- This topic has 80 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 2 months ago by
NotCranky.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 1, 2008 at 8:06 PM #163586March 1, 2008 at 8:56 PM #163203
NotCranky
ParticipantNice graphs and map esmith.
From your second graph on the link…are you interpreting the picture that you paint there to mean that lower and middle tiers are about to overshoot what you consider a reasonable target, given current interest rate environment?
ThanksMarch 1, 2008 at 8:56 PM #163512ParticipantNice graphs and map esmith.
From your second graph on the link…are you interpreting the picture that you paint there to mean that lower and middle tiers are about to overshoot what you consider a reasonable target, given current interest rate environment?
ThanksMarch 1, 2008 at 8:56 PM #163524ParticipantNice graphs and map esmith.
From your second graph on the link…are you interpreting the picture that you paint there to mean that lower and middle tiers are about to overshoot what you consider a reasonable target, given current interest rate environment?
ThanksMarch 1, 2008 at 8:56 PM #163535ParticipantNice graphs and map esmith.
From your second graph on the link…are you interpreting the picture that you paint there to mean that lower and middle tiers are about to overshoot what you consider a reasonable target, given current interest rate environment?
ThanksMarch 1, 2008 at 8:56 PM #163617ParticipantNice graphs and map esmith.
From your second graph on the link…are you interpreting the picture that you paint there to mean that lower and middle tiers are about to overshoot what you consider a reasonable target, given current interest rate environment?
ThanksMarch 1, 2008 at 9:47 PM #163233Eugene
ParticipantIt certainly appears that way. But maybe I got the long-term reasonable target wrong. My basic assumption is that “fortress” wasn’t overpriced in 2002 (yet). Some people may disagree with that.
March 1, 2008 at 9:47 PM #163543ParticipantIt certainly appears that way. But maybe I got the long-term reasonable target wrong. My basic assumption is that “fortress” wasn’t overpriced in 2002 (yet). Some people may disagree with that.
March 1, 2008 at 9:47 PM #163554ParticipantIt certainly appears that way. But maybe I got the long-term reasonable target wrong. My basic assumption is that “fortress” wasn’t overpriced in 2002 (yet). Some people may disagree with that.
March 1, 2008 at 9:47 PM #163565ParticipantIt certainly appears that way. But maybe I got the long-term reasonable target wrong. My basic assumption is that “fortress” wasn’t overpriced in 2002 (yet). Some people may disagree with that.
March 1, 2008 at 9:47 PM #163647ParticipantIt certainly appears that way. But maybe I got the long-term reasonable target wrong. My basic assumption is that “fortress” wasn’t overpriced in 2002 (yet). Some people may disagree with that.
March 1, 2008 at 10:22 PM #163254gdcox
ParticipantIsn’t is best to go back to the fourth graph on
to look for a clue as to when prices were ‘correct’ : ie not over or undershot for a period of normal mortgages. That tells me something like late 99; but projected for the very long term trend ‘real’ growth in house and land prices (ie trend above inflation) the ‘normal’ price level may well been something like 2002 prices
The big time trouble is, the market will probably undershoot that level; perhaps by a substantial . Longer term buyer won’t then worry so much though for they can wait for the knife to bounce!
March 1, 2008 at 10:22 PM #163563ParticipantIsn’t is best to go back to the fourth graph on
to look for a clue as to when prices were ‘correct’ : ie not over or undershot for a period of normal mortgages. That tells me something like late 99; but projected for the very long term trend ‘real’ growth in house and land prices (ie trend above inflation) the ‘normal’ price level may well been something like 2002 prices
The big time trouble is, the market will probably undershoot that level; perhaps by a substantial . Longer term buyer won’t then worry so much though for they can wait for the knife to bounce!
March 1, 2008 at 10:22 PM #163573ParticipantIsn’t is best to go back to the fourth graph on
to look for a clue as to when prices were ‘correct’ : ie not over or undershot for a period of normal mortgages. That tells me something like late 99; but projected for the very long term trend ‘real’ growth in house and land prices (ie trend above inflation) the ‘normal’ price level may well been something like 2002 prices
The big time trouble is, the market will probably undershoot that level; perhaps by a substantial . Longer term buyer won’t then worry so much though for they can wait for the knife to bounce!
March 1, 2008 at 10:22 PM #163585ParticipantIsn’t is best to go back to the fourth graph on
to look for a clue as to when prices were ‘correct’ : ie not over or undershot for a period of normal mortgages. That tells me something like late 99; but projected for the very long term trend ‘real’ growth in house and land prices (ie trend above inflation) the ‘normal’ price level may well been something like 2002 prices
The big time trouble is, the market will probably undershoot that level; perhaps by a substantial . Longer term buyer won’t then worry so much though for they can wait for the knife to bounce!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.