- This topic has 37 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 7 months ago by
temeculaguy.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 5, 2006 at 11:59 AM #26216June 5, 2006 at 1:52 PM #26225
powayseller
ParticipantFrom 2000-2004, LA County experienced annual average -22% domestic migration. Natural increase played a greater part in population growth in the coastal counties, whereas domestic migration was the main cause in the Inland Empire. Since 2000, Orange County experienced 14,000 net domestic outmigration. Domestic migrants to the Inland Empire came primarily from Los Angeles. Government Study
“Most of have these shaky loans can sell their homes”.
1) Why do we have record foreclosures? It is up 60% in California versus last year? Couldn’t these people sell?
2) Most people with “shaky loans” don’t even know they have them, think they’ll be able to pay the higher payments somehow, or don’t realize the market is going down and they will be upside down when it’s time to sell
3) House prices have fallen 5-10% already, so anyone who bought in the last 2 years, has a high probability of being upside down on their mortgage. The shaky loans have prepayment penalties, and I know several people who are not refinancing from their ARM into a fixed rate mortgage because they don’t want to pay the 3 months interest that is the penalty.
4) The term “population stampede” is erroneous reporting. Please show your sources for this claim.
5) Which economists have you spent “weeks talking to”?June 5, 2006 at 3:59 PM #26233john67elco
ParticipantPeople can still sell their house?
Ok what happened here?
Hereand here this ones for sale exact same list price as paid for it 09/14/2005: $325,000:
And HereGot a few more but this is enough to say um ya. RE has never been better. Yes people can still sell if they can under cut market enough. If forclosing didnt take so long we would see a bigger shift sooner. Most people forclose and take a whole year before its on the market. So if those 1.5 trillion ARM’s reset in 07 we may not see the largest impact of it until 2008. As for that journalist, OMFG…..
June 5, 2006 at 4:01 PM #26235lostkitty
ParticipantDo any of you have a problem with me cutting and pasting your comments into my email response to her?
I will end it with a “P.S.” about baies not stampeding to buy houses.
June 5, 2006 at 4:07 PM #26236ParticipantNo way go for it
Oh btw
Temecula/Murrieta area is the starting grounds of RE due to mostly commuters and retirees own homes there unless Circuit City employee’s salaries have quadrupled.“You say housing market will keep rising? Then your stupid for not buying as many homes as you can right now!!!!!!!!!
June 5, 2006 at 9:50 PM #26281Anonymous
GuestPS,
I’ve seen you post several places that housing prices have already dropped 5 to 10%. Where did you find these statistics? I havent seen them anywhere?June 6, 2006 at 5:18 AM #26298ParticipantLook at the MLS – selling price vs. listing price, and add in that seller is now paying closing costs. Add in allowances which don’t show up in the contract.
Look at new homes: use 2005 figures, add price reductions, upgrades.
Check downtown condos. Many many are 10% off. See the bubble blogger section for a guy who tracks these.
Look at Bressi Ranch. Remember I asked you about the pendings, and you didn’t know. I kept asking, and I got an answer:
“Bressi Ranch is showing 11 pending, but 8 have already closed escrow. Two examples of what they have to hide:
In September 2005 they closed a house for $936,000 that was listed for $1,125,000. In May 2006 they closed a house for $900,000 that was listed at $1,079,000. Both still show pending.
I can see why they want to disguise those sales as long as possible.
They aren’t putting everything on the MLS either, if they did it would be disastrous. From what I can tell they have a lot of houses not selling.”Hope this helps…
June 6, 2006 at 11:39 AM #26329ParticipantHere is her reply (as you can see I prety much cutnpasted the two suggestions from this blog. I nly added in the “babies dont buy houses” part to a section of what powayseller wrote. She did not respond to the links at the bottom):
From 2000-2004, LA County experienced annual average -22% domestic migration. Natural increase played a greater part in population growth in the coastal counties, whereas domestic migration was the main cause in the Inland Empire. Since 2000, Orange County experienced 14,000 net domestic outmigration. Domestic migrants to the Inland Empire came primarily from Los Angeles. Government Study[
Diane’s response ***** I get my census information directly from the U.S. Census Bureau and our census expert at the paper analyzes the data. We’re correct. ******
“Most of have these shaky loans can sell their homes”.
1) Why do we have record foreclosures? It is up 60% in California versus last year? Couldn’t these people sell?***** I don’t know why they’re starting the foreclosure process–they should be able to sell and come out OK. No matter, demand for homes still far outstrips supply. *****
2) Most people with “shaky loans” don’t even know they have them, think they’ll be able to pay the higher payments somehow, or don’t realize the market is going down and they will be upside down when it’s time to sell
***** I agree with you—and have written about this. Most people who got their interest-only loans—or worse, negative-amortization–don’t know what they’re in for. And economists worry about this. The market is still doing OK–it’s normal, in fact. The 20% appreciation was abnormal. *****
3) House prices have fallen 5-10% already, so anyone who bought in the last 2 years, has a high probability of being upside down on their mortgage. The shaky loans have prepayment penalties, and I know several people who are not refinancing from their ARM into a fixed rate mortgage because they don’t want to pay the 3 months interest that is the penalty.
***** Prices are still rising in the SoCal counties (year-over-year, which is what counts). They sometimes fall a bit for seasonal reasons. Appreciation is not in the double-digits anymore, but homes still are appreciating in the 7% range or so nearly everywhere (not everywhere, of course). Even those who bought two years ago should have equity gains, although you’re very right about pre-payment penalties with some loans. *****
4) The term “population stampede” is erroneous reporting. Births do not affect housing since babies do not stampede to buy homes. Please show your sources for this claim.
***** International immigration accounts for about 1.5 million per year. call it what you will. *****
5) Which economists have you spent “weeks talking to”?
***** I do my reporting well. I have for 30 years now (and have won numerous awards for it). I talk to the most widely respected economists in the country–every week. *****
***** This is my last response to your angry e-mails. We simply do not agree. You view journalists as people who tell “half-truths.” I respectfully beg to differ.
Diane Wedner *****
People can still sell their house in So California?
Ok what happened here?
HereAnd Here
and here this ones for sale exact same list price as paid for it 09/14/2005: $325,000:
And HereJune 6, 2006 at 12:21 PM #26338ParticipantA professional would have taken your comments into consideration.
Instead of learning, she is digging in her heels. Too bad.
Why did she refuse to list the economists she mentioned in her article? Does she understand that medians are going up, because the distribution of homes sold has shifted? Prices are falling, so while the median is up, the trend is down.
Some people don’t want to believe prices are falling. These people cannot be convinced. They must experience it.
June 6, 2006 at 1:29 PM #26348sdrealtor
ParticipantPS,
I was just curious as to what your source was. I’ve said over and over that they’ve fallen 5 to 10% already in mnay places. I just havent seen any stats published yet. The stats you provided really don’t substantiate it. Don’t worry though…..it’s comingJune 6, 2006 at 2:45 PM #26352ParticipantI can’t remember the sources. The next time I find it written, I’ll start a thread on it.
June 6, 2006 at 4:32 PM #26356ParticipantMe thinks the source was me….
June 6, 2006 at 7:20 PM #26358ParticipantI just saw this:
http://www.benengebreth.org/housingtracker/location/California/SanDiego/
Check out that rise in inventory!!!!! Wooohwee..
I think I better put this one in its own thread. Too bad I am too “wicked retaaahhded” as they say here in the NEast to do one of those hyperlinks…
June 26, 2006 at 2:14 PM #27423ParticipantThis San Antonio newspaper article muses about the reasons for San Diego’s population loss and San Antonio’s population increase. From their perspective, SD suffers from City Hall corruption and high housing prices.
June 26, 2006 at 2:27 PM #27425
barnaby33ParticipantPlus in San Antonio, you don’t have to worry about any of those pesky mountains sneaking up on you. They are scary.
Josh
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.