Seeking the opinion of the buyers out there.

[sdcellar]

yep. lots of rationalization. i almost feel like i’m at the car dealer and he’s trying to scam me with the old ‘what can you spend a month’ routine…

[waiting for bottom]

[quote=sdcellar]yep. lots of rationalization. i almost feel like i’m at the car dealer and he’s trying to scam me with the old ‘what can you spend a month’ routine…[/quote]

If rationalization is “I bought a house I like with the payment I can afford” then, yes, I have rationalized.

Seriously, you guys think there is no risk to timing the bottom? What do you think rates will do between now and then? I’ll give you a hint, not down.

Again – if my recent purchase falls 20% but rates go to 7.5%, I will have the same payment. There is equal – at best for your argument – chance of these happening. From my POV, 7.5% is a certainty, 20% down is not.

[waiting for bottom]

[quote=sdcellar]yep. lots of rationalization. i almost feel like i’m at the car dealer and he’s trying to scam me with the old ‘what can you spend a month’ routine…[/quote]

If rationalization is “I bought a house I like with the payment I can afford” then, yes, I have rationalized.

Seriously, you guys think there is no risk to timing the bottom? What do you think rates will do between now and then? I’ll give you a hint, not down.

Again – if my recent purchase falls 20% but rates go to 7.5%, I will have the same payment. There is equal – at best for your argument – chance of these happening. From my POV, 7.5% is a certainty, 20% down is not.

[waiting for bottom]

[quote=sdcellar]yep. lots of rationalization. i almost feel like i’m at the car dealer and he’s trying to scam me with the old ‘what can you spend a month’ routine…[/quote]

If rationalization is “I bought a house I like with the payment I can afford” then, yes, I have rationalized.

Seriously, you guys think there is no risk to timing the bottom? What do you think rates will do between now and then? I’ll give you a hint, not down.

Again – if my recent purchase falls 20% but rates go to 7.5%, I will have the same payment. There is equal – at best for your argument – chance of these happening. From my POV, 7.5% is a certainty, 20% down is not.

[waiting for bottom]

[quote=sdcellar]yep. lots of rationalization. i almost feel like i’m at the car dealer and he’s trying to scam me with the old ‘what can you spend a month’ routine…[/quote]

If rationalization is “I bought a house I like with the payment I can afford” then, yes, I have rationalized.

Seriously, you guys think there is no risk to timing the bottom? What do you think rates will do between now and then? I’ll give you a hint, not down.

Again – if my recent purchase falls 20% but rates go to 7.5%, I will have the same payment. There is equal – at best for your argument – chance of these happening. From my POV, 7.5% is a certainty, 20% down is not.

[waiting for bottom]

[quote=sdcellar]yep. lots of rationalization. i almost feel like i’m at the car dealer and he’s trying to scam me with the old ‘what can you spend a month’ routine…[/quote]

If rationalization is “I bought a house I like with the payment I can afford” then, yes, I have rationalized.

Seriously, you guys think there is no risk to timing the bottom? What do you think rates will do between now and then? I’ll give you a hint, not down.

Again – if my recent purchase falls 20% but rates go to 7.5%, I will have the same payment. There is equal – at best for your argument – chance of these happening. From my POV, 7.5% is a certainty, 20% down is not.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=4plexowner]lots of rationalization about this and that – nobody addressed this undeniable fact:

3. what about the fact that previous real estate downturns in SoCal have been 6 to 7 years which puts a bottom in 2012 to 2014 at the earliest?[/quote]

I’ll address it, The six year cycle is not peak to bottom, it’s the peak to the start of the next cycle and it’s not always a flat line. The last cycle I timed completely wrong, bought in 1992 (chronilogically equivalent to 2006), was upside down for the next 5-6 years and was back to even in 1998, sold for what I paid, got my downpayment back and the transaction costs, but no profit to speak of. In that cycle, the actual bottom wasn’t 1998, things started to turn around in 1998, the best bargains weren’t in 1998. I did buy another house that year, I still got a decent deal, but 1995 and 1996 was when the real bargains could have been had. I couldn’t sell my place during that time, I tried, but I couldn’t sell without a loss until 1998. If I didn’t have a place that I needed to sell, if I had been older and wiser and possessed the balls to just keep my first house as a rental, I would have bought in 1995/1996, which was about three years after things peaked, not 6-7, by then, it was too late. Twice I have tried to time the cycle, but I was always both a seller and a buyer, and in time I learned that when you are both, it doesn’t matter so much. That is why this cycle I decided to rent during the decline.

2012-2014, anything can happen, we can be on the spam and ammo plan, who knows. But I’m gonna dance with the one that brung me, this is the third cycle I’ve watched and participated in, and my experience is that 2012-2014 will be too late, 2009/2010 is the buying season, as long as you don’t have to sell.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=4plexowner]lots of rationalization about this and that – nobody addressed this undeniable fact:

3. what about the fact that previous real estate downturns in SoCal have been 6 to 7 years which puts a bottom in 2012 to 2014 at the earliest?[/quote]

I’ll address it, The six year cycle is not peak to bottom, it’s the peak to the start of the next cycle and it’s not always a flat line. The last cycle I timed completely wrong, bought in 1992 (chronilogically equivalent to 2006), was upside down for the next 5-6 years and was back to even in 1998, sold for what I paid, got my downpayment back and the transaction costs, but no profit to speak of. In that cycle, the actual bottom wasn’t 1998, things started to turn around in 1998, the best bargains weren’t in 1998. I did buy another house that year, I still got a decent deal, but 1995 and 1996 was when the real bargains could have been had. I couldn’t sell my place during that time, I tried, but I couldn’t sell without a loss until 1998. If I didn’t have a place that I needed to sell, if I had been older and wiser and possessed the balls to just keep my first house as a rental, I would have bought in 1995/1996, which was about three years after things peaked, not 6-7, by then, it was too late. Twice I have tried to time the cycle, but I was always both a seller and a buyer, and in time I learned that when you are both, it doesn’t matter so much. That is why this cycle I decided to rent during the decline.

2012-2014, anything can happen, we can be on the spam and ammo plan, who knows. But I’m gonna dance with the one that brung me, this is the third cycle I’ve watched and participated in, and my experience is that 2012-2014 will be too late, 2009/2010 is the buying season, as long as you don’t have to sell.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=4plexowner]lots of rationalization about this and that – nobody addressed this undeniable fact:

3. what about the fact that previous real estate downturns in SoCal have been 6 to 7 years which puts a bottom in 2012 to 2014 at the earliest?[/quote]

I’ll address it, The six year cycle is not peak to bottom, it’s the peak to the start of the next cycle and it’s not always a flat line. The last cycle I timed completely wrong, bought in 1992 (chronilogically equivalent to 2006), was upside down for the next 5-6 years and was back to even in 1998, sold for what I paid, got my downpayment back and the transaction costs, but no profit to speak of. In that cycle, the actual bottom wasn’t 1998, things started to turn around in 1998, the best bargains weren’t in 1998. I did buy another house that year, I still got a decent deal, but 1995 and 1996 was when the real bargains could have been had. I couldn’t sell my place during that time, I tried, but I couldn’t sell without a loss until 1998. If I didn’t have a place that I needed to sell, if I had been older and wiser and possessed the balls to just keep my first house as a rental, I would have bought in 1995/1996, which was about three years after things peaked, not 6-7, by then, it was too late. Twice I have tried to time the cycle, but I was always both a seller and a buyer, and in time I learned that when you are both, it doesn’t matter so much. That is why this cycle I decided to rent during the decline.

2012-2014, anything can happen, we can be on the spam and ammo plan, who knows. But I’m gonna dance with the one that brung me, this is the third cycle I’ve watched and participated in, and my experience is that 2012-2014 will be too late, 2009/2010 is the buying season, as long as you don’t have to sell.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=4plexowner]lots of rationalization about this and that – nobody addressed this undeniable fact:

3. what about the fact that previous real estate downturns in SoCal have been 6 to 7 years which puts a bottom in 2012 to 2014 at the earliest?[/quote]

I’ll address it, The six year cycle is not peak to bottom, it’s the peak to the start of the next cycle and it’s not always a flat line. The last cycle I timed completely wrong, bought in 1992 (chronilogically equivalent to 2006), was upside down for the next 5-6 years and was back to even in 1998, sold for what I paid, got my downpayment back and the transaction costs, but no profit to speak of. In that cycle, the actual bottom wasn’t 1998, things started to turn around in 1998, the best bargains weren’t in 1998. I did buy another house that year, I still got a decent deal, but 1995 and 1996 was when the real bargains could have been had. I couldn’t sell my place during that time, I tried, but I couldn’t sell without a loss until 1998. If I didn’t have a place that I needed to sell, if I had been older and wiser and possessed the balls to just keep my first house as a rental, I would have bought in 1995/1996, which was about three years after things peaked, not 6-7, by then, it was too late. Twice I have tried to time the cycle, but I was always both a seller and a buyer, and in time I learned that when you are both, it doesn’t matter so much. That is why this cycle I decided to rent during the decline.

2012-2014, anything can happen, we can be on the spam and ammo plan, who knows. But I’m gonna dance with the one that brung me, this is the third cycle I’ve watched and participated in, and my experience is that 2012-2014 will be too late, 2009/2010 is the buying season, as long as you don’t have to sell.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=4plexowner]lots of rationalization about this and that – nobody addressed this undeniable fact:

3. what about the fact that previous real estate downturns in SoCal have been 6 to 7 years which puts a bottom in 2012 to 2014 at the earliest?[/quote]

I’ll address it, The six year cycle is not peak to bottom, it’s the peak to the start of the next cycle and it’s not always a flat line. The last cycle I timed completely wrong, bought in 1992 (chronilogically equivalent to 2006), was upside down for the next 5-6 years and was back to even in 1998, sold for what I paid, got my downpayment back and the transaction costs, but no profit to speak of. In that cycle, the actual bottom wasn’t 1998, things started to turn around in 1998, the best bargains weren’t in 1998. I did buy another house that year, I still got a decent deal, but 1995 and 1996 was when the real bargains could have been had. I couldn’t sell my place during that time, I tried, but I couldn’t sell without a loss until 1998. If I didn’t have a place that I needed to sell, if I had been older and wiser and possessed the balls to just keep my first house as a rental, I would have bought in 1995/1996, which was about three years after things peaked, not 6-7, by then, it was too late. Twice I have tried to time the cycle, but I was always both a seller and a buyer, and in time I learned that when you are both, it doesn’t matter so much. That is why this cycle I decided to rent during the decline.

2012-2014, anything can happen, we can be on the spam and ammo plan, who knows. But I’m gonna dance with the one that brung me, this is the third cycle I’ve watched and participated in, and my experience is that 2012-2014 will be too late, 2009/2010 is the buying season, as long as you don’t have to sell.

[carlsbadworker]

[quote=waiting for bottom]
If rationalization is “I bought a house I like with the payment I can afford” then, yes, I have rationalized.

Seriously, you guys think there is no risk to timing the bottom? What do you think rates will do between now and then? I’ll give you a hint, not down.

Again – if my recent purchase falls 20% but rates go to 7.5%, I will have the same payment. There is equal – at best for your argument – chance of these happening. From my POV, 7.5% is a certainty, 20% down is not.[/quote]

I don’t think “rational” and “timing the bottom” could come together in the same sentence, since it is the seed for great disappointment.
Let me illustrate what I meant. The price bottom is determined the aggregate demands from the buyers as a group and the aggregate supplies from the sellers as a group. A bottom seeker has a price target of what it should be…and he might be very well correct in his maths. But the trouble is that the buyers as a group is not rational, the very fact that they criticize “knife catchers are always with us”, allows the buyers as a group to bid up the price to be higher than what a rational person think where the exact bottom price lies.
A true rational bottom price will only exist when all buyers in the market are rational. Therefore, the bottom price hunter who think themselves as very rational, will unavoidably be outbid every single time, as they have been. This is especially true in this cycle when the banks are more rational in their selling pricing strategy than a normal seller would be.

[carlsbadworker]

[quote=waiting for bottom]
If rationalization is “I bought a house I like with the payment I can afford” then, yes, I have rationalized.

Seriously, you guys think there is no risk to timing the bottom? What do you think rates will do between now and then? I’ll give you a hint, not down.

Again – if my recent purchase falls 20% but rates go to 7.5%, I will have the same payment. There is equal – at best for your argument – chance of these happening. From my POV, 7.5% is a certainty, 20% down is not.[/quote]

I don’t think “rational” and “timing the bottom” could come together in the same sentence, since it is the seed for great disappointment.
Let me illustrate what I meant. The price bottom is determined the aggregate demands from the buyers as a group and the aggregate supplies from the sellers as a group. A bottom seeker has a price target of what it should be…and he might be very well correct in his maths. But the trouble is that the buyers as a group is not rational, the very fact that they criticize “knife catchers are always with us”, allows the buyers as a group to bid up the price to be higher than what a rational person think where the exact bottom price lies.
A true rational bottom price will only exist when all buyers in the market are rational. Therefore, the bottom price hunter who think themselves as very rational, will unavoidably be outbid every single time, as they have been. This is especially true in this cycle when the banks are more rational in their selling pricing strategy than a normal seller would be.

[carlsbadworker]

[quote=waiting for bottom]
If rationalization is “I bought a house I like with the payment I can afford” then, yes, I have rationalized.

Seriously, you guys think there is no risk to timing the bottom? What do you think rates will do between now and then? I’ll give you a hint, not down.

Again – if my recent purchase falls 20% but rates go to 7.5%, I will have the same payment. There is equal – at best for your argument – chance of these happening. From my POV, 7.5% is a certainty, 20% down is not.[/quote]

I don’t think “rational” and “timing the bottom” could come together in the same sentence, since it is the seed for great disappointment.
Let me illustrate what I meant. The price bottom is determined the aggregate demands from the buyers as a group and the aggregate supplies from the sellers as a group. A bottom seeker has a price target of what it should be…and he might be very well correct in his maths. But the trouble is that the buyers as a group is not rational, the very fact that they criticize “knife catchers are always with us”, allows the buyers as a group to bid up the price to be higher than what a rational person think where the exact bottom price lies.
A true rational bottom price will only exist when all buyers in the market are rational. Therefore, the bottom price hunter who think themselves as very rational, will unavoidably be outbid every single time, as they have been. This is especially true in this cycle when the banks are more rational in their selling pricing strategy than a normal seller would be.

[carlsbadworker]

[quote=waiting for bottom]
If rationalization is “I bought a house I like with the payment I can afford” then, yes, I have rationalized.

Seriously, you guys think there is no risk to timing the bottom? What do you think rates will do between now and then? I’ll give you a hint, not down.

Again – if my recent purchase falls 20% but rates go to 7.5%, I will have the same payment. There is equal – at best for your argument – chance of these happening. From my POV, 7.5% is a certainty, 20% down is not.[/quote]

I don’t think “rational” and “timing the bottom” could come together in the same sentence, since it is the seed for great disappointment.
Let me illustrate what I meant. The price bottom is determined the aggregate demands from the buyers as a group and the aggregate supplies from the sellers as a group. A bottom seeker has a price target of what it should be…and he might be very well correct in his maths. But the trouble is that the buyers as a group is not rational, the very fact that they criticize “knife catchers are always with us”, allows the buyers as a group to bid up the price to be higher than what a rational person think where the exact bottom price lies.
A true rational bottom price will only exist when all buyers in the market are rational. Therefore, the bottom price hunter who think themselves as very rational, will unavoidably be outbid every single time, as they have been. This is especially true in this cycle when the banks are more rational in their selling pricing strategy than a normal seller would be.

[Author]

Posts