Solana Beach Oceanview Condo’s Still Expensive

[Happs]

Check this out! A 1700sq ft oceanview condo in Seascape Sur (one of the many oceanfront gated communities along Sierra Ave) in Solana Beach for $1,200,000. What’s the owner thinking? He/she is asking pre-bubble prices. Do people along the bluff think they are immune to the downturn and that just because they are on the bluff that people will pay top $, even for an un-remodeled unit like this? What do you all think of this? Would low-balling the owner and offering $900,000 “send a message?”

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-081000666-591_Sierra_Ave_46_Solana_Beach_CA_92075

[Doofrat]

A buddy of mine has an ocean front condo at the Del Mar Beach Club. One of the ironic things about these places is that a lot of them are owned by out-of-towners who live in Arizona and such. The parking lot is completely empty in the winter, but packed in the summer. From what I’ve seen, the ocean front condos seem to be mostly owned by 1. Retirees 2. Out of town owners. 3. Friends of mine that have rich parents.
As you go away from the ocean front towards the street, they become more local.
I don’t know what this means for prices in the future though, but I don’t see evidence of a lot of the EZ credit fueled flipping going on on the bluff, those condos have always been very expensive, but the prices don’t seem to have gone up at the same rate as say a house in Mira Mesa.
That’s just my take on it.

[Doofrat]

A buddy of mine has an ocean front condo at the Del Mar Beach Club. One of the ironic things about these places is that a lot of them are owned by out-of-towners who live in Arizona and such. The parking lot is completely empty in the winter, but packed in the summer. From what I’ve seen, the ocean front condos seem to be mostly owned by 1. Retirees 2. Out of town owners. 3. Friends of mine that have rich parents.
As you go away from the ocean front towards the street, they become more local.
I don’t know what this means for prices in the future though, but I don’t see evidence of a lot of the EZ credit fueled flipping going on on the bluff, those condos have always been very expensive, but the prices don’t seem to have gone up at the same rate as say a house in Mira Mesa.
That’s just my take on it.

[Doofrat]

A buddy of mine has an ocean front condo at the Del Mar Beach Club. One of the ironic things about these places is that a lot of them are owned by out-of-towners who live in Arizona and such. The parking lot is completely empty in the winter, but packed in the summer. From what I’ve seen, the ocean front condos seem to be mostly owned by 1. Retirees 2. Out of town owners. 3. Friends of mine that have rich parents.
As you go away from the ocean front towards the street, they become more local.
I don’t know what this means for prices in the future though, but I don’t see evidence of a lot of the EZ credit fueled flipping going on on the bluff, those condos have always been very expensive, but the prices don’t seem to have gone up at the same rate as say a house in Mira Mesa.
That’s just my take on it.

[Doofrat]

A buddy of mine has an ocean front condo at the Del Mar Beach Club. One of the ironic things about these places is that a lot of them are owned by out-of-towners who live in Arizona and such. The parking lot is completely empty in the winter, but packed in the summer. From what I’ve seen, the ocean front condos seem to be mostly owned by 1. Retirees 2. Out of town owners. 3. Friends of mine that have rich parents.
As you go away from the ocean front towards the street, they become more local.
I don’t know what this means for prices in the future though, but I don’t see evidence of a lot of the EZ credit fueled flipping going on on the bluff, those condos have always been very expensive, but the prices don’t seem to have gone up at the same rate as say a house in Mira Mesa.
That’s just my take on it.

[Doofrat]

A buddy of mine has an ocean front condo at the Del Mar Beach Club. One of the ironic things about these places is that a lot of them are owned by out-of-towners who live in Arizona and such. The parking lot is completely empty in the winter, but packed in the summer. From what I’ve seen, the ocean front condos seem to be mostly owned by 1. Retirees 2. Out of town owners. 3. Friends of mine that have rich parents.
As you go away from the ocean front towards the street, they become more local.
I don’t know what this means for prices in the future though, but I don’t see evidence of a lot of the EZ credit fueled flipping going on on the bluff, those condos have always been very expensive, but the prices don’t seem to have gone up at the same rate as say a house in Mira Mesa.
That’s just my take on it.

[HappyHouseHunting]

This is a question asked strictly out of curiosity because I do not know the area at all, but when you look at the sales history on this house, and other properties around it, how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

I notice if you go back to condos in the same complex that the 1999 prices were in the $400,000 range or so. This would make them pricey as you say but from everything I am reading, anything in the $900,000 range would be strictly bubble pricing. If prices go to 2000 value (which seems to make sense) shouldn’t these go the high $400,000s?

Like I said, this is strictly a lack of understanding of the San Diego market. Are there enough people out there who can fundamentally afford $900,000 for condos and is there a bank out there who would loan that in today’s market?

[blahblahblah]

…how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

Two reasons:

1) Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.

2) Inflation. How did a gallon of milk become $5? How did your dollar go from being worth 1.25 euros 8 years ago to being only worth .7 today?

[HappyHouseHunting]

Inflation does account for some increase sometimes, but not always. I certainly do not expect homes to go back to say, 1960s home prices. My parents bought their small home in 1963 for $19,000 and in Southern California, that is not going to happen again. (There are parts of the country where that is true though.)

Homes can most definitely depreciate though. Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

I am just wondering, when the basic fundamentals for housing actually start applying in Southern California, what will homes be worth? I know, I know, whatever someone is willing to pay, but it used to be the banks were pretty picky about who they loaned to, the underlying value of the property, blah,blah. You know,the old fashioned crap that went out of style when the smart people started running things.

[Happs]

Do you all think this area appreciated heavily in the last few years because of its location by the beach and the fact that there are very few condos right on the beach either in Del Mar, Solana Beach or Encinitas? Maybe the seller thinks that because there are no more apartments being built at the beach, that he/she can command a high price. I can understand how Mira Mesa or other inland communities had run ups in prices due to the common man frenzy and subprime loans etc, but it’s interesting in an upscale area like this what transpired.

[blahblahblah]

Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

Inflation calculators use the government published GDP deflator figures. Remember, these are the same figures that they use to justify keeping interest rates depressed below what they really should be. If you believe the reported GDP deflator, you might as well believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. Real inflation is much, much higher and since the fed quit publishing M3 is probably running at 10%/year or more. Things are getting extremely expensive now and it’s going to get worse.

Home prices will continue to decline in nominal dollars, however IMO they will not get anywhere close to 2000 nominal values. They will drop below 2000 real values back to 1995 real values or less. However, that condo still might cost you $550K in nominal dollars.

For this to happen, salaries of course will have to rise. I think this will start happening in many industries during 2008 and 2009, especially medical, homeland security, military, all of the stuff that’s subsidized by the government, pharma, or insurance industries. I expect the government Keynesian policies to just get more extreme as that’s the only lever they know how to pull. Just spend, spend, spend and print dollars faster and faster. Everyone will just be happy that they have a $150K/yr job in the Homeland Security department looking through people’s email — or a $200K/yr job with a private security contractor, patrolling main street to keep the poor people from rioting — or a $200K/yr job with a big insurance company trying to find ways to deny Aunt Millie’s claims for chemotherapy. We are completing the transition into a full socialist corporatocracy that has been going on for a long time.

Do I want this to happen? Of course not. However, it’s what I expect.

[HappyHouseHunting]

“Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.”

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Bubble pricing by definition implies that this pricing was created by truly believing in the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, you know, “real estate always goes up”, “I can always refinance”, “I can sell and take equity out,” etc., etc. and the banks, those bastions of rationality, actually loaned the money to do this.

‘Tis a puzzlement to me.

[blahblahblah]

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Man I wish I knew where this was gonna end. It can’t end well. The only things I know for sure are that a lot of people with way more money and power than yours truly have a vested interest in keeping this charade going as long as possible and that this country is unique in its ability to print currency backed by nothing that everyone else in the world is obliged to accept. Nothing about this scenario is “real” in any sense of the word.

It has been touched on in other threads on this site that the concept of homeowning in this country may become sort of a lifetime rental arrangement from the bank. Meaning, your average “homeowner” will never pay off their mortgage. Note that in many other countries (in south america for example) there are not really mortgage loans as in the US. People pay cash for homes or they don’t get to buy them at all. It used to be that way here in the US, too. For a few decades, mortgages were very effective in allowing a large number of citizens to own property but I’m worried that those days may be over. Remember that the powers that be don’t want you and I to own property. They want us to be indebted for our entire lives. If we’re not paying interest to them, they’re not getting paid. When they’re not getting paid, they get upset. And when they get upset, watch out.

Depressing, isn’t it! Of course I could be wrong. I HOPE I’m wrong!

[patientrenter]

Concho, you seem to think that the system is rigged so that investors (who lend money to borrowers so they can buy homes) do well out of housing. But investors:

a. Put up almost all the money to buy the house
b. Take on almost all the losses if the price declines
c. Get a return just a tiny amount above the rate on risk-free Treasuries. (Tiny compared to the possible losses.)
d. Take on all the losses if the loan repayments are devalued by inflation

Meanwhile borrowers:

1. Put down very little of the money
2. Can walk away if prices go down
3. Keep all the increases if home prices go up
4. Pay a lower rate than on any other loan they could get from any other fre-market source
5. Make out like bandits if inflation is high, because the loan repayments they have to make shrink in real terms

Help me understand how the system is rigged to help investors, and not the borrowers. As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

Patient renter in OC

[TheBreeze]

As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

I totally agree with you PC. Most of the investors are so far removed from what they are actually investing in that they have no idea what is about to hit them. The mortgage on this Solana Beach condo is probably packaged into some AAA-rated CDO that was purchased by a bond fund. The bond fund manager is using money from some private investor who is probably close to retirement and has been told that bonds are ‘safer’ than stocks. The private investor has no idea that he has really bought a mortgage backed up by an asset that is probably as risky as Internet stocks were during the bubble.

Over the next 10 years, I think we’re going to see a lot of would-be retirees who are shocked at how much their retirement funds have shrunk. Some of them won’t ever be able to retire because of this. Meanwhile, the condo speculator on the front-end will get off with just a minor hit to their credit score.

At least the Internet-stock buyers knew they were taking some risks. The bond investors have no idea what they are in for.

[TheBreeze]

As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

I totally agree with you PC. Most of the investors are so far removed from what they are actually investing in that they have no idea what is about to hit them. The mortgage on this Solana Beach condo is probably packaged into some AAA-rated CDO that was purchased by a bond fund. The bond fund manager is using money from some private investor who is probably close to retirement and has been told that bonds are ‘safer’ than stocks. The private investor has no idea that he has really bought a mortgage backed up by an asset that is probably as risky as Internet stocks were during the bubble.

Over the next 10 years, I think we’re going to see a lot of would-be retirees who are shocked at how much their retirement funds have shrunk. Some of them won’t ever be able to retire because of this. Meanwhile, the condo speculator on the front-end will get off with just a minor hit to their credit score.

At least the Internet-stock buyers knew they were taking some risks. The bond investors have no idea what they are in for.

[TheBreeze]

As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

I totally agree with you PC. Most of the investors are so far removed from what they are actually investing in that they have no idea what is about to hit them. The mortgage on this Solana Beach condo is probably packaged into some AAA-rated CDO that was purchased by a bond fund. The bond fund manager is using money from some private investor who is probably close to retirement and has been told that bonds are ‘safer’ than stocks. The private investor has no idea that he has really bought a mortgage backed up by an asset that is probably as risky as Internet stocks were during the bubble.

Over the next 10 years, I think we’re going to see a lot of would-be retirees who are shocked at how much their retirement funds have shrunk. Some of them won’t ever be able to retire because of this. Meanwhile, the condo speculator on the front-end will get off with just a minor hit to their credit score.

At least the Internet-stock buyers knew they were taking some risks. The bond investors have no idea what they are in for.

[TheBreeze]

As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

I totally agree with you PC. Most of the investors are so far removed from what they are actually investing in that they have no idea what is about to hit them. The mortgage on this Solana Beach condo is probably packaged into some AAA-rated CDO that was purchased by a bond fund. The bond fund manager is using money from some private investor who is probably close to retirement and has been told that bonds are ‘safer’ than stocks. The private investor has no idea that he has really bought a mortgage backed up by an asset that is probably as risky as Internet stocks were during the bubble.

Over the next 10 years, I think we’re going to see a lot of would-be retirees who are shocked at how much their retirement funds have shrunk. Some of them won’t ever be able to retire because of this. Meanwhile, the condo speculator on the front-end will get off with just a minor hit to their credit score.

At least the Internet-stock buyers knew they were taking some risks. The bond investors have no idea what they are in for.

[TheBreeze]

As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

I totally agree with you PC. Most of the investors are so far removed from what they are actually investing in that they have no idea what is about to hit them. The mortgage on this Solana Beach condo is probably packaged into some AAA-rated CDO that was purchased by a bond fund. The bond fund manager is using money from some private investor who is probably close to retirement and has been told that bonds are ‘safer’ than stocks. The private investor has no idea that he has really bought a mortgage backed up by an asset that is probably as risky as Internet stocks were during the bubble.

Over the next 10 years, I think we’re going to see a lot of would-be retirees who are shocked at how much their retirement funds have shrunk. Some of them won’t ever be able to retire because of this. Meanwhile, the condo speculator on the front-end will get off with just a minor hit to their credit score.

At least the Internet-stock buyers knew they were taking some risks. The bond investors have no idea what they are in for.

[patientrenter]

Concho, you seem to think that the system is rigged so that investors (who lend money to borrowers so they can buy homes) do well out of housing. But investors:

a. Put up almost all the money to buy the house
b. Take on almost all the losses if the price declines
c. Get a return just a tiny amount above the rate on risk-free Treasuries. (Tiny compared to the possible losses.)
d. Take on all the losses if the loan repayments are devalued by inflation

Meanwhile borrowers:

1. Put down very little of the money
2. Can walk away if prices go down
3. Keep all the increases if home prices go up
4. Pay a lower rate than on any other loan they could get from any other fre-market source
5. Make out like bandits if inflation is high, because the loan repayments they have to make shrink in real terms

Help me understand how the system is rigged to help investors, and not the borrowers. As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

Concho, you seem to think that the system is rigged so that investors (who lend money to borrowers so they can buy homes) do well out of housing. But investors:

a. Put up almost all the money to buy the house
b. Take on almost all the losses if the price declines
c. Get a return just a tiny amount above the rate on risk-free Treasuries. (Tiny compared to the possible losses.)
d. Take on all the losses if the loan repayments are devalued by inflation

Meanwhile borrowers:

1. Put down very little of the money
2. Can walk away if prices go down
3. Keep all the increases if home prices go up
4. Pay a lower rate than on any other loan they could get from any other fre-market source
5. Make out like bandits if inflation is high, because the loan repayments they have to make shrink in real terms

Help me understand how the system is rigged to help investors, and not the borrowers. As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

Concho, you seem to think that the system is rigged so that investors (who lend money to borrowers so they can buy homes) do well out of housing. But investors:

a. Put up almost all the money to buy the house
b. Take on almost all the losses if the price declines
c. Get a return just a tiny amount above the rate on risk-free Treasuries. (Tiny compared to the possible losses.)
d. Take on all the losses if the loan repayments are devalued by inflation

Meanwhile borrowers:

1. Put down very little of the money
2. Can walk away if prices go down
3. Keep all the increases if home prices go up
4. Pay a lower rate than on any other loan they could get from any other fre-market source
5. Make out like bandits if inflation is high, because the loan repayments they have to make shrink in real terms

Help me understand how the system is rigged to help investors, and not the borrowers. As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

Concho, you seem to think that the system is rigged so that investors (who lend money to borrowers so they can buy homes) do well out of housing. But investors:

a. Put up almost all the money to buy the house
b. Take on almost all the losses if the price declines
c. Get a return just a tiny amount above the rate on risk-free Treasuries. (Tiny compared to the possible losses.)
d. Take on all the losses if the loan repayments are devalued by inflation

Meanwhile borrowers:

1. Put down very little of the money
2. Can walk away if prices go down
3. Keep all the increases if home prices go up
4. Pay a lower rate than on any other loan they could get from any other fre-market source
5. Make out like bandits if inflation is high, because the loan repayments they have to make shrink in real terms

Help me understand how the system is rigged to help investors, and not the borrowers. As far as I can tell, our system of home financing is the biggest govt wealth redistribution system in the world, taking wealth from savers and giving it to people who borrow to buy homes, in truly mind-boggling amounts.

Patient renter in OC

[blahblahblah]

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Man I wish I knew where this was gonna end. It can’t end well. The only things I know for sure are that a lot of people with way more money and power than yours truly have a vested interest in keeping this charade going as long as possible and that this country is unique in its ability to print currency backed by nothing that everyone else in the world is obliged to accept. Nothing about this scenario is “real” in any sense of the word.

It has been touched on in other threads on this site that the concept of homeowning in this country may become sort of a lifetime rental arrangement from the bank. Meaning, your average “homeowner” will never pay off their mortgage. Note that in many other countries (in south america for example) there are not really mortgage loans as in the US. People pay cash for homes or they don’t get to buy them at all. It used to be that way here in the US, too. For a few decades, mortgages were very effective in allowing a large number of citizens to own property but I’m worried that those days may be over. Remember that the powers that be don’t want you and I to own property. They want us to be indebted for our entire lives. If we’re not paying interest to them, they’re not getting paid. When they’re not getting paid, they get upset. And when they get upset, watch out.

Depressing, isn’t it! Of course I could be wrong. I HOPE I’m wrong!

[blahblahblah]

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Man I wish I knew where this was gonna end. It can’t end well. The only things I know for sure are that a lot of people with way more money and power than yours truly have a vested interest in keeping this charade going as long as possible and that this country is unique in its ability to print currency backed by nothing that everyone else in the world is obliged to accept. Nothing about this scenario is “real” in any sense of the word.

It has been touched on in other threads on this site that the concept of homeowning in this country may become sort of a lifetime rental arrangement from the bank. Meaning, your average “homeowner” will never pay off their mortgage. Note that in many other countries (in south america for example) there are not really mortgage loans as in the US. People pay cash for homes or they don’t get to buy them at all. It used to be that way here in the US, too. For a few decades, mortgages were very effective in allowing a large number of citizens to own property but I’m worried that those days may be over. Remember that the powers that be don’t want you and I to own property. They want us to be indebted for our entire lives. If we’re not paying interest to them, they’re not getting paid. When they’re not getting paid, they get upset. And when they get upset, watch out.

Depressing, isn’t it! Of course I could be wrong. I HOPE I’m wrong!

[blahblahblah]

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Man I wish I knew where this was gonna end. It can’t end well. The only things I know for sure are that a lot of people with way more money and power than yours truly have a vested interest in keeping this charade going as long as possible and that this country is unique in its ability to print currency backed by nothing that everyone else in the world is obliged to accept. Nothing about this scenario is “real” in any sense of the word.

It has been touched on in other threads on this site that the concept of homeowning in this country may become sort of a lifetime rental arrangement from the bank. Meaning, your average “homeowner” will never pay off their mortgage. Note that in many other countries (in south america for example) there are not really mortgage loans as in the US. People pay cash for homes or they don’t get to buy them at all. It used to be that way here in the US, too. For a few decades, mortgages were very effective in allowing a large number of citizens to own property but I’m worried that those days may be over. Remember that the powers that be don’t want you and I to own property. They want us to be indebted for our entire lives. If we’re not paying interest to them, they’re not getting paid. When they’re not getting paid, they get upset. And when they get upset, watch out.

Depressing, isn’t it! Of course I could be wrong. I HOPE I’m wrong!

[blahblahblah]

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Man I wish I knew where this was gonna end. It can’t end well. The only things I know for sure are that a lot of people with way more money and power than yours truly have a vested interest in keeping this charade going as long as possible and that this country is unique in its ability to print currency backed by nothing that everyone else in the world is obliged to accept. Nothing about this scenario is “real” in any sense of the word.

It has been touched on in other threads on this site that the concept of homeowning in this country may become sort of a lifetime rental arrangement from the bank. Meaning, your average “homeowner” will never pay off their mortgage. Note that in many other countries (in south america for example) there are not really mortgage loans as in the US. People pay cash for homes or they don’t get to buy them at all. It used to be that way here in the US, too. For a few decades, mortgages were very effective in allowing a large number of citizens to own property but I’m worried that those days may be over. Remember that the powers that be don’t want you and I to own property. They want us to be indebted for our entire lives. If we’re not paying interest to them, they’re not getting paid. When they’re not getting paid, they get upset. And when they get upset, watch out.

Depressing, isn’t it! Of course I could be wrong. I HOPE I’m wrong!

[HappyHouseHunting]

“Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.”

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Bubble pricing by definition implies that this pricing was created by truly believing in the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, you know, “real estate always goes up”, “I can always refinance”, “I can sell and take equity out,” etc., etc. and the banks, those bastions of rationality, actually loaned the money to do this.

‘Tis a puzzlement to me.

[HappyHouseHunting]

“Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.”

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Bubble pricing by definition implies that this pricing was created by truly believing in the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, you know, “real estate always goes up”, “I can always refinance”, “I can sell and take equity out,” etc., etc. and the banks, those bastions of rationality, actually loaned the money to do this.

‘Tis a puzzlement to me.

[HappyHouseHunting]

“Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.”

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Bubble pricing by definition implies that this pricing was created by truly believing in the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, you know, “real estate always goes up”, “I can always refinance”, “I can sell and take equity out,” etc., etc. and the banks, those bastions of rationality, actually loaned the money to do this.

‘Tis a puzzlement to me.

[HappyHouseHunting]

“Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.”

Sigh. Where does it all end then? We had stupid lending which led to this housing bubble, people getting greedy and buying beyond their means (no fat government salary here), but inflation, the real one, will keep this house and many others at a high level? So are these prices “real?”

Bubble pricing by definition implies that this pricing was created by truly believing in the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, you know, “real estate always goes up”, “I can always refinance”, “I can sell and take equity out,” etc., etc. and the banks, those bastions of rationality, actually loaned the money to do this.

‘Tis a puzzlement to me.

[blahblahblah]

Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

Inflation calculators use the government published GDP deflator figures. Remember, these are the same figures that they use to justify keeping interest rates depressed below what they really should be. If you believe the reported GDP deflator, you might as well believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. Real inflation is much, much higher and since the fed quit publishing M3 is probably running at 10%/year or more. Things are getting extremely expensive now and it’s going to get worse.

Home prices will continue to decline in nominal dollars, however IMO they will not get anywhere close to 2000 nominal values. They will drop below 2000 real values back to 1995 real values or less. However, that condo still might cost you $550K in nominal dollars.

For this to happen, salaries of course will have to rise. I think this will start happening in many industries during 2008 and 2009, especially medical, homeland security, military, all of the stuff that’s subsidized by the government, pharma, or insurance industries. I expect the government Keynesian policies to just get more extreme as that’s the only lever they know how to pull. Just spend, spend, spend and print dollars faster and faster. Everyone will just be happy that they have a $150K/yr job in the Homeland Security department looking through people’s email — or a $200K/yr job with a private security contractor, patrolling main street to keep the poor people from rioting — or a $200K/yr job with a big insurance company trying to find ways to deny Aunt Millie’s claims for chemotherapy. We are completing the transition into a full socialist corporatocracy that has been going on for a long time.

Do I want this to happen? Of course not. However, it’s what I expect.

[blahblahblah]

Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

Inflation calculators use the government published GDP deflator figures. Remember, these are the same figures that they use to justify keeping interest rates depressed below what they really should be. If you believe the reported GDP deflator, you might as well believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. Real inflation is much, much higher and since the fed quit publishing M3 is probably running at 10%/year or more. Things are getting extremely expensive now and it’s going to get worse.

Home prices will continue to decline in nominal dollars, however IMO they will not get anywhere close to 2000 nominal values. They will drop below 2000 real values back to 1995 real values or less. However, that condo still might cost you $550K in nominal dollars.

For this to happen, salaries of course will have to rise. I think this will start happening in many industries during 2008 and 2009, especially medical, homeland security, military, all of the stuff that’s subsidized by the government, pharma, or insurance industries. I expect the government Keynesian policies to just get more extreme as that’s the only lever they know how to pull. Just spend, spend, spend and print dollars faster and faster. Everyone will just be happy that they have a $150K/yr job in the Homeland Security department looking through people’s email — or a $200K/yr job with a private security contractor, patrolling main street to keep the poor people from rioting — or a $200K/yr job with a big insurance company trying to find ways to deny Aunt Millie’s claims for chemotherapy. We are completing the transition into a full socialist corporatocracy that has been going on for a long time.

Do I want this to happen? Of course not. However, it’s what I expect.

[blahblahblah]

Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

Inflation calculators use the government published GDP deflator figures. Remember, these are the same figures that they use to justify keeping interest rates depressed below what they really should be. If you believe the reported GDP deflator, you might as well believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. Real inflation is much, much higher and since the fed quit publishing M3 is probably running at 10%/year or more. Things are getting extremely expensive now and it’s going to get worse.

Home prices will continue to decline in nominal dollars, however IMO they will not get anywhere close to 2000 nominal values. They will drop below 2000 real values back to 1995 real values or less. However, that condo still might cost you $550K in nominal dollars.

For this to happen, salaries of course will have to rise. I think this will start happening in many industries during 2008 and 2009, especially medical, homeland security, military, all of the stuff that’s subsidized by the government, pharma, or insurance industries. I expect the government Keynesian policies to just get more extreme as that’s the only lever they know how to pull. Just spend, spend, spend and print dollars faster and faster. Everyone will just be happy that they have a $150K/yr job in the Homeland Security department looking through people’s email — or a $200K/yr job with a private security contractor, patrolling main street to keep the poor people from rioting — or a $200K/yr job with a big insurance company trying to find ways to deny Aunt Millie’s claims for chemotherapy. We are completing the transition into a full socialist corporatocracy that has been going on for a long time.

Do I want this to happen? Of course not. However, it’s what I expect.

[blahblahblah]

Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

Inflation calculators use the government published GDP deflator figures. Remember, these are the same figures that they use to justify keeping interest rates depressed below what they really should be. If you believe the reported GDP deflator, you might as well believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. Real inflation is much, much higher and since the fed quit publishing M3 is probably running at 10%/year or more. Things are getting extremely expensive now and it’s going to get worse.

Home prices will continue to decline in nominal dollars, however IMO they will not get anywhere close to 2000 nominal values. They will drop below 2000 real values back to 1995 real values or less. However, that condo still might cost you $550K in nominal dollars.

For this to happen, salaries of course will have to rise. I think this will start happening in many industries during 2008 and 2009, especially medical, homeland security, military, all of the stuff that’s subsidized by the government, pharma, or insurance industries. I expect the government Keynesian policies to just get more extreme as that’s the only lever they know how to pull. Just spend, spend, spend and print dollars faster and faster. Everyone will just be happy that they have a $150K/yr job in the Homeland Security department looking through people’s email — or a $200K/yr job with a private security contractor, patrolling main street to keep the poor people from rioting — or a $200K/yr job with a big insurance company trying to find ways to deny Aunt Millie’s claims for chemotherapy. We are completing the transition into a full socialist corporatocracy that has been going on for a long time.

Do I want this to happen? Of course not. However, it’s what I expect.

[Happs]

Do you all think this area appreciated heavily in the last few years because of its location by the beach and the fact that there are very few condos right on the beach either in Del Mar, Solana Beach or Encinitas? Maybe the seller thinks that because there are no more apartments being built at the beach, that he/she can command a high price. I can understand how Mira Mesa or other inland communities had run ups in prices due to the common man frenzy and subprime loans etc, but it’s interesting in an upscale area like this what transpired.

[Happs]

Do you all think this area appreciated heavily in the last few years because of its location by the beach and the fact that there are very few condos right on the beach either in Del Mar, Solana Beach or Encinitas? Maybe the seller thinks that because there are no more apartments being built at the beach, that he/she can command a high price. I can understand how Mira Mesa or other inland communities had run ups in prices due to the common man frenzy and subprime loans etc, but it’s interesting in an upscale area like this what transpired.

[Happs]

Do you all think this area appreciated heavily in the last few years because of its location by the beach and the fact that there are very few condos right on the beach either in Del Mar, Solana Beach or Encinitas? Maybe the seller thinks that because there are no more apartments being built at the beach, that he/she can command a high price. I can understand how Mira Mesa or other inland communities had run ups in prices due to the common man frenzy and subprime loans etc, but it’s interesting in an upscale area like this what transpired.

[Happs]

Do you all think this area appreciated heavily in the last few years because of its location by the beach and the fact that there are very few condos right on the beach either in Del Mar, Solana Beach or Encinitas? Maybe the seller thinks that because there are no more apartments being built at the beach, that he/she can command a high price. I can understand how Mira Mesa or other inland communities had run ups in prices due to the common man frenzy and subprime loans etc, but it’s interesting in an upscale area like this what transpired.

[HappyHouseHunting]

Inflation does account for some increase sometimes, but not always. I certainly do not expect homes to go back to say, 1960s home prices. My parents bought their small home in 1963 for $19,000 and in Southern California, that is not going to happen again. (There are parts of the country where that is true though.)

Homes can most definitely depreciate though. Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

I am just wondering, when the basic fundamentals for housing actually start applying in Southern California, what will homes be worth? I know, I know, whatever someone is willing to pay, but it used to be the banks were pretty picky about who they loaned to, the underlying value of the property, blah,blah. You know,the old fashioned crap that went out of style when the smart people started running things.

[HappyHouseHunting]

Inflation does account for some increase sometimes, but not always. I certainly do not expect homes to go back to say, 1960s home prices. My parents bought their small home in 1963 for $19,000 and in Southern California, that is not going to happen again. (There are parts of the country where that is true though.)

Homes can most definitely depreciate though. Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

I am just wondering, when the basic fundamentals for housing actually start applying in Southern California, what will homes be worth? I know, I know, whatever someone is willing to pay, but it used to be the banks were pretty picky about who they loaned to, the underlying value of the property, blah,blah. You know,the old fashioned crap that went out of style when the smart people started running things.

[HappyHouseHunting]

Inflation does account for some increase sometimes, but not always. I certainly do not expect homes to go back to say, 1960s home prices. My parents bought their small home in 1963 for $19,000 and in Southern California, that is not going to happen again. (There are parts of the country where that is true though.)

Homes can most definitely depreciate though. Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

I am just wondering, when the basic fundamentals for housing actually start applying in Southern California, what will homes be worth? I know, I know, whatever someone is willing to pay, but it used to be the banks were pretty picky about who they loaned to, the underlying value of the property, blah,blah. You know,the old fashioned crap that went out of style when the smart people started running things.

[HappyHouseHunting]

Inflation does account for some increase sometimes, but not always. I certainly do not expect homes to go back to say, 1960s home prices. My parents bought their small home in 1963 for $19,000 and in Southern California, that is not going to happen again. (There are parts of the country where that is true though.)

Homes can most definitely depreciate though. Using a generic inflation calculator online shows a value of $437,000 (approximately for this home).

I am just wondering, when the basic fundamentals for housing actually start applying in Southern California, what will homes be worth? I know, I know, whatever someone is willing to pay, but it used to be the banks were pretty picky about who they loaned to, the underlying value of the property, blah,blah. You know,the old fashioned crap that went out of style when the smart people started running things.

[blahblahblah]

…how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

Two reasons:

1) Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.

2) Inflation. How did a gallon of milk become $5? How did your dollar go from being worth 1.25 euros 8 years ago to being only worth .7 today?

[blahblahblah]

…how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

Two reasons:

1) Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.

2) Inflation. How did a gallon of milk become $5? How did your dollar go from being worth 1.25 euros 8 years ago to being only worth .7 today?

[blahblahblah]

…how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

Two reasons:

1) Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.

2) Inflation. How did a gallon of milk become $5? How did your dollar go from being worth 1.25 euros 8 years ago to being only worth .7 today?

[blahblahblah]

…how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

Two reasons:

1) Securitization of loans allowed lenders to pass off mortgage risk to 3rd parties rather than holding it themselves. They only have to hold the loans long enough to fob them off on the next sucker, so why bother making sure that the borrower is good for the money? And of course they pushed the ARM products so that initial payments were low. This allowed a much larger pool of buyers to enter the market than would normally be possible. Supply held constant, this pushed prices way up.

2) Inflation. How did a gallon of milk become $5? How did your dollar go from being worth 1.25 euros 8 years ago to being only worth .7 today?

[I would rather be lucky then smart]

Someone please let me know

when a unit like that can be purchased at the “anti-bubble” price of the high $400K’s:

a: never
b: dream on
c: in 200??

[I would rather be lucky then smart]

Someone please let me know

when a unit like that can be purchased at the “anti-bubble” price of the high $400K’s:

a: never
b: dream on
c: in 200??

[I would rather be lucky then smart]

Someone please let me know

when a unit like that can be purchased at the “anti-bubble” price of the high $400K’s:

a: never
b: dream on
c: in 200??

[I would rather be lucky then smart]

Someone please let me know

when a unit like that can be purchased at the “anti-bubble” price of the high $400K’s:

a: never
b: dream on
c: in 200??

[I would rather be lucky then smart]

Someone please let me know

when a unit like that can be purchased at the “anti-bubble” price of the high $400K’s:

a: never
b: dream on
c: in 200??

[Happs]

I found out that the condo sold for $928,000. It was an oceanview unit (not oceanfront). I still think the buyer overpaid.

[PadreBrian]

To the rich Russian or European that bought it as a vacation home, it was only 500k Euros. Cheap really.

[Happs]

It finally looks like prices are coming down along the coast in Solana Beach on S. Sierra Avenue since I first posted 2 years ago.

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100007680-585_S_Sierra_Ave_29_Solana_Beach_CA_92075

[snail]

whoaa…. from 1.2 to 700K, Thanks for the update

[snail]

whoaa…. from 1.2 to 700K, Thanks for the update

[snail]

whoaa…. from 1.2 to 700K, Thanks for the update

[snail]

whoaa…. from 1.2 to 700K, Thanks for the update

[snail]

whoaa…. from 1.2 to 700K, Thanks for the update

[Happs]

It finally looks like prices are coming down along the coast in Solana Beach on S. Sierra Avenue since I first posted 2 years ago.

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100007680-585_S_Sierra_Ave_29_Solana_Beach_CA_92075

[Happs]

It finally looks like prices are coming down along the coast in Solana Beach on S. Sierra Avenue since I first posted 2 years ago.

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100007680-585_S_Sierra_Ave_29_Solana_Beach_CA_92075

[Happs]

It finally looks like prices are coming down along the coast in Solana Beach on S. Sierra Avenue since I first posted 2 years ago.

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100007680-585_S_Sierra_Ave_29_Solana_Beach_CA_92075

[Happs]

It finally looks like prices are coming down along the coast in Solana Beach on S. Sierra Avenue since I first posted 2 years ago.

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100007680-585_S_Sierra_Ave_29_Solana_Beach_CA_92075

[PadreBrian]

To the rich Russian or European that bought it as a vacation home, it was only 500k Euros. Cheap really.

[PadreBrian]

To the rich Russian or European that bought it as a vacation home, it was only 500k Euros. Cheap really.

[PadreBrian]

To the rich Russian or European that bought it as a vacation home, it was only 500k Euros. Cheap really.

[PadreBrian]

To the rich Russian or European that bought it as a vacation home, it was only 500k Euros. Cheap really.

[Happs]

I found out that the condo sold for $928,000. It was an oceanview unit (not oceanfront). I still think the buyer overpaid.

[Happs]

I found out that the condo sold for $928,000. It was an oceanview unit (not oceanfront). I still think the buyer overpaid.

[Happs]

I found out that the condo sold for $928,000. It was an oceanview unit (not oceanfront). I still think the buyer overpaid.

[Happs]

I found out that the condo sold for $928,000. It was an oceanview unit (not oceanfront). I still think the buyer overpaid.

[HappyHouseHunting]

This is a question asked strictly out of curiosity because I do not know the area at all, but when you look at the sales history on this house, and other properties around it, how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

I notice if you go back to condos in the same complex that the 1999 prices were in the $400,000 range or so. This would make them pricey as you say but from everything I am reading, anything in the $900,000 range would be strictly bubble pricing. If prices go to 2000 value (which seems to make sense) shouldn’t these go the high $400,000s?

Like I said, this is strictly a lack of understanding of the San Diego market. Are there enough people out there who can fundamentally afford $900,000 for condos and is there a bank out there who would loan that in today’s market?

[HappyHouseHunting]

This is a question asked strictly out of curiosity because I do not know the area at all, but when you look at the sales history on this house, and other properties around it, how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

I notice if you go back to condos in the same complex that the 1999 prices were in the $400,000 range or so. This would make them pricey as you say but from everything I am reading, anything in the $900,000 range would be strictly bubble pricing. If prices go to 2000 value (which seems to make sense) shouldn’t these go the high $400,000s?

Like I said, this is strictly a lack of understanding of the San Diego market. Are there enough people out there who can fundamentally afford $900,000 for condos and is there a bank out there who would loan that in today’s market?

[HappyHouseHunting]

This is a question asked strictly out of curiosity because I do not know the area at all, but when you look at the sales history on this house, and other properties around it, how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

I notice if you go back to condos in the same complex that the 1999 prices were in the $400,000 range or so. This would make them pricey as you say but from everything I am reading, anything in the $900,000 range would be strictly bubble pricing. If prices go to 2000 value (which seems to make sense) shouldn’t these go the high $400,000s?

Like I said, this is strictly a lack of understanding of the San Diego market. Are there enough people out there who can fundamentally afford $900,000 for condos and is there a bank out there who would loan that in today’s market?

[HappyHouseHunting]

This is a question asked strictly out of curiosity because I do not know the area at all, but when you look at the sales history on this house, and other properties around it, how did a $217,000 dollar condo become $1,000,000?

I notice if you go back to condos in the same complex that the 1999 prices were in the $400,000 range or so. This would make them pricey as you say but from everything I am reading, anything in the $900,000 range would be strictly bubble pricing. If prices go to 2000 value (which seems to make sense) shouldn’t these go the high $400,000s?

Like I said, this is strictly a lack of understanding of the San Diego market. Are there enough people out there who can fundamentally afford $900,000 for condos and is there a bank out there who would loan that in today’s market?

[Happs]

The little sidebar to this front page article in today’s Arizona Republic confirms that prices on the bluff are holding steady or rising while downtown condo prices are in retreat. I don’t think Zonies though are interested in going downtown San Diego on vacation. Just my opinion.

http://www.azcentral.com/realestate/articles/0209biz-sdcondo0210.html

[Bugs]

The primo coastal areas will be among the last dominoes to fall. If the same condo located in Encinitas east of !-5 drops below $300k (and it might) then this unit probably will not be worth 300% more just because of the oceanfront location. These properties are all related, even if indirectly; and pricing is proportional.

[Bugs]

The primo coastal areas will be among the last dominoes to fall. If the same condo located in Encinitas east of !-5 drops below $300k (and it might) then this unit probably will not be worth 300% more just because of the oceanfront location. These properties are all related, even if indirectly; and pricing is proportional.

[Bugs]

The primo coastal areas will be among the last dominoes to fall. If the same condo located in Encinitas east of !-5 drops below $300k (and it might) then this unit probably will not be worth 300% more just because of the oceanfront location. These properties are all related, even if indirectly; and pricing is proportional.

[Bugs]

The primo coastal areas will be among the last dominoes to fall. If the same condo located in Encinitas east of !-5 drops below $300k (and it might) then this unit probably will not be worth 300% more just because of the oceanfront location. These properties are all related, even if indirectly; and pricing is proportional.

[Bugs]

The primo coastal areas will be among the last dominoes to fall. If the same condo located in Encinitas east of !-5 drops below $300k (and it might) then this unit probably will not be worth 300% more just because of the oceanfront location. These properties are all related, even if indirectly; and pricing is proportional.

[Happs]

The little sidebar to this front page article in today’s Arizona Republic confirms that prices on the bluff are holding steady or rising while downtown condo prices are in retreat. I don’t think Zonies though are interested in going downtown San Diego on vacation. Just my opinion.

http://www.azcentral.com/realestate/articles/0209biz-sdcondo0210.html

[Happs]

The little sidebar to this front page article in today’s Arizona Republic confirms that prices on the bluff are holding steady or rising while downtown condo prices are in retreat. I don’t think Zonies though are interested in going downtown San Diego on vacation. Just my opinion.

http://www.azcentral.com/realestate/articles/0209biz-sdcondo0210.html

[Happs]

The little sidebar to this front page article in today’s Arizona Republic confirms that prices on the bluff are holding steady or rising while downtown condo prices are in retreat. I don’t think Zonies though are interested in going downtown San Diego on vacation. Just my opinion.

http://www.azcentral.com/realestate/articles/0209biz-sdcondo0210.html

[Happs]

The little sidebar to this front page article in today’s Arizona Republic confirms that prices on the bluff are holding steady or rising while downtown condo prices are in retreat. I don’t think Zonies though are interested in going downtown San Diego on vacation. Just my opinion.

http://www.azcentral.com/realestate/articles/0209biz-sdcondo0210.html

[Happs]

The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.

[CA renter]

[quote=Happs]The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.[/quote]

Good news. Thanks for keeping us posted on these condos.

[CA renter]

[quote=Happs]The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.[/quote]

Good news. Thanks for keeping us posted on these condos.

[CA renter]

[quote=Happs]The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.[/quote]

Good news. Thanks for keeping us posted on these condos.

[CA renter]

[quote=Happs]The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.[/quote]

Good news. Thanks for keeping us posted on these condos.

[CA renter]

[quote=Happs]The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.[/quote]

Good news. Thanks for keeping us posted on these condos.

[Happs]

The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.

[Happs]

The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.

[Happs]

The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.

[Happs]

The unit listed at $695,000 is not the same as the unit in the link from two years ago, but it still seems like list prices for ocean view and non ocean view condos on the bluff in Solana Beach have tapered off.

[Author]

Posts