December 26, 2006 at 11:43 AM #8113bubParticipantDecember 26, 2006 at 1:03 PM #42315
I hate to say it but reading the article it sounds like it is better to be a friend of Rich (Mannion) than Rich himself.December 26, 2006 at 2:42 PM #42317PerryChaseParticipant
I was thinking the same thing sdrealtor. However, Mr. Mannion probably wouldn’t have had to foresight to sell and rent had he not been friends with Mr. Toscano.
Most who sold high also “reinvested” even higher with no way to get out now that the market is in a slump. I know a few of those buyers.December 26, 2006 at 3:14 PM #42319AnonymousGuest
Rich, congratulations on the free press from the WSJ.
And, of course, congratulations and thank you for your site.
sdr, there’s still time for you to make money via speculation, but the vehicle, now, is gold, not real estate.
If you liked Rich’s prescience on San Diego real estate, you may want to speak with him about investments. Per my memory of my discussion with him at the November get together, Rich views gold favorably, and that strikes me as sensible and makes him deserving of heed on investments. Just food for thought.December 26, 2006 at 3:20 PM #42320
Unfortunately, the journalist and his editor cherry-picked the quotes that created the most conflict and which balanced out the negative sentiment.
Although I don’t know the exact #s, we all know the market value of homes in San Diego didn’t appreciate by 50% in the last 2.5 years as the article seems to imply. The truth of the matter is that the Mannions are hardly typical — they are experienced home sellers who have specific expertise and who put a lot of hard work and money into improving their home. Despite all of that, the sale was still slow and stressful. In retrospect, the Mannions are completely aware that Rich was right about the risk they undertook and that they are lucky they sold when they did.
None of that made it into the article …December 26, 2006 at 3:21 PM #42321IONEGARMParticipant
Honestly, I think most of the bloggers come of sounding pretty bad in the article, especially David Jackson.December 26, 2006 at 3:36 PM #42322
Agreed -> upon second reading it really spun the whole issue postively toward homeownership and made the nay-sayers seem like stupid extremists. But we’ve known for years that the WSJ is biased.December 26, 2006 at 4:58 PM #42323
I think you are giving the Mannions too much credit. They were lucky plain and simple to buy in early 2003 before a huge jump in prices. All their appreciation came in the first 12 months and had they waited even a month or two their return would have been dramtically smaller. Timing any market is extraordinarily difficult and they got lucky. The thing they deserve credit for is acting on Rich’s advice to sell at the peak. That’s all.December 26, 2006 at 5:11 PM #42324
The Mannions actually bought in December ’03 and put their house on the market in May ’06, where it stayed until Nov ’06.
“… buy in early 2003 before a huge jump in prices. All their appreciation came in the first 12 months and had they waited even a month or two their return would have been dramtically smaller.”
Hmmmmm, I guess they only got 1 out of those 12 months of dramatic appreciation.
Christina Mannion is an accomplished architect who has been featured in home design books. Considering these are my good friends, I know that she and Mike spent a lot of money and long hours over many weekends improving their 2nd home. Their intelligence and hard work deserve ALL the credit in my opinion.December 26, 2006 at 9:33 PM #42325
I meant to type “Late” but mistakenly typed “early”. Other than the one mistyped word I stand by my statement. One of my best friends sold his house in mid November 2003 for $680K and in late January 2004 they could have gotten $850K just two months later. I saw this happen numerous times between Dec 2003 and Feb 2004 as nearly every property in SD spiked up by $100K to $200K.
I dont doubt your friends skills and my comments were no disrespect to them but all the work they did does not come close to adding near $300K in value. The money they invested and their work could have added $100K or so but buying in Late 2003 rather than early 2004 accounted for the vast majority of their gains. The house they bought for $585K in Nov 2003 most likely would have sold as is for the mid 700’s a couple months later.
The luck of good timing, nothing more.December 26, 2006 at 11:41 PM #42326PerryChaseParticipant
sdrealtor, your comments piqued my interest. So I looked at some sales data. I concur with your observation that house prices went through the roof in 2004.
As an illustration, if you look at the houses on the west side of Camino Del Sur accross from Santa Luz, you’ll see that in 2003 they originally sold in the 500s and 2004 onwards they sold in the 700s and 800s.
The above neighborhood is a good example because it’s a new community so there wouldn’t have been major restoration jobs that would have skewed the data (unlike in more established neighborhoods).December 27, 2006 at 4:05 PM #42336
I have a very large position in MSFT that I have held for close to 20 years which has started to pay big dividends literally and figuratively. I apreciate the advice but am very comfortable with my investments to date.
SDRDecember 27, 2006 at 4:46 PM #42338AnonymousGuest
sdr, that’s a nice one to have had for 20 years, MSFT; congratulations!December 27, 2006 at 5:13 PM #42339Steve BeeboParticipant
sdrealtor – $170,000 gain in two months? I don't know about that. In one year, maybe.
From 1990 to 1998 Microsoft was spectacular, but not too great since then:December 27, 2006 at 6:11 PM #42340
MSFT is no longer the growth stock it was and like my house the stock price while nice to look at is not my primary concern. In another 20 years my mortgage will be paid off and I should be reaping 6 figure dividend income from MSFT.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.