, or you kick the can off a cliff.

Just the opposite is always expecting doom – you are always wrong until suddenly you are correct and look like a genius. Predicting 5 of the last 2 recessions makes one 2-3, not 2-0.

I’m not sure if I’d give you 8-0. You explicitly called for a non-bounce that ended up being a definitive bounce 🙂 Make it 7-0-1 for identifying a “non-down” period.

I have to admit, your short-term view of the market in No Co is pretty good, and you still hold to the long-term vision of “down more than up” while seeing when the market will turn.

I think we are in for a long series of up/down/up/down/up/down with the downs being a little more aggressive than the ups, resulting in a net “downage” over the next several years.

We have to be about ready for a downswing here soon, though. Certainly the national numbers look bleak.

I’m still liking this one from Dec 1, 2008:
“It wouldn’t shock me if this recession ended in late 2009, then another one hits in 2011 when all the people who have been bailed out realize they are still screwed.”

Maybe North-county coastal is at the top of the Margarita glass and wont be affected by Big Recession 2.0

[relocator]

[quote=andymajumder][quote=Scarlett]I’d be happy with a 2002 nominal pricing for Rancho Penasquitos…[/quote]

That may be possible quite soon. Actually even now if you negotiate hard you can get early 2003 nominal price…and than factor in that interest rates are about 2% lower now than early 2003, you are probably getting early to mid 2002 prices. You do have to take the cost of financing into account.[/quote]

In PQ, 2003 seems to be the year the prices rose steeply. PQ(92129) average home prices rose from 410K to 510K in one year. When you say you get 2003 prices, are you refering to early or late 2003? PQ homes are still way pricer compared to these and at best are closer to 500K range.

Any thoughts?

[relocator]

[quote=andymajumder][quote=Scarlett]I’d be happy with a 2002 nominal pricing for Rancho Penasquitos…[/quote]

That may be possible quite soon. Actually even now if you negotiate hard you can get early 2003 nominal price…and than factor in that interest rates are about 2% lower now than early 2003, you are probably getting early to mid 2002 prices. You do have to take the cost of financing into account.[/quote]

In PQ, 2003 seems to be the year the prices rose steeply. PQ(92129) average home prices rose from 410K to 510K in one year. When you say you get 2003 prices, are you refering to early or late 2003? PQ homes are still way pricer compared to these and at best are closer to 500K range.

Any thoughts?

[relocator]

[quote=andymajumder][quote=Scarlett]I’d be happy with a 2002 nominal pricing for Rancho Penasquitos…[/quote]

That may be possible quite soon. Actually even now if you negotiate hard you can get early 2003 nominal price…and than factor in that interest rates are about 2% lower now than early 2003, you are probably getting early to mid 2002 prices. You do have to take the cost of financing into account.[/quote]

In PQ, 2003 seems to be the year the prices rose steeply. PQ(92129) average home prices rose from 410K to 510K in one year. When you say you get 2003 prices, are you refering to early or late 2003? PQ homes are still way pricer compared to these and at best are closer to 500K range.

Any thoughts?

[relocator]

[quote=andymajumder][quote=Scarlett]I’d be happy with a 2002 nominal pricing for Rancho Penasquitos…[/quote]

That may be possible quite soon. Actually even now if you negotiate hard you can get early 2003 nominal price…and than factor in that interest rates are about 2% lower now than early 2003, you are probably getting early to mid 2002 prices. You do have to take the cost of financing into account.[/quote]

In PQ, 2003 seems to be the year the prices rose steeply. PQ(92129) average home prices rose from 410K to 510K in one year. When you say you get 2003 prices, are you refering to early or late 2003? PQ homes are still way pricer compared to these and at best are closer to 500K range.

Any thoughts?

[relocator]

[quote=andymajumder][quote=Scarlett]I’d be happy with a 2002 nominal pricing for Rancho Penasquitos…[/quote]

That may be possible quite soon. Actually even now if you negotiate hard you can get early 2003 nominal price…and than factor in that interest rates are about 2% lower now than early 2003, you are probably getting early to mid 2002 prices. You do have to take the cost of financing into account.[/quote]

In PQ, 2003 seems to be the year the prices rose steeply. PQ(92129) average home prices rose from 410K to 510K in one year. When you say you get 2003 prices, are you refering to early or late 2003? PQ homes are still way pricer compared to these and at best are closer to 500K range.

Any thoughts?

[stockstradr]

In case it hasn’t been posted to this thread, Mish has some great blogging on this topic:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/08/burning-down-house-new-home-sales.html

[stockstradr]

In case it hasn’t been posted to this thread, Mish has some great blogging on this topic:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/08/burning-down-house-new-home-sales.html

[stockstradr]

In case it hasn’t been posted to this thread, Mish has some great blogging on this topic:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/08/burning-down-house-new-home-sales.html

[stockstradr]

In case it hasn’t been posted to this thread, Mish has some great blogging on this topic:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/08/burning-down-house-new-home-sales.html

[stockstradr]

In case it hasn’t been posted to this thread, Mish has some great blogging on this topic:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/08/burning-down-house-new-home-sales.html

[desmond]

[quote=deadzone]I don’t belive that 70% of AZ homeowners are underwater, you’ll have to show some proof of that one. Las Vegas I’ll believe. Las Vegas is the extreme because more than any other place they grew disproportionally during the 2000s due to the bogus economy.

[/quote]

dead, the actual number is 75% as discussed on a previous topic:

http://www.lvrj.com/business/las-vegas-home-values-keep-going-down-100714169.html?source=patrick.net#branding-left

[desmond]

[quote=deadzone]I don’t belive that 70% of AZ homeowners are underwater, you’ll have to show some proof of that one. Las Vegas I’ll believe. Las Vegas is the extreme because more than any other place they grew disproportionally during the 2000s due to the bogus economy.

[/quote]

dead, the actual number is 75% as discussed on a previous topic:

http://www.lvrj.com/business/las-vegas-home-values-keep-going-down-100714169.html?source=patrick.net#branding-left

[desmond]

[quote=deadzone]I don’t belive that 70% of AZ homeowners are underwater, you’ll have to show some proof of that one. Las Vegas I’ll believe. Las Vegas is the extreme because more than any other place they grew disproportionally during the 2000s due to the bogus economy.

[/quote]

dead, the actual number is 75% as discussed on a previous topic:

http://www.lvrj.com/business/las-vegas-home-values-keep-going-down-100714169.html?source=patrick.net#branding-left

[desmond]

[quote=deadzone]I don’t belive that 70% of AZ homeowners are underwater, you’ll have to show some proof of that one. Las Vegas I’ll believe. Las Vegas is the extreme because more than any other place they grew disproportionally during the 2000s due to the bogus economy.

[/quote]

dead, the actual number is 75% as discussed on a previous topic:

http://www.lvrj.com/business/las-vegas-home-values-keep-going-down-100714169.html?source=patrick.net#branding-left

[Author]

Posts