Point Loma reducing a little

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal][quote=AN]
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100071045-6559_Caminito_Blythefield_La_Jolla_CA_92037
Sold in 1991 for $767k, listing now for $800k.
[/quote]

Of note on this listing… from the remarks:
Bank owned detached patio home in windemere- la jolla. Major foundation issues. Spectacular view of rose canyon, open floor plan, unlimited potential.[/quote]

Thank you for that, UCGal, I think AN is trying to compare apples to oranges when comparing MH and LJ to MM here. In addition, he brought up a highly upgraded comp in 92109 to compare to MM. They’re all different animals.

[quote=AN]Wow, someone actually paid $944k for a house that was sold for $204k in 1985? This house was sold for $212k in 1985:

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100011141-30…

and in 2005, it only got up to $770k. So, whoever bought that house for $944k must be on crack.[/quote]

What AN is referring to here was obviously a nondescript tract home when purchased in 1985 for $212K. It had a LOT of $$ invested in it prior to the pics being taken for the above listing on SDL.

No offense to AN, but MM is not even in the same league as MH and LJ (and I was probably scraping acoustical ceiling for a friend on “Capricorn Wy” in MM before AN was born … lol). His comp in 92009, although upgraded, is a tract home where the vast majority of homes in 92103 and 92106 are custom. 92037 is 2/3 custom and 1/3 tract. Virtually ALL the homes in MM are built on tract.

Nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is.

[jpinpb]

If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.

[jpinpb]

If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.

[jpinpb]

If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.

[jpinpb]

If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.

[jpinpb]

If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.[/quote]

Yes, the gap is greater now, but in the mid-eighties, there weren’t all these rehabs in MH and PL to buy. They were HEAVY FIXERS. And much of MM was fairly new construction (outlying at the time and sold for an inflated price).

Now, much of the inventory in MH and PL has been rehabbed or lovingly restored, at great effort and expense. It is VERY difficult to find a premium address now in either of these two zips that is a true “fixer.” The fixers were all gobbled up by about 1996. What is marketed now are mostly properties that have had a lot of work done to them.

That’s why the prices in MH and PL were close in price to MM in the eighties. MM was fairly *new* construction and many properties in MH and PL had cracked plaster and linoleum, plywood cabinets, etc and were badly in need of rehab at that time.

In the case of PL, the harbor skyline was one-twelfth in 1985 of what it is today. So the view from eligible properties in 92106 consisted of a handful of ’60’s *tallish* buildings, 2 aircraft carriers and 2-3 quonset huts on NAS North Island. There was nothing *yawn* too “spectacular” about that.

The best Fleetridge view back then could be described as “charming,” in an antiquated sort of way :=}

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.[/quote]

Yes, the gap is greater now, but in the mid-eighties, there weren’t all these rehabs in MH and PL to buy. They were HEAVY FIXERS. And much of MM was fairly new construction (outlying at the time and sold for an inflated price).

Now, much of the inventory in MH and PL has been rehabbed or lovingly restored, at great effort and expense. It is VERY difficult to find a premium address now in either of these two zips that is a true “fixer.” The fixers were all gobbled up by about 1996. What is marketed now are mostly properties that have had a lot of work done to them.

That’s why the prices in MH and PL were close in price to MM in the eighties. MM was fairly *new* construction and many properties in MH and PL had cracked plaster and linoleum, plywood cabinets, etc and were badly in need of rehab at that time.

In the case of PL, the harbor skyline was one-twelfth in 1985 of what it is today. So the view from eligible properties in 92106 consisted of a handful of ’60’s *tallish* buildings, 2 aircraft carriers and 2-3 quonset huts on NAS North Island. There was nothing *yawn* too “spectacular” about that.

The best Fleetridge view back then could be described as “charming,” in an antiquated sort of way :=}

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.[/quote]

Yes, the gap is greater now, but in the mid-eighties, there weren’t all these rehabs in MH and PL to buy. They were HEAVY FIXERS. And much of MM was fairly new construction (outlying at the time and sold for an inflated price).

Now, much of the inventory in MH and PL has been rehabbed or lovingly restored, at great effort and expense. It is VERY difficult to find a premium address now in either of these two zips that is a true “fixer.” The fixers were all gobbled up by about 1996. What is marketed now are mostly properties that have had a lot of work done to them.

That’s why the prices in MH and PL were close in price to MM in the eighties. MM was fairly *new* construction and many properties in MH and PL had cracked plaster and linoleum, plywood cabinets, etc and were badly in need of rehab at that time.

In the case of PL, the harbor skyline was one-twelfth in 1985 of what it is today. So the view from eligible properties in 92106 consisted of a handful of ’60’s *tallish* buildings, 2 aircraft carriers and 2-3 quonset huts on NAS North Island. There was nothing *yawn* too “spectacular” about that.

The best Fleetridge view back then could be described as “charming,” in an antiquated sort of way :=}

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.[/quote]

Yes, the gap is greater now, but in the mid-eighties, there weren’t all these rehabs in MH and PL to buy. They were HEAVY FIXERS. And much of MM was fairly new construction (outlying at the time and sold for an inflated price).

Now, much of the inventory in MH and PL has been rehabbed or lovingly restored, at great effort and expense. It is VERY difficult to find a premium address now in either of these two zips that is a true “fixer.” The fixers were all gobbled up by about 1996. What is marketed now are mostly properties that have had a lot of work done to them.

That’s why the prices in MH and PL were close in price to MM in the eighties. MM was fairly *new* construction and many properties in MH and PL had cracked plaster and linoleum, plywood cabinets, etc and were badly in need of rehab at that time.

In the case of PL, the harbor skyline was one-twelfth in 1985 of what it is today. So the view from eligible properties in 92106 consisted of a handful of ’60’s *tallish* buildings, 2 aircraft carriers and 2-3 quonset huts on NAS North Island. There was nothing *yawn* too “spectacular” about that.

The best Fleetridge view back then could be described as “charming,” in an antiquated sort of way :=}

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jpinpb]If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.[/quote]

Yes, the gap is greater now, but in the mid-eighties, there weren’t all these rehabs in MH and PL to buy. They were HEAVY FIXERS. And much of MM was fairly new construction (outlying at the time and sold for an inflated price).

Now, much of the inventory in MH and PL has been rehabbed or lovingly restored, at great effort and expense. It is VERY difficult to find a premium address now in either of these two zips that is a true “fixer.” The fixers were all gobbled up by about 1996. What is marketed now are mostly properties that have had a lot of work done to them.

That’s why the prices in MH and PL were close in price to MM in the eighties. MM was fairly *new* construction and many properties in MH and PL had cracked plaster and linoleum, plywood cabinets, etc and were badly in need of rehab at that time.

In the case of PL, the harbor skyline was one-twelfth in 1985 of what it is today. So the view from eligible properties in 92106 consisted of a handful of ’60’s *tallish* buildings, 2 aircraft carriers and 2-3 quonset huts on NAS North Island. There was nothing *yawn* too “spectacular” about that.

The best Fleetridge view back then could be described as “charming,” in an antiquated sort of way :=}

[an]

[quote=jpinpb]If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.[/quote]
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m trying compare. I’m not saying that these areas attract the same buyers (i.e. buyers don’t usually cross shop these areas). However, the premium for each of these areas are all related.

Since BG stated that the reason by a huge price appreciation between MH and other areas in SD is due to the major rehab that was going on in the 80s, I decide to do some more investigating and compare premium of MH vs MM in the mid 90s instead of the mid 80s. This is what I come up with:

MH:
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100064293-3665_Jackdaw_St_San_Diego_CA_92103
03/05/2008 $610,000 10y 7m 94% 6%
07/11/1997 $315,000 1y 10m 60% 28%
08/24/1995 $197,000 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100053546-3775_Dana_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92103
10/02/1998 $262,500 7y 2m 20% 3%
07/11/1991 $219,500 6y 3m 74% 9%
03/27/1985 $126,500 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100054217-2839_State_St_San_Diego_CA_92103
12/30/1998 $315,000 15y 2m 133% 6%
10/24/1983 $135,000 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100063461-1860_Fort_Stockton_Dr_San_Diego_CA_92103
02/20/2002 $535,000 3y 6m 45% 11%
08/24/1998 $369,000 9y 2m 9% 1%
06/13/1989 $340,000 1y 10m 37% 18%
07/31/1987 $249,000 3y 2m 49% 13%
05/30/1984 $167,600 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-090042193-10444_Flanders_Cove_San_Diego_CA_92126
02/18/2010 $504,000 10y 2m 83% 6%
12/13/1999 $275,000 16y 2m 115% 5%
09/30/1983 $128,075 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100047289-7666_Northrup_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92126
02/24/2005 $621,000 14y 10m 182% 7%
04/12/1990 $220,000 5y 5m 67% 10%
10/15/1984 $132,000 4m -4% -11%
06/04/1984 $138,000 5m 4% 8%
12/21/1983 $133,075 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100045205-6646_Hollycrest_Ct_San_Diego_CA_92121
09/01/2004 $780,000 4y 9m 106% 16%
11/10/1999 $379,243 n/a – –

As you can see, the premium difference between 3775 Dana Pl and 10444 Flanders Cove is roughly the same both in mid 80s and late 90s with their sold price. The Flanders Cove was completely remodeled as well with all the modern amenities. Yet it closed for $504k. The Dana Pl property on the other hand is asking $729k. So, let me ask my question again, what has changed in MH since the late 90s that made it that much more desirable?

[an]

[quote=jpinpb]If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.[/quote]
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m trying compare. I’m not saying that these areas attract the same buyers (i.e. buyers don’t usually cross shop these areas). However, the premium for each of these areas are all related.

Since BG stated that the reason by a huge price appreciation between MH and other areas in SD is due to the major rehab that was going on in the 80s, I decide to do some more investigating and compare premium of MH vs MM in the mid 90s instead of the mid 80s. This is what I come up with:

MH:
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100064293-3665_Jackdaw_St_San_Diego_CA_92103
03/05/2008 $610,000 10y 7m 94% 6%
07/11/1997 $315,000 1y 10m 60% 28%
08/24/1995 $197,000 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100053546-3775_Dana_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92103
10/02/1998 $262,500 7y 2m 20% 3%
07/11/1991 $219,500 6y 3m 74% 9%
03/27/1985 $126,500 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100054217-2839_State_St_San_Diego_CA_92103
12/30/1998 $315,000 15y 2m 133% 6%
10/24/1983 $135,000 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100063461-1860_Fort_Stockton_Dr_San_Diego_CA_92103
02/20/2002 $535,000 3y 6m 45% 11%
08/24/1998 $369,000 9y 2m 9% 1%
06/13/1989 $340,000 1y 10m 37% 18%
07/31/1987 $249,000 3y 2m 49% 13%
05/30/1984 $167,600 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-090042193-10444_Flanders_Cove_San_Diego_CA_92126
02/18/2010 $504,000 10y 2m 83% 6%
12/13/1999 $275,000 16y 2m 115% 5%
09/30/1983 $128,075 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100047289-7666_Northrup_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92126
02/24/2005 $621,000 14y 10m 182% 7%
04/12/1990 $220,000 5y 5m 67% 10%
10/15/1984 $132,000 4m -4% -11%
06/04/1984 $138,000 5m 4% 8%
12/21/1983 $133,075 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100045205-6646_Hollycrest_Ct_San_Diego_CA_92121
09/01/2004 $780,000 4y 9m 106% 16%
11/10/1999 $379,243 n/a – –

As you can see, the premium difference between 3775 Dana Pl and 10444 Flanders Cove is roughly the same both in mid 80s and late 90s with their sold price. The Flanders Cove was completely remodeled as well with all the modern amenities. Yet it closed for $504k. The Dana Pl property on the other hand is asking $729k. So, let me ask my question again, what has changed in MH since the late 90s that made it that much more desirable?

[an]

[quote=jpinpb]If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.[/quote]
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m trying compare. I’m not saying that these areas attract the same buyers (i.e. buyers don’t usually cross shop these areas). However, the premium for each of these areas are all related.

Since BG stated that the reason by a huge price appreciation between MH and other areas in SD is due to the major rehab that was going on in the 80s, I decide to do some more investigating and compare premium of MH vs MM in the mid 90s instead of the mid 80s. This is what I come up with:

MH:
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100064293-3665_Jackdaw_St_San_Diego_CA_92103
03/05/2008 $610,000 10y 7m 94% 6%
07/11/1997 $315,000 1y 10m 60% 28%
08/24/1995 $197,000 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100053546-3775_Dana_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92103
10/02/1998 $262,500 7y 2m 20% 3%
07/11/1991 $219,500 6y 3m 74% 9%
03/27/1985 $126,500 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100054217-2839_State_St_San_Diego_CA_92103
12/30/1998 $315,000 15y 2m 133% 6%
10/24/1983 $135,000 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100063461-1860_Fort_Stockton_Dr_San_Diego_CA_92103
02/20/2002 $535,000 3y 6m 45% 11%
08/24/1998 $369,000 9y 2m 9% 1%
06/13/1989 $340,000 1y 10m 37% 18%
07/31/1987 $249,000 3y 2m 49% 13%
05/30/1984 $167,600 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-090042193-10444_Flanders_Cove_San_Diego_CA_92126
02/18/2010 $504,000 10y 2m 83% 6%
12/13/1999 $275,000 16y 2m 115% 5%
09/30/1983 $128,075 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100047289-7666_Northrup_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92126
02/24/2005 $621,000 14y 10m 182% 7%
04/12/1990 $220,000 5y 5m 67% 10%
10/15/1984 $132,000 4m -4% -11%
06/04/1984 $138,000 5m 4% 8%
12/21/1983 $133,075 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100045205-6646_Hollycrest_Ct_San_Diego_CA_92121
09/01/2004 $780,000 4y 9m 106% 16%
11/10/1999 $379,243 n/a – –

As you can see, the premium difference between 3775 Dana Pl and 10444 Flanders Cove is roughly the same both in mid 80s and late 90s with their sold price. The Flanders Cove was completely remodeled as well with all the modern amenities. Yet it closed for $504k. The Dana Pl property on the other hand is asking $729k. So, let me ask my question again, what has changed in MH since the late 90s that made it that much more desirable?

[an]

[quote=jpinpb]If I’m understanding AN, it was the gap is greater now. I think that was the comparison. Maybe I misunderstood what the examples were illustrating.[/quote]
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m trying compare. I’m not saying that these areas attract the same buyers (i.e. buyers don’t usually cross shop these areas). However, the premium for each of these areas are all related.

Since BG stated that the reason by a huge price appreciation between MH and other areas in SD is due to the major rehab that was going on in the 80s, I decide to do some more investigating and compare premium of MH vs MM in the mid 90s instead of the mid 80s. This is what I come up with:

MH:
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100064293-3665_Jackdaw_St_San_Diego_CA_92103
03/05/2008 $610,000 10y 7m 94% 6%
07/11/1997 $315,000 1y 10m 60% 28%
08/24/1995 $197,000 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100053546-3775_Dana_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92103
10/02/1998 $262,500 7y 2m 20% 3%
07/11/1991 $219,500 6y 3m 74% 9%
03/27/1985 $126,500 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100054217-2839_State_St_San_Diego_CA_92103
12/30/1998 $315,000 15y 2m 133% 6%
10/24/1983 $135,000 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100063461-1860_Fort_Stockton_Dr_San_Diego_CA_92103
02/20/2002 $535,000 3y 6m 45% 11%
08/24/1998 $369,000 9y 2m 9% 1%
06/13/1989 $340,000 1y 10m 37% 18%
07/31/1987 $249,000 3y 2m 49% 13%
05/30/1984 $167,600 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-090042193-10444_Flanders_Cove_San_Diego_CA_92126
02/18/2010 $504,000 10y 2m 83% 6%
12/13/1999 $275,000 16y 2m 115% 5%
09/30/1983 $128,075 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100047289-7666_Northrup_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92126
02/24/2005 $621,000 14y 10m 182% 7%
04/12/1990 $220,000 5y 5m 67% 10%
10/15/1984 $132,000 4m -4% -11%
06/04/1984 $138,000 5m 4% 8%
12/21/1983 $133,075 n/a – –

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100045205-6646_Hollycrest_Ct_San_Diego_CA_92121
09/01/2004 $780,000 4y 9m 106% 16%
11/10/1999 $379,243 n/a – –

As you can see, the premium difference between 3775 Dana Pl and 10444 Flanders Cove is roughly the same both in mid 80s and late 90s with their sold price. The Flanders Cove was completely remodeled as well with all the modern amenities. Yet it closed for $504k. The Dana Pl property on the other hand is asking $729k. So, let me ask my question again, what has changed in MH since the late 90s that made it that much more desirable?

[Author]

Posts