should I buy in temecula

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Ren]When I say “coast”, I generally mean north county coastal or a location in San Diego proper that is near the coast (like Bay Park). I probably wouldn’t consider areas like North Park just because they can command a premium without what I would consider to be a premium location.[/quote](emphasis added)

Ren, I don’t mean to be argumentative, but do you think TV is more of a “premium” location than North Park (5-10 mins. from dtn. SD on surface sts)? How much (%) premium (if any) should be attributed to a “craftsman-built” home that is still in original condition? And, do you think “coastal” neighborhoods in SD County are the only locations which are worthy of commanding a “premium?” Should properties in Imperial Beach command a premium?

[quote=Ren]. . . if the property wouldn’t at least break even as a rental, they’re paying too much for housing and they should be renting a smaller place.[/quote] (emphasis added)

Ren, do you think SFR’s (purchased in the last 15 years) in CA “coastal” areas will “break-even” as rentals? If not, do you think that they’re not worth buying because of this? Do you equate “size” or “square footage” with value or rental-rate?

[quote=Ren]Our current tax rate is 1.5%. There are bonds involved, but I don’t know the details. That’s one of the downsides to this area, but like all the other downsides, it’s minor – that 1.5% is on a house that cost me $250k, so it’s not like I’m paying exorbitant amounts in taxes . . .[/quote]

Ren, do you pay 2% annually in “taxes” after adding your MR bonds to your 1.5% tax rate, or does your 1.5% rate also cover your MR bonds? In other words, is your annual tax bill on a property assessed at $250K $3,750 ($313 mo.) or closer to $5,000 ($417 mo.)? When you add your taxes, MR, fire ins. prem and $46 HOA fee to your monthly P&I, could you STILL break even if you were to find a tenant tomorrow and begin collecting rent on your current TV property? Moreover, if you retire to SD County and still have rental(s) in RIV Co., will you manage them yourself?

Why is child care lower-priced in TV than SD? Don’t you have to leave your children for longer periods at daycare because of lengthy commutes?

What’s your typical family gasoline bill? I live 10 mi. from dtn. SD (surface sts) and go there at least twice a week, along with numerous local errands and use about $80-$100 month or 2 – 2 1/2 tanks (if I don’t take any road trips). FWIW, I drive a luxury sedan.

[quote=Ren]Anything near the coast would be a better long-term investment than TV, if you buy at the right price. In my opinion, we’re not there yet.[/quote]

Ren, how much (%) lower would the “right price” be for SD County coastal zip codes? And how long do you think it will take the market to get there? Do you think the market on the “coast” will come down in price enough by the time you’re ready to buy a property to retire in?

Just offering some food for thought here.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=temeculaguy]Right now, if you do your homework, you can spend about 300k for a 3000 sq ft house built within the last 5 years. Your taxes will be between 4 and 6k because it’s based on purchase price, so for about 2k a month, you can get more than you need and with top notch schools, probably only surpassed by the carlsbad/encinitas or poway districts.[/quote]

TG, 4K taxes on $300K assessed value is 1.33% or $333 mo. and 6K taxes on $300K assessed value is 2% or $500 per month. Are you saying that MR added to your tax bill renders the property taxed at a 2% rate? Do ALL the tracts in TV have MR? Can you possibly show me an SFR listing in TV of around $300K that has 3000 sf?

[quote=temeculaguy]As far as long term investments, Temecula proper is nearly built out, most houses purchased today are almost rent nuetral from day one, I can find rentals that cash flow from day one, no place in S.D. has the same opportunity.[/quote]

Are rental rates the same in TV as they are in SD or is it cheaper to rent in TV than SD? If the rental rates were the same, I can’t see how/why anyone would want to rent there when they could live in SD instead, for the same rent. What kind of housing can you find there from “day one” that will cash-flow instantly, i.e. condos, apt. bldgs. SFR’s, etc? Are the condo and apt. owners in TV paying MR bonds, too?

[quote=temeculaguy]What I think you need to do is actually come check it out or get a tour from a local, your impression is from another time and it’s not the same place it once was.[/quote]

I’m still learning, TG. I’ll try to get to Pechanga for a concert in the coming months or tour a winery. I don’t know anyone who lives there.

[quote=temeculaguy]I still think there are nicer places in S.D. than where I live, but comparing apples to apples, dollar for dollar, the 270k i spent on my place would run me between 700k and 1 mil to get a comparable feel as far as the physical house and the community it is in . . .[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, could you point me to a “sold” listing in SD County which would compare directly to your $270K house in TV?

[quote-temeculaguy]I also think the market in most sd areas is still overpriced so it will appreciate less in the coming years.[/quote]

Are you saying here that you think SD areas will appreciate less than TV in the coming years?

[quote=temeculaguy]My place was purchased at peak in the 600’s and then they put money into it, losing it two years later as it value fell below half, in my opinion, the air had already be let out . . .[/quote]

TG, do you think all the “air” has already been “let out” of TV’s housing bubble or does it still have a ways to go?

[quote=temeculaguy] . . . most of sd has yet to lose similar numbers so it will either still do it, or fail to rise because there is a limit as to what people can afford using traditional mortgages. A 300k place in some of the less desirable places you mentioned willhave just as hard of a time getting to 600k as mine will in the future. Because little old falling apart places with rotten schools dont attract young families, migration out is as likely as migration in.[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, if many “young families” move out of the “less desireable places” I mentioned, who will move in to take their place? If you don’t think “young families” would want to live there, then does that make these areas less valuable than areas that you think “young families” WOULD want to live in? Will the prices that other types of households are willing to pay (not necessarily young *nuclear* families) cause the values to fall in these areas? In your mind, are “young-family” buyers the only and biggest driver of the real estate market? If all “young families” thought all SD city schools were bad, then why are most filled to capacity (some magnets with waiting lists)?? TG, are you aware that some of those “less desirable places” I mentioned (in SD) DO NOT have MR and their residents are entitled to free trash pickup?

TG, I’ve worked off and on as a RE agent (in urban SD and South County) over the years and to tell you the truth, I represented sellers with young children a few times but only represented ONE “young-family” buyer (1 child) who was buying in the same ‘hood they grew up in. Not that they’re not out there but I just didn’t represent any. I represented MANY singles, couples and “nontraditional family” formulations buying property together. (I feel perhaps these buyers are in greater numbers than “young families.”) Thus, “young families” in and of themselves do NOT drive SD County RE prices but play a bit part, along with several other types of buyers.

Thanks for any help to enable me to understand the wisdom of and where the value is in investing in TV, from an investment standpoint.

Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=temeculaguy]Right now, if you do your homework, you can spend about 300k for a 3000 sq ft house built within the last 5 years. Your taxes will be between 4 and 6k because it’s based on purchase price, so for about 2k a month, you can get more than you need and with top notch schools, probably only surpassed by the carlsbad/encinitas or poway districts.[/quote]

TG, 4K taxes on $300K assessed value is 1.33% or $333 mo. and 6K taxes on $300K assessed value is 2% or $500 per month. Are you saying that MR added to your tax bill renders the property taxed at a 2% rate? Do ALL the tracts in TV have MR? Can you possibly show me an SFR listing in TV of around $300K that has 3000 sf?

[quote=temeculaguy]As far as long term investments, Temecula proper is nearly built out, most houses purchased today are almost rent nuetral from day one, I can find rentals that cash flow from day one, no place in S.D. has the same opportunity.[/quote]

Are rental rates the same in TV as they are in SD or is it cheaper to rent in TV than SD? If the rental rates were the same, I can’t see how/why anyone would want to rent there when they could live in SD instead, for the same rent. What kind of housing can you find there from “day one” that will cash-flow instantly, i.e. condos, apt. bldgs. SFR’s, etc? Are the condo and apt. owners in TV paying MR bonds, too?

[quote=temeculaguy]What I think you need to do is actually come check it out or get a tour from a local, your impression is from another time and it’s not the same place it once was.[/quote]

I’m still learning, TG. I’ll try to get to Pechanga for a concert in the coming months or tour a winery. I don’t know anyone who lives there.

[quote=temeculaguy]I still think there are nicer places in S.D. than where I live, but comparing apples to apples, dollar for dollar, the 270k i spent on my place would run me between 700k and 1 mil to get a comparable feel as far as the physical house and the community it is in . . .[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, could you point me to a “sold” listing in SD County which would compare directly to your $270K house in TV?

[quote-temeculaguy]I also think the market in most sd areas is still overpriced so it will appreciate less in the coming years.[/quote]

Are you saying here that you think SD areas will appreciate less than TV in the coming years?

[quote=temeculaguy]My place was purchased at peak in the 600’s and then they put money into it, losing it two years later as it value fell below half, in my opinion, the air had already be let out . . .[/quote]

TG, do you think all the “air” has already been “let out” of TV’s housing bubble or does it still have a ways to go?

[quote=temeculaguy] . . . most of sd has yet to lose similar numbers so it will either still do it, or fail to rise because there is a limit as to what people can afford using traditional mortgages. A 300k place in some of the less desirable places you mentioned willhave just as hard of a time getting to 600k as mine will in the future. Because little old falling apart places with rotten schools dont attract young families, migration out is as likely as migration in.[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, if many “young families” move out of the “less desireable places” I mentioned, who will move in to take their place? If you don’t think “young families” would want to live there, then does that make these areas less valuable than areas that you think “young families” WOULD want to live in? Will the prices that other types of households are willing to pay (not necessarily young *nuclear* families) cause the values to fall in these areas? In your mind, are “young-family” buyers the only and biggest driver of the real estate market? If all “young families” thought all SD city schools were bad, then why are most filled to capacity (some magnets with waiting lists)?? TG, are you aware that some of those “less desirable places” I mentioned (in SD) DO NOT have MR and their residents are entitled to free trash pickup?

TG, I’ve worked off and on as a RE agent (in urban SD and South County) over the years and to tell you the truth, I represented sellers with young children a few times but only represented ONE “young-family” buyer (1 child) who was buying in the same ‘hood they grew up in. Not that they’re not out there but I just didn’t represent any. I represented MANY singles, couples and “nontraditional family” formulations buying property together. (I feel perhaps these buyers are in greater numbers than “young families.”) Thus, “young families” in and of themselves do NOT drive SD County RE prices but play a bit part, along with several other types of buyers.

Thanks for any help to enable me to understand the wisdom of and where the value is in investing in TV, from an investment standpoint.

Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=temeculaguy]Right now, if you do your homework, you can spend about 300k for a 3000 sq ft house built within the last 5 years. Your taxes will be between 4 and 6k because it’s based on purchase price, so for about 2k a month, you can get more than you need and with top notch schools, probably only surpassed by the carlsbad/encinitas or poway districts.[/quote]

TG, 4K taxes on $300K assessed value is 1.33% or $333 mo. and 6K taxes on $300K assessed value is 2% or $500 per month. Are you saying that MR added to your tax bill renders the property taxed at a 2% rate? Do ALL the tracts in TV have MR? Can you possibly show me an SFR listing in TV of around $300K that has 3000 sf?

[quote=temeculaguy]As far as long term investments, Temecula proper is nearly built out, most houses purchased today are almost rent nuetral from day one, I can find rentals that cash flow from day one, no place in S.D. has the same opportunity.[/quote]

Are rental rates the same in TV as they are in SD or is it cheaper to rent in TV than SD? If the rental rates were the same, I can’t see how/why anyone would want to rent there when they could live in SD instead, for the same rent. What kind of housing can you find there from “day one” that will cash-flow instantly, i.e. condos, apt. bldgs. SFR’s, etc? Are the condo and apt. owners in TV paying MR bonds, too?

[quote=temeculaguy]What I think you need to do is actually come check it out or get a tour from a local, your impression is from another time and it’s not the same place it once was.[/quote]

I’m still learning, TG. I’ll try to get to Pechanga for a concert in the coming months or tour a winery. I don’t know anyone who lives there.

[quote=temeculaguy]I still think there are nicer places in S.D. than where I live, but comparing apples to apples, dollar for dollar, the 270k i spent on my place would run me between 700k and 1 mil to get a comparable feel as far as the physical house and the community it is in . . .[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, could you point me to a “sold” listing in SD County which would compare directly to your $270K house in TV?

[quote-temeculaguy]I also think the market in most sd areas is still overpriced so it will appreciate less in the coming years.[/quote]

Are you saying here that you think SD areas will appreciate less than TV in the coming years?

[quote=temeculaguy]My place was purchased at peak in the 600’s and then they put money into it, losing it two years later as it value fell below half, in my opinion, the air had already be let out . . .[/quote]

TG, do you think all the “air” has already been “let out” of TV’s housing bubble or does it still have a ways to go?

[quote=temeculaguy] . . . most of sd has yet to lose similar numbers so it will either still do it, or fail to rise because there is a limit as to what people can afford using traditional mortgages. A 300k place in some of the less desirable places you mentioned willhave just as hard of a time getting to 600k as mine will in the future. Because little old falling apart places with rotten schools dont attract young families, migration out is as likely as migration in.[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, if many “young families” move out of the “less desireable places” I mentioned, who will move in to take their place? If you don’t think “young families” would want to live there, then does that make these areas less valuable than areas that you think “young families” WOULD want to live in? Will the prices that other types of households are willing to pay (not necessarily young *nuclear* families) cause the values to fall in these areas? In your mind, are “young-family” buyers the only and biggest driver of the real estate market? If all “young families” thought all SD city schools were bad, then why are most filled to capacity (some magnets with waiting lists)?? TG, are you aware that some of those “less desirable places” I mentioned (in SD) DO NOT have MR and their residents are entitled to free trash pickup?

TG, I’ve worked off and on as a RE agent (in urban SD and South County) over the years and to tell you the truth, I represented sellers with young children a few times but only represented ONE “young-family” buyer (1 child) who was buying in the same ‘hood they grew up in. Not that they’re not out there but I just didn’t represent any. I represented MANY singles, couples and “nontraditional family” formulations buying property together. (I feel perhaps these buyers are in greater numbers than “young families.”) Thus, “young families” in and of themselves do NOT drive SD County RE prices but play a bit part, along with several other types of buyers.

Thanks for any help to enable me to understand the wisdom of and where the value is in investing in TV, from an investment standpoint.

Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=temeculaguy]Right now, if you do your homework, you can spend about 300k for a 3000 sq ft house built within the last 5 years. Your taxes will be between 4 and 6k because it’s based on purchase price, so for about 2k a month, you can get more than you need and with top notch schools, probably only surpassed by the carlsbad/encinitas or poway districts.[/quote]

TG, 4K taxes on $300K assessed value is 1.33% or $333 mo. and 6K taxes on $300K assessed value is 2% or $500 per month. Are you saying that MR added to your tax bill renders the property taxed at a 2% rate? Do ALL the tracts in TV have MR? Can you possibly show me an SFR listing in TV of around $300K that has 3000 sf?

[quote=temeculaguy]As far as long term investments, Temecula proper is nearly built out, most houses purchased today are almost rent nuetral from day one, I can find rentals that cash flow from day one, no place in S.D. has the same opportunity.[/quote]

Are rental rates the same in TV as they are in SD or is it cheaper to rent in TV than SD? If the rental rates were the same, I can’t see how/why anyone would want to rent there when they could live in SD instead, for the same rent. What kind of housing can you find there from “day one” that will cash-flow instantly, i.e. condos, apt. bldgs. SFR’s, etc? Are the condo and apt. owners in TV paying MR bonds, too?

[quote=temeculaguy]What I think you need to do is actually come check it out or get a tour from a local, your impression is from another time and it’s not the same place it once was.[/quote]

I’m still learning, TG. I’ll try to get to Pechanga for a concert in the coming months or tour a winery. I don’t know anyone who lives there.

[quote=temeculaguy]I still think there are nicer places in S.D. than where I live, but comparing apples to apples, dollar for dollar, the 270k i spent on my place would run me between 700k and 1 mil to get a comparable feel as far as the physical house and the community it is in . . .[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, could you point me to a “sold” listing in SD County which would compare directly to your $270K house in TV?

[quote-temeculaguy]I also think the market in most sd areas is still overpriced so it will appreciate less in the coming years.[/quote]

Are you saying here that you think SD areas will appreciate less than TV in the coming years?

[quote=temeculaguy]My place was purchased at peak in the 600’s and then they put money into it, losing it two years later as it value fell below half, in my opinion, the air had already be let out . . .[/quote]

TG, do you think all the “air” has already been “let out” of TV’s housing bubble or does it still have a ways to go?

[quote=temeculaguy] . . . most of sd has yet to lose similar numbers so it will either still do it, or fail to rise because there is a limit as to what people can afford using traditional mortgages. A 300k place in some of the less desirable places you mentioned willhave just as hard of a time getting to 600k as mine will in the future. Because little old falling apart places with rotten schools dont attract young families, migration out is as likely as migration in.[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, if many “young families” move out of the “less desireable places” I mentioned, who will move in to take their place? If you don’t think “young families” would want to live there, then does that make these areas less valuable than areas that you think “young families” WOULD want to live in? Will the prices that other types of households are willing to pay (not necessarily young *nuclear* families) cause the values to fall in these areas? In your mind, are “young-family” buyers the only and biggest driver of the real estate market? If all “young families” thought all SD city schools were bad, then why are most filled to capacity (some magnets with waiting lists)?? TG, are you aware that some of those “less desirable places” I mentioned (in SD) DO NOT have MR and their residents are entitled to free trash pickup?

TG, I’ve worked off and on as a RE agent (in urban SD and South County) over the years and to tell you the truth, I represented sellers with young children a few times but only represented ONE “young-family” buyer (1 child) who was buying in the same ‘hood they grew up in. Not that they’re not out there but I just didn’t represent any. I represented MANY singles, couples and “nontraditional family” formulations buying property together. (I feel perhaps these buyers are in greater numbers than “young families.”) Thus, “young families” in and of themselves do NOT drive SD County RE prices but play a bit part, along with several other types of buyers.

Thanks for any help to enable me to understand the wisdom of and where the value is in investing in TV, from an investment standpoint.

Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=temeculaguy]Right now, if you do your homework, you can spend about 300k for a 3000 sq ft house built within the last 5 years. Your taxes will be between 4 and 6k because it’s based on purchase price, so for about 2k a month, you can get more than you need and with top notch schools, probably only surpassed by the carlsbad/encinitas or poway districts.[/quote]

TG, 4K taxes on $300K assessed value is 1.33% or $333 mo. and 6K taxes on $300K assessed value is 2% or $500 per month. Are you saying that MR added to your tax bill renders the property taxed at a 2% rate? Do ALL the tracts in TV have MR? Can you possibly show me an SFR listing in TV of around $300K that has 3000 sf?

[quote=temeculaguy]As far as long term investments, Temecula proper is nearly built out, most houses purchased today are almost rent nuetral from day one, I can find rentals that cash flow from day one, no place in S.D. has the same opportunity.[/quote]

Are rental rates the same in TV as they are in SD or is it cheaper to rent in TV than SD? If the rental rates were the same, I can’t see how/why anyone would want to rent there when they could live in SD instead, for the same rent. What kind of housing can you find there from “day one” that will cash-flow instantly, i.e. condos, apt. bldgs. SFR’s, etc? Are the condo and apt. owners in TV paying MR bonds, too?

[quote=temeculaguy]What I think you need to do is actually come check it out or get a tour from a local, your impression is from another time and it’s not the same place it once was.[/quote]

I’m still learning, TG. I’ll try to get to Pechanga for a concert in the coming months or tour a winery. I don’t know anyone who lives there.

[quote=temeculaguy]I still think there are nicer places in S.D. than where I live, but comparing apples to apples, dollar for dollar, the 270k i spent on my place would run me between 700k and 1 mil to get a comparable feel as far as the physical house and the community it is in . . .[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, could you point me to a “sold” listing in SD County which would compare directly to your $270K house in TV?

[quote-temeculaguy]I also think the market in most sd areas is still overpriced so it will appreciate less in the coming years.[/quote]

Are you saying here that you think SD areas will appreciate less than TV in the coming years?

[quote=temeculaguy]My place was purchased at peak in the 600’s and then they put money into it, losing it two years later as it value fell below half, in my opinion, the air had already be let out . . .[/quote]

TG, do you think all the “air” has already been “let out” of TV’s housing bubble or does it still have a ways to go?

[quote=temeculaguy] . . . most of sd has yet to lose similar numbers so it will either still do it, or fail to rise because there is a limit as to what people can afford using traditional mortgages. A 300k place in some of the less desirable places you mentioned willhave just as hard of a time getting to 600k as mine will in the future. Because little old falling apart places with rotten schools dont attract young families, migration out is as likely as migration in.[/quote](emphasis added)

TG, if many “young families” move out of the “less desireable places” I mentioned, who will move in to take their place? If you don’t think “young families” would want to live there, then does that make these areas less valuable than areas that you think “young families” WOULD want to live in? Will the prices that other types of households are willing to pay (not necessarily young *nuclear* families) cause the values to fall in these areas? In your mind, are “young-family” buyers the only and biggest driver of the real estate market? If all “young families” thought all SD city schools were bad, then why are most filled to capacity (some magnets with waiting lists)?? TG, are you aware that some of those “less desirable places” I mentioned (in SD) DO NOT have MR and their residents are entitled to free trash pickup?

TG, I’ve worked off and on as a RE agent (in urban SD and South County) over the years and to tell you the truth, I represented sellers with young children a few times but only represented ONE “young-family” buyer (1 child) who was buying in the same ‘hood they grew up in. Not that they’re not out there but I just didn’t represent any. I represented MANY singles, couples and “nontraditional family” formulations buying property together. (I feel perhaps these buyers are in greater numbers than “young families.”) Thus, “young families” in and of themselves do NOT drive SD County RE prices but play a bit part, along with several other types of buyers.

Thanks for any help to enable me to understand the wisdom of and where the value is in investing in TV, from an investment standpoint.

Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.

[burghMan]

[quote=bearishgurl]Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.[/quote]

bg,

I’m not sure I follow your line of reasoning in the rest of your post, but I it’s hard not to agree that, yes, lifestyle reasons are indeed subjective. Different people have different priorities.

Paramount summarized the hater’s perspective best in his car analogy. But not everyone has to rationalize that their Audi is really a BMW, because not everyone is caught up in brand/image hype. The way I see it, if an Audi that has more performance, features, etc. than an a BMW at the same price, the Audi is the better car, period.

But some folks get way too wrapped up in image. If one is the type that feels obligated to buy the Audi as a “compromise,” only to wish it were a BMW every time time their friends saw them, then they shouldn’t move to Temecula.

[burghMan]

[quote=bearishgurl]Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.[/quote]

bg,

I’m not sure I follow your line of reasoning in the rest of your post, but I it’s hard not to agree that, yes, lifestyle reasons are indeed subjective. Different people have different priorities.

Paramount summarized the hater’s perspective best in his car analogy. But not everyone has to rationalize that their Audi is really a BMW, because not everyone is caught up in brand/image hype. The way I see it, if an Audi that has more performance, features, etc. than an a BMW at the same price, the Audi is the better car, period.

But some folks get way too wrapped up in image. If one is the type that feels obligated to buy the Audi as a “compromise,” only to wish it were a BMW every time time their friends saw them, then they shouldn’t move to Temecula.

[burghMan]

[quote=bearishgurl]Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.[/quote]

bg,

I’m not sure I follow your line of reasoning in the rest of your post, but I it’s hard not to agree that, yes, lifestyle reasons are indeed subjective. Different people have different priorities.

Paramount summarized the hater’s perspective best in his car analogy. But not everyone has to rationalize that their Audi is really a BMW, because not everyone is caught up in brand/image hype. The way I see it, if an Audi that has more performance, features, etc. than an a BMW at the same price, the Audi is the better car, period.

But some folks get way too wrapped up in image. If one is the type that feels obligated to buy the Audi as a “compromise,” only to wish it were a BMW every time time their friends saw them, then they shouldn’t move to Temecula.

[burghMan]

[quote=bearishgurl]Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.[/quote]

bg,

I’m not sure I follow your line of reasoning in the rest of your post, but I it’s hard not to agree that, yes, lifestyle reasons are indeed subjective. Different people have different priorities.

Paramount summarized the hater’s perspective best in his car analogy. But not everyone has to rationalize that their Audi is really a BMW, because not everyone is caught up in brand/image hype. The way I see it, if an Audi that has more performance, features, etc. than an a BMW at the same price, the Audi is the better car, period.

But some folks get way too wrapped up in image. If one is the type that feels obligated to buy the Audi as a “compromise,” only to wish it were a BMW every time time their friends saw them, then they shouldn’t move to Temecula.

[burghMan]

[quote=bearishgurl]Lifestyle reasons for buying there (whether or not it’s a wise investment) are purely subjective.[/quote]

bg,

I’m not sure I follow your line of reasoning in the rest of your post, but I it’s hard not to agree that, yes, lifestyle reasons are indeed subjective. Different people have different priorities.

Paramount summarized the hater’s perspective best in his car analogy. But not everyone has to rationalize that their Audi is really a BMW, because not everyone is caught up in brand/image hype. The way I see it, if an Audi that has more performance, features, etc. than an a BMW at the same price, the Audi is the better car, period.

But some folks get way too wrapped up in image. If one is the type that feels obligated to buy the Audi as a “compromise,” only to wish it were a BMW every time time their friends saw them, then they shouldn’t move to Temecula.

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

Yea That’s the problem, neither Audi or BMW make a decent pickup

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

Yea That’s the problem, neither Audi or BMW make a decent pickup

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

Yea That’s the problem, neither Audi or BMW make a decent pickup

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

Yea That’s the problem, neither Audi or BMW make a decent pickup

[Author]

Posts