- This topic has 260 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 3 months ago by an.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 16, 2010 at 3:49 PM #514574February 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM #513664unevenParticipant
Hey pat. Simmer down. The op is asking a legitimate question and whether or not you agree doesn’t matter. Facts are useful, your sarcasm is useless.
Lemme guess. you bought in 85, sold in 90 before that crash, re bought and sold in 2007 at the peak right? And now you are waiting for bottom.
It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and do nothing.February 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM #513811unevenParticipantHey pat. Simmer down. The op is asking a legitimate question and whether or not you agree doesn’t matter. Facts are useful, your sarcasm is useless.
Lemme guess. you bought in 85, sold in 90 before that crash, re bought and sold in 2007 at the peak right? And now you are waiting for bottom.
It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and do nothing.February 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM #514235unevenParticipantHey pat. Simmer down. The op is asking a legitimate question and whether or not you agree doesn’t matter. Facts are useful, your sarcasm is useless.
Lemme guess. you bought in 85, sold in 90 before that crash, re bought and sold in 2007 at the peak right? And now you are waiting for bottom.
It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and do nothing.February 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM #514327unevenParticipantHey pat. Simmer down. The op is asking a legitimate question and whether or not you agree doesn’t matter. Facts are useful, your sarcasm is useless.
Lemme guess. you bought in 85, sold in 90 before that crash, re bought and sold in 2007 at the peak right? And now you are waiting for bottom.
It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and do nothing.February 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM #514579unevenParticipantHey pat. Simmer down. The op is asking a legitimate question and whether or not you agree doesn’t matter. Facts are useful, your sarcasm is useless.
Lemme guess. you bought in 85, sold in 90 before that crash, re bought and sold in 2007 at the peak right? And now you are waiting for bottom.
It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and do nothing.February 16, 2010 at 4:33 PM #513679anParticipant[quote=patb]
obviously the OP is smoking crack.California has a 50% state budget deficit.
California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.
So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?[/quote]
Inflation?February 16, 2010 at 4:33 PM #513826anParticipant[quote=patb]
obviously the OP is smoking crack.California has a 50% state budget deficit.
California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.
So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?[/quote]
Inflation?February 16, 2010 at 4:33 PM #514251anParticipant[quote=patb]
obviously the OP is smoking crack.California has a 50% state budget deficit.
California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.
So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?[/quote]
Inflation?February 16, 2010 at 4:33 PM #514342anParticipant[quote=patb]
obviously the OP is smoking crack.California has a 50% state budget deficit.
California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.
So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?[/quote]
Inflation?February 16, 2010 at 4:33 PM #514594anParticipant[quote=patb]
obviously the OP is smoking crack.California has a 50% state budget deficit.
California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.
So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?[/quote]
Inflation?February 16, 2010 at 4:41 PM #513684Nor-LA-SD-guyParticipant[quote=AN][quote=patb]
obviously the OP is smoking crack.California has a 50% state budget deficit.
California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.
So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?[/quote]
Inflation?[/quote]My answer at least at the low end (may not apply so much to coastal SD at current prices)
Is new household formation !!
More than enough to soak up any existing inventory over the next few years assuming the economy improves.
But if the low end gets pressure then it may extend somewhat to the higher end area’s as well.
February 16, 2010 at 4:41 PM #513831Nor-LA-SD-guyParticipant[quote=AN][quote=patb]
obviously the OP is smoking crack.California has a 50% state budget deficit.
California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.
So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?[/quote]
Inflation?[/quote]My answer at least at the low end (may not apply so much to coastal SD at current prices)
Is new household formation !!
More than enough to soak up any existing inventory over the next few years assuming the economy improves.
But if the low end gets pressure then it may extend somewhat to the higher end area’s as well.
February 16, 2010 at 4:41 PM #514256Nor-LA-SD-guyParticipant[quote=AN][quote=patb]
obviously the OP is smoking crack.California has a 50% state budget deficit.
California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.
So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?[/quote]
Inflation?[/quote]My answer at least at the low end (may not apply so much to coastal SD at current prices)
Is new household formation !!
More than enough to soak up any existing inventory over the next few years assuming the economy improves.
But if the low end gets pressure then it may extend somewhat to the higher end area’s as well.
February 16, 2010 at 4:41 PM #514347Nor-LA-SD-guyParticipant[quote=AN][quote=patb]
obviously the OP is smoking crack.California has a 50% state budget deficit.
California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.
So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?[/quote]
Inflation?[/quote]My answer at least at the low end (may not apply so much to coastal SD at current prices)
Is new household formation !!
More than enough to soak up any existing inventory over the next few years assuming the economy improves.
But if the low end gets pressure then it may extend somewhat to the higher end area’s as well.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.