How many do you think…

[kev374]

…have 10% of the current median, $590,000 saved up?

…how many have 20% saved up?

[losgatos200]

Very few buyers have 20 % cash for a down payment.

And they can’t borrow it via a second anymore.

What a bummer, eh ?

Maybe these wetbacks go home to Mexico then ?

[losgatos200]

Very few buyers have 20 % cash for a down payment.

And they can’t borrow it via a second anymore.

What a bummer, eh ?

Maybe these wetbacks go home to Mexico then ?

[bobby]

what does this have to do with Hispanics?
given that your handle is a Spanish word, I find it ironic.

[bobby]

what does this have to do with Hispanics?
given that your handle is a Spanish word, I find it ironic.

[VoZangre]

race baiter

plain and simple…

(s)he does this routinely

[VoZangre]

race baiter

plain and simple…

(s)he does this routinely

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Wow – Usually it takes a few posts before someone diverts off-topic.
Anyway, there is no easy way to find out how much people have saved up in general. However, the RE agents on this board have occasionally given examples of the types of clients they see purchasing. That might give us a clue.

I suspect that most 1st time buyers have less than 10% to put down. I’ve purchased several houses in my life. First one I put down 5% (about $8 K). Second house we put down 10% (about $30K). Third house we put down 20% (about $70K).

Based on my experiences and those of my peers, my guess is that few 1st time buyers have more than 25K saved up in liquid accounts to put down, regardless of race or ethnic origin.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Wow – Usually it takes a few posts before someone diverts off-topic.
Anyway, there is no easy way to find out how much people have saved up in general. However, the RE agents on this board have occasionally given examples of the types of clients they see purchasing. That might give us a clue.

I suspect that most 1st time buyers have less than 10% to put down. I’ve purchased several houses in my life. First one I put down 5% (about $8 K). Second house we put down 10% (about $30K). Third house we put down 20% (about $70K).

Based on my experiences and those of my peers, my guess is that few 1st time buyers have more than 25K saved up in liquid accounts to put down, regardless of race or ethnic origin.

[JWM in SD]

FSD, that’s probably true. There is no easy way to measure. The only stat I can offer is the negative national savings rate.

I can offer an anecdote from circa Spring 2005 though. My wife and I had been in San Diego for six months at that point and my in-laws, who own a small, old, tract house in Diamond Bar were visiting SD for the weekend and stayed in our apartment. We got into a discussion about RE prices in SoCal and I had stated that I had about $50K saved at that point and my SIL’s immediate reaction was that that was “nothing” in terms of a downpayment. Now keep in mind that my wife and I have combined income that is almost double what theirs was / is. Well of course she was comparing the 50K to a moveup buyer in SoCal who might several hundred thousand as result of swapping out their already inflated bubble house for another. It was ironic hearing that from them because they near -0- liquid net worth. It’s all in the house. Now mind you they are not FBs. They bought their house in 2001 at what would be considered a reasonable price (not by me, but I’m from the MidWest so I expect to get value for my $).

[JWM in SD]

FSD, that’s probably true. There is no easy way to measure. The only stat I can offer is the negative national savings rate.

I can offer an anecdote from circa Spring 2005 though. My wife and I had been in San Diego for six months at that point and my in-laws, who own a small, old, tract house in Diamond Bar were visiting SD for the weekend and stayed in our apartment. We got into a discussion about RE prices in SoCal and I had stated that I had about $50K saved at that point and my SIL’s immediate reaction was that that was “nothing” in terms of a downpayment. Now keep in mind that my wife and I have combined income that is almost double what theirs was / is. Well of course she was comparing the 50K to a moveup buyer in SoCal who might several hundred thousand as result of swapping out their already inflated bubble house for another. It was ironic hearing that from them because they near -0- liquid net worth. It’s all in the house. Now mind you they are not FBs. They bought their house in 2001 at what would be considered a reasonable price (not by me, but I’m from the MidWest so I expect to get value for my $).

[Diego Mamani]

It was ironic hearing that from them because they near -0- liquid net worth. It’s all in the house.

I think zero liquid assets is a better term to use. If they bought their house in 2001, their net worth could easily be in the half million range, provided they didn’t use their house as an ATM.

[Diego Mamani]

It was ironic hearing that from them because they near -0- liquid net worth. It’s all in the house.

I think zero liquid assets is a better term to use. If they bought their house in 2001, their net worth could easily be in the half million range, provided they didn’t use their house as an ATM.

[JWM in SD]

“I think zero liquid assets is a better term to use.”

Yes, that’s a better way to put it. Thanks. I don’t know for certain that they haven’t used their house as an ATM, but I don’t see glaring evidence of it. No fancy cars, no extreme remodeling of the house, although they’ve taken a lot vacations.

[JWM in SD]

“I think zero liquid assets is a better term to use.”

Yes, that’s a better way to put it. Thanks. I don’t know for certain that they haven’t used their house as an ATM, but I don’t see glaring evidence of it. No fancy cars, no extreme remodeling of the house, although they’ve taken a lot vacations.

[Author]

Posts