- This topic has 90 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 11 months ago by
23109VC.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 24, 2007 at 4:55 PM #54895May 24, 2007 at 4:55 PM #54909
PerryChase
ParticipantThere’s video on Bakersfield.
http://www.kget.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=49f70807-fe57-4167-8fd4-124a43b02eb2
May 24, 2007 at 5:06 PM #54896temeculaguy
Participant23109, a lot of what you say is correct and many San Diegans have an opinion of Temecula that dates back a decade. I don’t have a negative opinion but I believe in the 50% drop. Not accross the board and not every house, but there will be examples and I want to find the example before Waiting Hawk does.
Here’s why the 50% drop will happen. In 1998 and 1999 the homes that were selling for 175 to 230 were not small houses and those same houses peaked in 2005 in the high 600’s to the high 700’s.
This is a model match of one my parents bought in 1999 for 213k (thier lot was better), today the match is listed for 690k
This is a model match of a house I bought in 1998 for 187k inclusive of options and lot premium, that model started at 165 in 1998. Things were taking off that year, it was the official bottom in the area and as they built the street I lived on, there was an increase of 5-10% per phase, I bought it when it was a dirt lot and was up 25% by the time I moved in. Zillow doesn’t show the 1998 sales prices but it is not a legend, ten years ago, almost no list price in this valley had a 2 at the beginning of the number. I sold last year. Today a model match is listed at 609k, in 2005/2006 at 600k it would have sold in a week, some may have sold in the 700’s
This is not the undesirable part of Temecula, these are both in Redhawk.
So to look at these two houses which sold for just under and just above 200k, to see them both rise to the 600’s is about tripling the price in 8/9 years. For them to fall to 350k would reflect a 50% drop from peak but still have gained more than 5% per year. Both those properties are hanging on to near peak prices but there are examples in the same development of 100-150k drops. There is one a few houses away from the 609k (he’s on his third realtor I believe) that is listed at 500k and has been on the market forever, soon it will list in the 400’s and we will be within striking range of 350k, voila, 50%
May 24, 2007 at 5:06 PM #54911Participant23109, a lot of what you say is correct and many San Diegans have an opinion of Temecula that dates back a decade. I don’t have a negative opinion but I believe in the 50% drop. Not accross the board and not every house, but there will be examples and I want to find the example before Waiting Hawk does.
Here’s why the 50% drop will happen. In 1998 and 1999 the homes that were selling for 175 to 230 were not small houses and those same houses peaked in 2005 in the high 600’s to the high 700’s.
This is a model match of one my parents bought in 1999 for 213k (thier lot was better), today the match is listed for 690k
This is a model match of a house I bought in 1998 for 187k inclusive of options and lot premium, that model started at 165 in 1998. Things were taking off that year, it was the official bottom in the area and as they built the street I lived on, there was an increase of 5-10% per phase, I bought it when it was a dirt lot and was up 25% by the time I moved in. Zillow doesn’t show the 1998 sales prices but it is not a legend, ten years ago, almost no list price in this valley had a 2 at the beginning of the number. I sold last year. Today a model match is listed at 609k, in 2005/2006 at 600k it would have sold in a week, some may have sold in the 700’s
This is not the undesirable part of Temecula, these are both in Redhawk.
So to look at these two houses which sold for just under and just above 200k, to see them both rise to the 600’s is about tripling the price in 8/9 years. For them to fall to 350k would reflect a 50% drop from peak but still have gained more than 5% per year. Both those properties are hanging on to near peak prices but there are examples in the same development of 100-150k drops. There is one a few houses away from the 609k (he’s on his third realtor I believe) that is listed at 500k and has been on the market forever, soon it will list in the 400’s and we will be within striking range of 350k, voila, 50%
May 24, 2007 at 6:25 PM #54906no_such_reality
ParticipantPC, what I noticed in that article and in the Sacramento one is the extent that NODS are going to trustee sale.
If they had 2400 NODS in Jan-May and 1440 Trustee sales, it’s looking like 47.5% or so of the NODs to to foreclosure. Actually higher if one assume NODs are increasing slightly on average month to month. Sacramento had similar numbers.
San Diego in Jan-Apr had 5820 NODS and 1978 Foreclosures, a 34% rate.
Back at Innovest’s foreclosure statss for the 90s bottom and we see that San Diego previously lept from a 30% going to foreclosure to a 50% going to foreclosure in Q1 ’94 and stayed there for 3 years.
More importantly, the Trustee deed volume was about 10% below todays. I think that puts it at about even when adjusting for population growth. adjusted.
Looking at the ARM reset curve and adding an a Bakersfield like NOD to Foreclosure rate paints a very grim picture given were already at a population adjusted foreclosure rate equal to the bottom of the last cycle and this cycle is just starting.
May 24, 2007 at 6:25 PM #54920ParticipantPC, what I noticed in that article and in the Sacramento one is the extent that NODS are going to trustee sale.
If they had 2400 NODS in Jan-May and 1440 Trustee sales, it’s looking like 47.5% or so of the NODs to to foreclosure. Actually higher if one assume NODs are increasing slightly on average month to month. Sacramento had similar numbers.
San Diego in Jan-Apr had 5820 NODS and 1978 Foreclosures, a 34% rate.
Back at Innovest’s foreclosure statss for the 90s bottom and we see that San Diego previously lept from a 30% going to foreclosure to a 50% going to foreclosure in Q1 ’94 and stayed there for 3 years.
More importantly, the Trustee deed volume was about 10% below todays. I think that puts it at about even when adjusting for population growth. adjusted.
Looking at the ARM reset curve and adding an a Bakersfield like NOD to Foreclosure rate paints a very grim picture given were already at a population adjusted foreclosure rate equal to the bottom of the last cycle and this cycle is just starting.
May 24, 2007 at 9:43 PM #54924sdrealtor
ParticipantCONCHO you missed the word “many”. 1 and 2 hour commutes driving in your car alone are also very common back east.
May 24, 2007 at 9:43 PM #54939ParticipantCONCHO you missed the word “many”. 1 and 2 hour commutes driving in your car alone are also very common back east.
May 24, 2007 at 9:48 PM #54926hipmatt
ParticipantIts funny, the things I read here.. like Temecula isn’t how it was 10 years ago… I would take the Temecula 10 years ago to the Temecula today in a second. I have lived in and around Temecula since 1990. Temecula was so nice in the early 90’s, it was a mellow, quiet, rural ranch town.
There was lots of horses, open rolling hills, minimal traffic, and mellow, down to earth people. Crime was virtually non existent, and people had patience and seemed to have better values. We didn’t have a mall, but had everything one really could need. It was a nice secluded area, close enough to all the amenities of SD, LA, OC, and Riverside/SB, but just far enough to escape all the madness and ugliness. You could ride dirt bikes in hills all over the valley. Lifted trucks were actually used off road. The I 15 was considered the best freeway in socal. I remember people had license plates that said..”Heaven is living in Temecula”.. and I kind of agreed with that… now, I am looking to leave, and am a bit embarrassed by my community.
I suppose many here would laugh at the thought of this once, smaller semi-hick town, and why I would like living there.
Fast forward to 2007… the supposed “newer”/”better” Temecula.. hmm, a mini rat race full of lifted heavy duty trucks, SUV driving-silicone trophy wives, mega-McMansion envy syndrome, bad traffic, and its growing concentration of people who lack substance….
If you think about it, all the benefits of Temecula seem to attract shallow people… like you said 23109vc…
people move here so they can have a bigger MC Mansion, a Hummer, a rolex, a starbucks in had as they frequent Costco, trendy landscape and interior, even if these things don’t add to a happier life.And then there is the reference to Greer Ranch, … what an over rated community if I ever saw one…. absolutely over priced, in the middle of Wildomar, which has horrible emergency response and law enforcement.. (I know from experience), virtually all of the amenities are in Temecula, the taxes and HOA there are insane, and you are bordering Lake Elsinore… please.. there is a sucker born every minute, and if he is paying $800k to live in Queer Ranch, then definitely they are a sucker. Ya.. sign me up for $1200 month in taxes alone… what a waste..
Temeculans are hurting for money, inflation, gas, and mortgages, credit card debt are all killing many of them. Wages up here aren’t appreciating that fast, and many that did, are RE related and will crumble. This is still a bedroom community. If you think that cops, teachers, nurses, and retail employees can afford $500k homes you are drinking the same kool aid as your RE agent. Most who make 6 figures commute, and this is no secret. So yeah.. I still see a large drop in Temecula RE.
May 24, 2007 at 9:48 PM #54941ParticipantIts funny, the things I read here.. like Temecula isn’t how it was 10 years ago… I would take the Temecula 10 years ago to the Temecula today in a second. I have lived in and around Temecula since 1990. Temecula was so nice in the early 90’s, it was a mellow, quiet, rural ranch town.
There was lots of horses, open rolling hills, minimal traffic, and mellow, down to earth people. Crime was virtually non existent, and people had patience and seemed to have better values. We didn’t have a mall, but had everything one really could need. It was a nice secluded area, close enough to all the amenities of SD, LA, OC, and Riverside/SB, but just far enough to escape all the madness and ugliness. You could ride dirt bikes in hills all over the valley. Lifted trucks were actually used off road. The I 15 was considered the best freeway in socal. I remember people had license plates that said..”Heaven is living in Temecula”.. and I kind of agreed with that… now, I am looking to leave, and am a bit embarrassed by my community.
I suppose many here would laugh at the thought of this once, smaller semi-hick town, and why I would like living there.
Fast forward to 2007… the supposed “newer”/”better” Temecula.. hmm, a mini rat race full of lifted heavy duty trucks, SUV driving-silicone trophy wives, mega-McMansion envy syndrome, bad traffic, and its growing concentration of people who lack substance….
If you think about it, all the benefits of Temecula seem to attract shallow people… like you said 23109vc…
people move here so they can have a bigger MC Mansion, a Hummer, a rolex, a starbucks in had as they frequent Costco, trendy landscape and interior, even if these things don’t add to a happier life.And then there is the reference to Greer Ranch, … what an over rated community if I ever saw one…. absolutely over priced, in the middle of Wildomar, which has horrible emergency response and law enforcement.. (I know from experience), virtually all of the amenities are in Temecula, the taxes and HOA there are insane, and you are bordering Lake Elsinore… please.. there is a sucker born every minute, and if he is paying $800k to live in Queer Ranch, then definitely they are a sucker. Ya.. sign me up for $1200 month in taxes alone… what a waste..
Temeculans are hurting for money, inflation, gas, and mortgages, credit card debt are all killing many of them. Wages up here aren’t appreciating that fast, and many that did, are RE related and will crumble. This is still a bedroom community. If you think that cops, teachers, nurses, and retail employees can afford $500k homes you are drinking the same kool aid as your RE agent. Most who make 6 figures commute, and this is no secret. So yeah.. I still see a large drop in Temecula RE.
May 24, 2007 at 11:09 PM #54932CardiffBaseball
ParticipantWhile I am too cheap to pay for it myself, I for high on seeing plenty of silicon trophy wives.
May 24, 2007 at 11:09 PM #54947ParticipantWhile I am too cheap to pay for it myself, I for high on seeing plenty of silicon trophy wives.
May 25, 2007 at 8:39 AM #5496423109VC
Participanti guess i feel like temecula is a carbon copy of San diego now, just further up.
temecula maybe used to be a quiet rural area…and now it’s a mini SD or mini OC. you don’t have a lot of the culture, downtown, beach, etc of those areas – but you have the mcmansions, the malls, the people trying to one up each other with their houses and cars…
the reason temecula became like this is NOT b/c of the people who originally lived here…it’s all teh “big city” people who came in and brought those values wtih them.
if you build it…they will come..and they did…in droves….
but that’s why i think you won’t see as much of a bust here. the people who came here for all the toys, etc…like it here. they can’t have this stuff if they go back..and they are hooked on the toys the lifestyle…and to go back to SD..means going to a condo or an apt…and they can’t handle that..it’s taking too many steps backward in their ‘bling” lifestyle…
May 25, 2007 at 8:39 AM #54979Participanti guess i feel like temecula is a carbon copy of San diego now, just further up.
temecula maybe used to be a quiet rural area…and now it’s a mini SD or mini OC. you don’t have a lot of the culture, downtown, beach, etc of those areas – but you have the mcmansions, the malls, the people trying to one up each other with their houses and cars…
the reason temecula became like this is NOT b/c of the people who originally lived here…it’s all teh “big city” people who came in and brought those values wtih them.
if you build it…they will come..and they did…in droves….
but that’s why i think you won’t see as much of a bust here. the people who came here for all the toys, etc…like it here. they can’t have this stuff if they go back..and they are hooked on the toys the lifestyle…and to go back to SD..means going to a condo or an apt…and they can’t handle that..it’s taking too many steps backward in their ‘bling” lifestyle…
May 25, 2007 at 8:39 AM #54966Participanti guess i feel like temecula is a carbon copy of San diego now, just further up.
temecula maybe used to be a quiet rural area…and now it’s a mini SD or mini OC. you don’t have a lot of the culture, downtown, beach, etc of those areas – but you have the mcmansions, the malls, the people trying to one up each other with their houses and cars…
the reason temecula became like this is NOT b/c of the people who originally lived here…it’s all teh “big city” people who came in and brought those values wtih them.
if you build it…they will come..and they did…in droves….
but that’s why i think you won’t see as much of a bust here. the people who came here for all the toys, etc…like it here. they can’t have this stuff if they go back..and they are hooked on the toys the lifestyle…and to go back to SD..means going to a condo or an apt…and they can’t handle that..it’s taking too many steps backward in their ‘bling” lifestyle…
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.