[an]

[quote=livinincali]AGNC is a high leverage play. If they are right about their investments it should have a decent return, if they’re wrong it’s a zero. It’s at least a 10 to 1 leverage play. They have 51 billion in liabilities, 54 billion in assets and 2 billion in cash. If the value of their assets drops by 10% they are bankrupt.

They also don’t have a long term history of big dividends either. Cash flow in 2009 was 118 million, 2010 was 288 million and 2011 was 770 million. So just 3 years ago the dividend was 1/7th of today’s and their return of investment is around 1%. 770 million cash flow on assets of 54 billion.[/quote]
I agree. Like I said, it’s my RE play first and foremost. Dividend is second. It’s a way to have “rentals” without having to buy physical rental.

[an]

I actually got out of CEL awhile back as a rebalancing strategy. Locking in my 40+% gain and invest in some other stuff. Still have AGNC though. AGNC is my long term RE play. We’ll see how that turns out.

[an]

desmond, I agree. timing is everything. It’s different if you buy it last year vs if you buy it this year. This is also a small fraction of my total portfolio. You have to do your own research. There’s no safe bet in the market.

flu, I didn’t buy AGNC solely for its dividend. I was looking to invest in REIT and AGNC looks the best to me at the time with the combination of appreciation and dividend. Because they’re a REIT, they have to return 9x% back as dividend. So, I’m expecting RE to recover, so AGNC seems like a good idea. But like I said, it’s still a small portion of my total portfolio.

[an]

[quote=desmond]I started watching AGNC from this post. The 14.5% dividend sounded to just to good to be true, it was.[/quote]Why would you say it’s too good to be true? I’ve been in AGNC for over a year and their dividend have been around there thus far. Due to the recent decline, the % actually is higher at 17%. If you compare it to the DOW over the last year, they’re about even. If you compare it over 5 years, it’s well ahead of the DOW.

[an]

[quote=Rhett]s/might be/is probably/

Unless squat is very poor, or unless he kid somehow trips up the holistic admissions procedure, he would not get past the first cut. I do agree that it wouldn’t hurt to try, but it’s a pipe dream.

The average high school GPA of a freshman getting admitted to engineering at UCSD is above 4.[/quote]
Oh, I know. average HS GPA at UCSD engineering has always been well above 4. It was around 4.5 in the 90s. But, you never know. The essay (story) makes a big impact too, especially if you have a compelling story to tell and why you only have 3.4 GPA.

[an]

[quote=squat250]i don’t know if it’s a good idea to reach too far. As he told me when we were discussing the pros and cons of me applying for higher positions, he said, “Pa, the tallest blade of grass always gets cut first.”[/quote]
Did you also look into UCI and UCSD? The GPA might be too low for those two schools, but it never hurt to try. Those are also top notch engineering school with UCSD being in the top 15 in the nation and #1 or #2 in Bio-Engineering (depending on which ranking). Those two schools are also very close to home for you. Maybe make that kind of commute to work.

[an]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=AN]Why did you buy the 4k 4/3 in the first place? Why didn’t you buy a 1600 2/3 instead of the 2k 3/3? Why not a 1200 2/2? You’re right, I’m being silly with the 200 sq-ft studio. It was an exaggeration to try and prove a point that everybody have their desire size and # of bed/bath. To say # of bed/bath and sq-ft doesn’t affect living standard is also just as silly. I don’t want to live in a 5/5 6k sq-ft but I don’t want to live in a 1300 sq-ft 3/1 either.[/quote]

I think the point was, bigger and more bedrooms/bathrooms is not the only measurement of lifestyle quality. Depending on circumstances, smaller is sometimes better.[/quote]
And I never said it was the only measurement. I just get people saying its not a measurement.

[an]

[quote=SK in CV]This was pretty interesting but i think we’ve jumped the shark here.

I went from almost 4K sq ft 4/3 to a 2000 sq ft 3/3 by choice. I could have afforded a lot more. And I came pretty close to buying a 1600 sq ft 2/3, with the same non-bedroom floor space, and would have bought it if the living space flowed better. No landscaping to deal with, no external maint. Some of us old people really do make the choice to downsize.

But that’s a whole lot different than a 200 sq ft studio. We can stay focused without silly extreme arguments.[/quote]
Why did you buy the 4k 4/3 in the first place? Why didn’t you buy a 1600 2/3 instead of the 2k 3/3? Why not a 1200 2/2? You’re right, I’m being silly with the 200 sq-ft studio. It was an exaggeration to try and prove a point that everybody have their desire size and # of bed/bath. To say # of bed/bath and sq-ft doesn’t affect living standard is also just as silly. I don’t want to live in a 5/5 6k sq-ft but I don’t want to live in a 1300 sq-ft 3/1 either.

[an]

[quote=bearishgurl]SM County is obviously not the place for buyers who feel they need ~2000 sf (in “move-in condition,” lol) within their ~$400K price range to raise their family of four in. It’s a free country and there are many other alternatives. There are plenty of other buyers back in SV (yes, even with families), who will eventually pick up all the slack.[/quote]or[quote=bearishgurl] I also feel it is entirely worth it for a young San Diegan college grad to relocate there for work, even one with a family. Most of the public schools there are better than here, as well.[/quote]
Which is it? Or are you saying it’s entirely worth it, if you get rid of all your wants and needs and adopt your wants and needs?

[an]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN] . . . You never going to find anyone that would say, although I can afford a 5/5 apartment in NYC, my living standard would be better in a 3/1 in NYC.[/quote]

Actually, you will. No matter how much money a person has, often a 3/1 (or 3/2 or 2/2) is all they need. A one or two-person household often doesn’t need a lot of space and likely won’t use it. ESPECIALLY a retired person/couple. A person who has had four bathrooms, 35′ long LR’s and pools in the past is TIRED of cleaning and landscaping chores.

LOTS of people have been there, done that and wrote the manual. After one has all the space they can possibly use, more space doesn’t equal any more happiness.[/quote]
So you’re saying, you’re fine living in a 200 sq-ft studio vs a 3/1? BTW, if you have money, you wouldn’t be cleaning and landscaping.

[an]

[quote=spdrun]AN:
Smart people underbuy and live below their means all the time.

Why would you want to burn down all of your equity and put it into a place that’s not producing income?[/quote]
Who said anything about living above their means? You’re saying if you have $100M to spend on a house, you’d still rather have a 3/1 and that 3/1 will give you better standard of living?

[an]

[quote=spdrun]AN: You’re ass-u-ming that the average residence for a family with 2 kids is the same in both cities, and thus are attempting to compare apples to apples. Again: floor space and number of thrones isn’t the be-all-and-end-all of housing quality. A castle in a burbclave and two foreign cars seems to be the San Diego dream, but it’s not everyone’s dream.

Oh, and my cousins grew up in Vienna (the one in Austria). Small 3/1.5 apartment, and they both turned out fine – one works for the UN, the other is a teacher in Japan.[/quote]
I’m not assuming anything. Everyone have their priorities and what they want most for their money. I will never say my priority is right for you. Just don’t expect me to agree that your priority is right for me either. But, it’s true everywhere is that, the more money you have for housing, the bigger the space you want. Even in NYC, the rich’s apartment is much larger than the poor. You never going to find anyone that would say, although I can afford a 5/5 apartment in NYC, my living standard would be better in a 3/1 in NYC.

[an]

[quote=bearishgurl]I have a theory about moving to SF Bay area (for work) from So Cal. If you don’t like it, you can always move back. Meanwhile, you will likely have:

MORE $$ from the sale of your residence there (IF you don’t keep it as a (lucrative) rental;

MORE $$ in your 401K acct (as a percentage of your salary there plus employer match, if any;

Your last position was likely HIGHER (due to being in the right place at the right time), so you got more experience;

And most importantly, your LAST WAGE was HIGHER, so that is NOW the benchmark on what you are worth on your next gig . . . .

Ideally, if you are Gen Y and in high tech, accept a position there as early as possible in your career.

***************************************

Trying this in reverse doesn’t work out nearly as well.[/quote]
Sorry, data would disagree with you.

BTW, you won’t be able to use your wage from the bay to bargain. There’s no way companies here would match that pay.

[an]

[quote=bearishgurl]
AN, I didn’t look at the school scores there but I can’t imagine that they’re that much lower than MM.

btw, I thought you posted somewhere that your kid was going to private school. If they are still attending private school, do you EVER plan on sending them to public school?

If not, why are you so focused on “school scores?”

And btw ~$320K / ~$455K is NOT “50-60%.” It is actually 29.3%. And you never even considered the upside potential of the $455K SM fixer (IF they get that much for it) vs a MM fixer for $320K.[/quote]
There’s no longer any need to discuss about me. Lets focus on the data. You’re wrong about the school. San Mateo’s schools are worse than MM, not better.

Do you need to go back and study basic math again? $455k is 42% HIGHER than $320k. How the heck did you get 29.3% higher?

There’s no point in upside potential, since my crystal ball is broken.
[quote=bearishgurl]If I was a GEN Y with the skills SV firms are currently looking for, I wouldn’t waste a second in moving up there, but that is just me. However, I never had any parents living here to help me with kids.[/quote]Yep, that’s just you. You’re not Gen Y and I am. I disagree which is why I’m here. I’m sure those who agree with you are already there. So, for those who chose here vs there, there are reasons you don’t know about. Anyways, it seems like you’re miserable living in an area you don’t want to, while I’m living in the exact area I want. I had plenty of opportunity to move to the “MECCA” of tech, but the numbers just doesn’t work.

[an]

flu, I would say it’s down the toilet. I would say, it would be like renting your home for $9k over 8 months, which is $1130/month. Seems like a pretty cheap rent for a SFR. Do forget that if you refi, your interest payment will be lower by around $150/month from day one as well. After 2 years, that $3600. So, you save $3600 while “flushing down the toilet” $9k. If you consider $9k as flushing down the toilet, then the other side of that equation is she gets to live there for free over 8 months.

You’re right about what I did and am doing. Rates/rebate are not linear. Example would be, a no cost loan on absolute mortgage is 3.375% but if you bump to 3.5%, you get about $3500 back. So, for $24/month more, you get $3500 up front. If rates drop again in a few months, you can refi again and keep that $3500. If you do it 2-3 times a year, that’s over $7k, which more than enough to pay for your property tax, insurance, and part of the interest you “flushed down the toilet”.

So, my answer to ninaprincess is, it depends on what kind of loans you did. If you did it like me and get credit back, then no, if you do 0 point, then yes. If you do a no cost loan, then it depends on how long you plan to keep the place.

[Author]

Posts