Why Your Home Is Not the Investment You Think It Is

[sdcellar]

Something you guys aren’t considering is that there are starter neighborhoods, move up neighborhoods and destination neighborhoods.

Actually, I am and that’s why I let sdrealtor pick the zip. I knew I’d get something closer to Point Loma than to Clairemont…

There are places where a more significant number of people choose to buy their “dream home” (or home to grow old in as some people put it!), and there are places that are not that.

That said, even a lot of fairly modest zips probably have a decent number loyal homeowners. I know I’ve lived in a few of those.

[sdcellar]

Thanks for the data sdrealtor, this is fun. Turns out the averages for your three examples are 13.2, 13.6, and 10.3. The medians are 13.6, 11, and 9.5.

Certainly higher than your current 8 years, around my max of 10, and kind of in between what I understand the actual average to be and the 20+ figure that you suggest is so common. I’ll admit that with 15 of the 76 at 20 or more years, that’s twice as many my personal estimate of 5 in 50 (20% vs. 10%), but hey, I only have 4 sets of grandparents and my parents like buying houses. What can I say!

I did find it a little curious that you mentioned prior owners when they exceed 5 years, but never when they were less. Come on, there had to be quite a few of those! I understand that your point is that it’s these short timers that throw everything off, but if you’re going to ignore one set of outliers…

But while I’m throwing stones, I also now realize that the street I picked doesn’t seem much more than 20 years old, so that makes it just a *little* bit harder to find owners who have held that long on that street (and the data seems to bear that out).

Anyway, it’s been fun and I agree with you that most people ultimately end up in a house for many years, but it’s usually just one house and it takes several to get there. So while it’s probably safe to say that most people are looking for a home to grow old in, often times, the next one isn’t it.

[sdrealtor]

SDcellar,
I think it was an interesting experiment. The last 5 years were an abberation with lots of people jumping around because of their equity gains and all the excitment. As the market settles down, I think we’ll see people getting back to laying down roots. Now more than ever I believe people stay longer than the 5 to 7 years that gets thrown around.

Lets try it again anywhere. Pick a decent street in any ZIP that people would want to live on and lets see what we find. By decent street, I mean no power lines overhead, houses not backing to a major street etc.

BTW, I provided previous owner data for short timers because there is no way of knowing how long they will stay or weather their bags are already packed for that matter. The interesting thing is that the clock is still ticking and the 10 to 13 year averages on those streets could easily be 15 to 20 years soon. Also, I never siad 20 years was common as I really didnt expect it to be as common as I found. I said some people get to stay 20+ years w/ fixed housing costs which was in reference to my own personal plans. You referneced a 5 to 7 year average which I think we are on our way to debunking.

[sdcellar]

The 5 to 7 year average isn’t mine, just what I’ve heard. It actually shouldn’t even be a range like that, rather just a number (like 6.8 or 14.2). I’d think either the NAR or some government source (or both) would have this number. Heck, there should even be a number for the number of homes people own in their lifetime.

Heck, I’d say the point I’m really trying to make is that people go through several homes before hunkering down. I don’t know a good way to figure that out, so I figured we’d try to back into it with tenure.

I understand about the clock ticking thing, but again, ignoring previous tenures for homes when they’re short is going to skew things as well. It’s really all prior ownership that’s going to give you precise length of ownership numbers (right?). No matter how one does it, the key is to be consistent.

For a new street, let’s follow Bugs lead and try Mt. Elbrus in Clairemont. I don’t know if there are power lines or not, but it looks like it’s near a park, so that’s usually good.

Finally, I agree with you that I think tenures are going to trend upward, but I’d probably refer to it as dropping anchor rather than laying down roots! This will, of course, be skewed by some of these foreclosures we seem to be hearing about, so who knows what where the “average” will go.

[sdrealtor]

SDC,
ARRRGGGGHHH! Your killing me! 48 houses on Mt Elebrus!

FYI, I’ve seen that 5 to 7 yr number thrown about often also.

Another interesting phenomena I see is houses selling multiple times. On my street, if you look at the homes that have resold since they were built about 8 years ago at least half of the ones that aren’t original owners have resold twice!

Thanks for inspiring this thread. I think we are all learning something here. Now lets go to Mount Elebrus. Alot of these homes have been owned a very long time and the tax records that I have quick access to might not reflect accurate sales before the mid 70’s. Thus homes listed beyond 30 yrs of ownership are soemwhere between 30 years and 50 years. Also, alot of these homes have ZERO loans balances with different mailing addresses indicating they are being held as long term investment properties. When people own homes that can cash flow, many choose to hold onto them in SD because they know there is usually avery strong rental market as well as the promise of siginifcant appreciation in the future.

22 yrs
23 yrs
7 yrs
46 yrs
30 yrs
15 yrs
10 yrs
3.5 yrs
24 yrs
28 yrs
2 yrs
11 yrs
8 yrs
47 yrs
18 yrs
7 yrs
17 yrs
9 yrs
2 yrs
25 yrs
15 yrs
6 yrs
39 yrs
47 yrs
1 yr
4 yrs
9 yrs
1 yr
10 yrs
7 yrs
16 yrs
19 yrs

blah, blah blah I’m too tired to go on. I think we see whats going on here in a decidedly starter home area.

[sdcellar]

Sorry sdrealtor! I didn’t really realize there were so many homes on that street.

Anyway, thanks for the feedback and I agree that you’ve done all you can to give us insight and in the end, I really do agree with you that people really just want to settle in to that last home they’ll grow old in.

Factor in people holding onto real estate here because at some point it’s just too cheap not too, and it’s hard characterize any of it generally! (and even worse in the last 5 years or so, right?)

I should close by apologizing that I conveniently forgot that my parents actually do still own the house they bought when we moved to San Diego (in 1978). I was thinking of things in terms of residence rather than ownership. So, see even for me, I know more people who have held real estate for 20+ years than I thought I did.

Again, thanks a lot. I know I really appreciate your insider’s view and your expertise extends well beyond the bubble of the last few years. I’m glad you share it with us.

For myself, I’ve been aware of this stuff for about, oh, 9 months or so. That should give you a good idea of the depth of my knowledge. I definitely think I have a clue, but I know I’ve still got a lot to learn.

[sdrealtor]

sdc,
We all have alot to learn! My favorite thing about RE is that everyday is different and an opportunity to learn something new. I try to contribute as best as I can and to have some fun along the way. Hopefully no one left around here takes my occasional jabs too personally.
SDR

[Bugs]

Sorry, I didn’t mean to mess up your experiment; I just wanted you to consider another variable.

I think if you go up into some areas of Point Loma or Mission Hills or Kensington you’ll see some destination neighborhoods that are older than 20 years. It’s kind of interesting that most of the high dollar neighborhoods farther out have higher turnover rates.

[Author]

Posts