Why I am leaving San Diego

[Anonymous]

I agree with the second of half of what DWCAP has said, and also a lot with some of the comments about SD being just another city. People take umbrage too quickly, and don’t realize that the first thing that hits out-of-towners is the barrage of propaganda about the life style. It insults one’s intelligence. I don’t blame the people who live here so much as those who deliberately perpetuate the hype. The irony of course is that they also have to live with the dream they created. But then perhaps some of them aren’t aware that’s what it is.

[DWCAP]

and to FSD’s comments about affordability, all true. Any payment to income/rent/historical payment/(whatever) calculation will show today’s unparalled affordability.

Because of today’s unparrelled interest rates.

Rates are so low, that they make our really quite high prices seem low. Seeing as interest rates can only really go up from here, the only way to maintain these ratio’s is for incomes go up by an equilivant amount (hard to do in todays economy) or for prices to fall.

I have no idea what will happen, but I do know that when he (and sdr) purchased his house in 1996, it was high(er) interest rates on low(er) prices vs incomes that constrained housing prices. Today it is high prices and rock bottom level interest rates vs stagnant incomes that are constraining pricing. The payments look the same in raw terms, but potential for future gains and ‘investment’ potential are drastically different.

The lesson I see from that, “only buy a house you really want to stay in, cause it is unlikley there will be much REAL appreciation for a very long time”.

[DWCAP]

and to FSD’s comments about affordability, all true. Any payment to income/rent/historical payment/(whatever) calculation will show today’s unparalled affordability.

Because of today’s unparrelled interest rates.

Rates are so low, that they make our really quite high prices seem low. Seeing as interest rates can only really go up from here, the only way to maintain these ratio’s is for incomes go up by an equilivant amount (hard to do in todays economy) or for prices to fall.

I have no idea what will happen, but I do know that when he (and sdr) purchased his house in 1996, it was high(er) interest rates on low(er) prices vs incomes that constrained housing prices. Today it is high prices and rock bottom level interest rates vs stagnant incomes that are constraining pricing. The payments look the same in raw terms, but potential for future gains and ‘investment’ potential are drastically different.

The lesson I see from that, “only buy a house you really want to stay in, cause it is unlikley there will be much REAL appreciation for a very long time”.

[DWCAP]

and to FSD’s comments about affordability, all true. Any payment to income/rent/historical payment/(whatever) calculation will show today’s unparalled affordability.

Because of today’s unparrelled interest rates.

Rates are so low, that they make our really quite high prices seem low. Seeing as interest rates can only really go up from here, the only way to maintain these ratio’s is for incomes go up by an equilivant amount (hard to do in todays economy) or for prices to fall.

I have no idea what will happen, but I do know that when he (and sdr) purchased his house in 1996, it was high(er) interest rates on low(er) prices vs incomes that constrained housing prices. Today it is high prices and rock bottom level interest rates vs stagnant incomes that are constraining pricing. The payments look the same in raw terms, but potential for future gains and ‘investment’ potential are drastically different.

The lesson I see from that, “only buy a house you really want to stay in, cause it is unlikley there will be much REAL appreciation for a very long time”.

[DWCAP]

and to FSD’s comments about affordability, all true. Any payment to income/rent/historical payment/(whatever) calculation will show today’s unparalled affordability.

Because of today’s unparrelled interest rates.

Rates are so low, that they make our really quite high prices seem low. Seeing as interest rates can only really go up from here, the only way to maintain these ratio’s is for incomes go up by an equilivant amount (hard to do in todays economy) or for prices to fall.

I have no idea what will happen, but I do know that when he (and sdr) purchased his house in 1996, it was high(er) interest rates on low(er) prices vs incomes that constrained housing prices. Today it is high prices and rock bottom level interest rates vs stagnant incomes that are constraining pricing. The payments look the same in raw terms, but potential for future gains and ‘investment’ potential are drastically different.

The lesson I see from that, “only buy a house you really want to stay in, cause it is unlikley there will be much REAL appreciation for a very long time”.

[DWCAP]

and to FSD’s comments about affordability, all true. Any payment to income/rent/historical payment/(whatever) calculation will show today’s unparalled affordability.

Because of today’s unparrelled interest rates.

Rates are so low, that they make our really quite high prices seem low. Seeing as interest rates can only really go up from here, the only way to maintain these ratio’s is for incomes go up by an equilivant amount (hard to do in todays economy) or for prices to fall.

I have no idea what will happen, but I do know that when he (and sdr) purchased his house in 1996, it was high(er) interest rates on low(er) prices vs incomes that constrained housing prices. Today it is high prices and rock bottom level interest rates vs stagnant incomes that are constraining pricing. The payments look the same in raw terms, but potential for future gains and ‘investment’ potential are drastically different.

The lesson I see from that, “only buy a house you really want to stay in, cause it is unlikley there will be much REAL appreciation for a very long time”.

[briansd1]

DWCAP, very good analysis.

[briansd1]

DWCAP, very good analysis.

[briansd1]

DWCAP, very good analysis.

[briansd1]

DWCAP, very good analysis.

[briansd1]

DWCAP, very good analysis.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=DWCAP] . . . But new buyers are also some of the dumbest buyers around. Not always, but often. They get a first promotion, get engaged/married, graduate grad school, get pregnant, whatever; and then decide they need to buy a house. So the go out, look around alittle bit and then try to make the best buy they can. But there is no historical or economic relevance to this decision process, and a tremendous amount of emotional baggage. . . [/quote]

Very good posts, DWCAP. The emphasized sentence just points out the difference between views like FSD’s (who once lived in SD and then moved away) or protorio’s (who grew up in SD) and the views of the OP (who is a relative newcomer to the area).

FSD and protorio can see that there are good buys here now based upon their own past experiences with the local RE market. Both have lived here (albeit modestly) and still enjoyed it and have good memories of it.

A “newcomer” often has expectations of what they were “used to living in” in another county/state as opposed to what they feel they “deserve” to live in now, even if it was their parents paying the bills (at the time of their imprinted housing memory) and not them. IMHO, that’s the “baggage” that you’re referring to here. I’ve never had a buyer-client who was a “newcomer,” but I would surmise they are MUCH more difficult to appease than a native or long-time San Diegan. Because they’re not yet in a place where they’re willing to “trade-off” certain “lifestyle preferences OF THE WAY THINGS SHOULD BE” implanted deep in their brains in order to consummate a successful purchase that they can afford and would be happy with in the long term. As an agent, you could drive them thru or meet them in Talmadge Park, for instance (actually an upscale and convenient location), or nearby El Cerrito and you may hear “Meh…” from them. “Too 50’s, grandma’s house, doesn’t `feel’ right,” blah, blah, blah. Of course, this is a buyers perogative.

As an agent, you could drive a “newcomer” buyer through a major thoroughfare near dtn Chula Vista, and because they only see T-lock (shingle) roofs instead of tile . . . again, “Meh.” They don’t EVEN WANT to see the inside of anything, even though there are several large homes on large lots perfect for their needs in the area. A lifetime Chula Vistan looking for property would be scoping out all available properties, regardless of condition, within two blocks of various relatives’ houses. Both the “newcomer” and the “native” are the same age (30-35).

I came to SD as a young person, but it was so long ago that SD was actually cheaper to live in at the time, in every respect, then where I moved from. And I have been here ever since, so don’t have any pie-in-the-sky aspirations in this regard. In addition, I myself am a product of public schools.

As I stated before, it is generational thing, too. If I had to sell and repurchase again now (assuming I could qualify for financing), I know exactly what and where I would buy and would waste no time placing offers in attempt to make a deal while the getting was good. I have a secondary area in mind if the first area doesn’t pan out for me. I just have never considered all the stuff that a lot of Piggs seem to have “analysis paralysis” over, such as rent multipliers (for an owner-occupied SFR), local unemployment rate, fiscal health of city/county, API scores, etc. And yeah, I have kids . . . all went to public school and all are fine . . . excelling, actually.

Maybe its a stupid notion now but I was always taught that RE is the best investment because it is tangible and you can control it yourself (as opposed to passive investments). As a buyer, the only things that I’ve ever considered were physical and environmental attributes (i.e. zoning, soil subsidence, traffic frontage or noise, lot size and elevation, sound structure, not fire-prone or on flood-plain, etc). And, of course, the recent surrounding sold comps.

Put to the test, I would venture I could make a acceptable deal on a resale SFR in San Diego County and close with four months of taking the challenge, “banks-taking-it-in-the-shorts” be damned!

I’m not worried at all about “losing equity” in the coming years.

Buying a house for yourself to live in is just not that hard to do, in ANY market (south of 10% mortgage rates).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=DWCAP] . . . But new buyers are also some of the dumbest buyers around. Not always, but often. They get a first promotion, get engaged/married, graduate grad school, get pregnant, whatever; and then decide they need to buy a house. So the go out, look around alittle bit and then try to make the best buy they can. But there is no historical or economic relevance to this decision process, and a tremendous amount of emotional baggage. . . [/quote]

Very good posts, DWCAP. The emphasized sentence just points out the difference between views like FSD’s (who once lived in SD and then moved away) or protorio’s (who grew up in SD) and the views of the OP (who is a relative newcomer to the area).

FSD and protorio can see that there are good buys here now based upon their own past experiences with the local RE market. Both have lived here (albeit modestly) and still enjoyed it and have good memories of it.

A “newcomer” often has expectations of what they were “used to living in” in another county/state as opposed to what they feel they “deserve” to live in now, even if it was their parents paying the bills (at the time of their imprinted housing memory) and not them. IMHO, that’s the “baggage” that you’re referring to here. I’ve never had a buyer-client who was a “newcomer,” but I would surmise they are MUCH more difficult to appease than a native or long-time San Diegan. Because they’re not yet in a place where they’re willing to “trade-off” certain “lifestyle preferences OF THE WAY THINGS SHOULD BE” implanted deep in their brains in order to consummate a successful purchase that they can afford and would be happy with in the long term. As an agent, you could drive them thru or meet them in Talmadge Park, for instance (actually an upscale and convenient location), or nearby El Cerrito and you may hear “Meh…” from them. “Too 50’s, grandma’s house, doesn’t `feel’ right,” blah, blah, blah. Of course, this is a buyers perogative.

As an agent, you could drive a “newcomer” buyer through a major thoroughfare near dtn Chula Vista, and because they only see T-lock (shingle) roofs instead of tile . . . again, “Meh.” They don’t EVEN WANT to see the inside of anything, even though there are several large homes on large lots perfect for their needs in the area. A lifetime Chula Vistan looking for property would be scoping out all available properties, regardless of condition, within two blocks of various relatives’ houses. Both the “newcomer” and the “native” are the same age (30-35).

I came to SD as a young person, but it was so long ago that SD was actually cheaper to live in at the time, in every respect, then where I moved from. And I have been here ever since, so don’t have any pie-in-the-sky aspirations in this regard. In addition, I myself am a product of public schools.

As I stated before, it is generational thing, too. If I had to sell and repurchase again now (assuming I could qualify for financing), I know exactly what and where I would buy and would waste no time placing offers in attempt to make a deal while the getting was good. I have a secondary area in mind if the first area doesn’t pan out for me. I just have never considered all the stuff that a lot of Piggs seem to have “analysis paralysis” over, such as rent multipliers (for an owner-occupied SFR), local unemployment rate, fiscal health of city/county, API scores, etc. And yeah, I have kids . . . all went to public school and all are fine . . . excelling, actually.

Maybe its a stupid notion now but I was always taught that RE is the best investment because it is tangible and you can control it yourself (as opposed to passive investments). As a buyer, the only things that I’ve ever considered were physical and environmental attributes (i.e. zoning, soil subsidence, traffic frontage or noise, lot size and elevation, sound structure, not fire-prone or on flood-plain, etc). And, of course, the recent surrounding sold comps.

Put to the test, I would venture I could make a acceptable deal on a resale SFR in San Diego County and close with four months of taking the challenge, “banks-taking-it-in-the-shorts” be damned!

I’m not worried at all about “losing equity” in the coming years.

Buying a house for yourself to live in is just not that hard to do, in ANY market (south of 10% mortgage rates).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=DWCAP] . . . But new buyers are also some of the dumbest buyers around. Not always, but often. They get a first promotion, get engaged/married, graduate grad school, get pregnant, whatever; and then decide they need to buy a house. So the go out, look around alittle bit and then try to make the best buy they can. But there is no historical or economic relevance to this decision process, and a tremendous amount of emotional baggage. . . [/quote]

Very good posts, DWCAP. The emphasized sentence just points out the difference between views like FSD’s (who once lived in SD and then moved away) or protorio’s (who grew up in SD) and the views of the OP (who is a relative newcomer to the area).

FSD and protorio can see that there are good buys here now based upon their own past experiences with the local RE market. Both have lived here (albeit modestly) and still enjoyed it and have good memories of it.

A “newcomer” often has expectations of what they were “used to living in” in another county/state as opposed to what they feel they “deserve” to live in now, even if it was their parents paying the bills (at the time of their imprinted housing memory) and not them. IMHO, that’s the “baggage” that you’re referring to here. I’ve never had a buyer-client who was a “newcomer,” but I would surmise they are MUCH more difficult to appease than a native or long-time San Diegan. Because they’re not yet in a place where they’re willing to “trade-off” certain “lifestyle preferences OF THE WAY THINGS SHOULD BE” implanted deep in their brains in order to consummate a successful purchase that they can afford and would be happy with in the long term. As an agent, you could drive them thru or meet them in Talmadge Park, for instance (actually an upscale and convenient location), or nearby El Cerrito and you may hear “Meh…” from them. “Too 50’s, grandma’s house, doesn’t `feel’ right,” blah, blah, blah. Of course, this is a buyers perogative.

As an agent, you could drive a “newcomer” buyer through a major thoroughfare near dtn Chula Vista, and because they only see T-lock (shingle) roofs instead of tile . . . again, “Meh.” They don’t EVEN WANT to see the inside of anything, even though there are several large homes on large lots perfect for their needs in the area. A lifetime Chula Vistan looking for property would be scoping out all available properties, regardless of condition, within two blocks of various relatives’ houses. Both the “newcomer” and the “native” are the same age (30-35).

I came to SD as a young person, but it was so long ago that SD was actually cheaper to live in at the time, in every respect, then where I moved from. And I have been here ever since, so don’t have any pie-in-the-sky aspirations in this regard. In addition, I myself am a product of public schools.

As I stated before, it is generational thing, too. If I had to sell and repurchase again now (assuming I could qualify for financing), I know exactly what and where I would buy and would waste no time placing offers in attempt to make a deal while the getting was good. I have a secondary area in mind if the first area doesn’t pan out for me. I just have never considered all the stuff that a lot of Piggs seem to have “analysis paralysis” over, such as rent multipliers (for an owner-occupied SFR), local unemployment rate, fiscal health of city/county, API scores, etc. And yeah, I have kids . . . all went to public school and all are fine . . . excelling, actually.

Maybe its a stupid notion now but I was always taught that RE is the best investment because it is tangible and you can control it yourself (as opposed to passive investments). As a buyer, the only things that I’ve ever considered were physical and environmental attributes (i.e. zoning, soil subsidence, traffic frontage or noise, lot size and elevation, sound structure, not fire-prone or on flood-plain, etc). And, of course, the recent surrounding sold comps.

Put to the test, I would venture I could make a acceptable deal on a resale SFR in San Diego County and close with four months of taking the challenge, “banks-taking-it-in-the-shorts” be damned!

I’m not worried at all about “losing equity” in the coming years.

Buying a house for yourself to live in is just not that hard to do, in ANY market (south of 10% mortgage rates).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=DWCAP] . . . But new buyers are also some of the dumbest buyers around. Not always, but often. They get a first promotion, get engaged/married, graduate grad school, get pregnant, whatever; and then decide they need to buy a house. So the go out, look around alittle bit and then try to make the best buy they can. But there is no historical or economic relevance to this decision process, and a tremendous amount of emotional baggage. . . [/quote]

Very good posts, DWCAP. The emphasized sentence just points out the difference between views like FSD’s (who once lived in SD and then moved away) or protorio’s (who grew up in SD) and the views of the OP (who is a relative newcomer to the area).

FSD and protorio can see that there are good buys here now based upon their own past experiences with the local RE market. Both have lived here (albeit modestly) and still enjoyed it and have good memories of it.

A “newcomer” often has expectations of what they were “used to living in” in another county/state as opposed to what they feel they “deserve” to live in now, even if it was their parents paying the bills (at the time of their imprinted housing memory) and not them. IMHO, that’s the “baggage” that you’re referring to here. I’ve never had a buyer-client who was a “newcomer,” but I would surmise they are MUCH more difficult to appease than a native or long-time San Diegan. Because they’re not yet in a place where they’re willing to “trade-off” certain “lifestyle preferences OF THE WAY THINGS SHOULD BE” implanted deep in their brains in order to consummate a successful purchase that they can afford and would be happy with in the long term. As an agent, you could drive them thru or meet them in Talmadge Park, for instance (actually an upscale and convenient location), or nearby El Cerrito and you may hear “Meh…” from them. “Too 50’s, grandma’s house, doesn’t `feel’ right,” blah, blah, blah. Of course, this is a buyers perogative.

As an agent, you could drive a “newcomer” buyer through a major thoroughfare near dtn Chula Vista, and because they only see T-lock (shingle) roofs instead of tile . . . again, “Meh.” They don’t EVEN WANT to see the inside of anything, even though there are several large homes on large lots perfect for their needs in the area. A lifetime Chula Vistan looking for property would be scoping out all available properties, regardless of condition, within two blocks of various relatives’ houses. Both the “newcomer” and the “native” are the same age (30-35).

I came to SD as a young person, but it was so long ago that SD was actually cheaper to live in at the time, in every respect, then where I moved from. And I have been here ever since, so don’t have any pie-in-the-sky aspirations in this regard. In addition, I myself am a product of public schools.

As I stated before, it is generational thing, too. If I had to sell and repurchase again now (assuming I could qualify for financing), I know exactly what and where I would buy and would waste no time placing offers in attempt to make a deal while the getting was good. I have a secondary area in mind if the first area doesn’t pan out for me. I just have never considered all the stuff that a lot of Piggs seem to have “analysis paralysis” over, such as rent multipliers (for an owner-occupied SFR), local unemployment rate, fiscal health of city/county, API scores, etc. And yeah, I have kids . . . all went to public school and all are fine . . . excelling, actually.

Maybe its a stupid notion now but I was always taught that RE is the best investment because it is tangible and you can control it yourself (as opposed to passive investments). As a buyer, the only things that I’ve ever considered were physical and environmental attributes (i.e. zoning, soil subsidence, traffic frontage or noise, lot size and elevation, sound structure, not fire-prone or on flood-plain, etc). And, of course, the recent surrounding sold comps.

Put to the test, I would venture I could make a acceptable deal on a resale SFR in San Diego County and close with four months of taking the challenge, “banks-taking-it-in-the-shorts” be damned!

I’m not worried at all about “losing equity” in the coming years.

Buying a house for yourself to live in is just not that hard to do, in ANY market (south of 10% mortgage rates).

[Author]

Posts