Menu

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 259 total)
1 2 3 4 5 … 16 17 18
  • Author
    Posts
  • February 4, 2008 at 11:59 AM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #147706
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – interesting to note teh similar drop in inventory at the end of January last year as well. Despite any potential sampling errors in counting short sales, there has only been 3 or 4 weeks when the number os short sales has decreased, regardless of what the total listings have done. The absolute numbers may not be 100% correct, but I think it is safe to say the overall trend at this point is pretty valid (not that most people here needed to be convinced of this).

    [img_assist|nid=6406|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6407|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6408|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]

    February 4, 2008 at 11:59 AM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #147958
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – interesting to note teh similar drop in inventory at the end of January last year as well. Despite any potential sampling errors in counting short sales, there has only been 3 or 4 weeks when the number os short sales has decreased, regardless of what the total listings have done. The absolute numbers may not be 100% correct, but I think it is safe to say the overall trend at this point is pretty valid (not that most people here needed to be convinced of this).

    [img_assist|nid=6406|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6407|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6408|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]

    February 4, 2008 at 11:59 AM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #147980
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – interesting to note teh similar drop in inventory at the end of January last year as well. Despite any potential sampling errors in counting short sales, there has only been 3 or 4 weeks when the number os short sales has decreased, regardless of what the total listings have done. The absolute numbers may not be 100% correct, but I think it is safe to say the overall trend at this point is pretty valid (not that most people here needed to be convinced of this).

    [img_assist|nid=6406|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6407|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6408|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]

    February 4, 2008 at 11:59 AM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #147992
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – interesting to note teh similar drop in inventory at the end of January last year as well. Despite any potential sampling errors in counting short sales, there has only been 3 or 4 weeks when the number os short sales has decreased, regardless of what the total listings have done. The absolute numbers may not be 100% correct, but I think it is safe to say the overall trend at this point is pretty valid (not that most people here needed to be convinced of this).

    [img_assist|nid=6406|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6407|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6408|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]

    February 4, 2008 at 11:59 AM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #148059
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – interesting to note teh similar drop in inventory at the end of January last year as well. Despite any potential sampling errors in counting short sales, there has only been 3 or 4 weeks when the number os short sales has decreased, regardless of what the total listings have done. The absolute numbers may not be 100% correct, but I think it is safe to say the overall trend at this point is pretty valid (not that most people here needed to be convinced of this).

    [img_assist|nid=6406|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6407|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]
    [img_assist|nid=6408|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=280]

    January 28, 2008 at 5:49 PM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #144211
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – short on time – but there is not much new insight to add anyway…

    [img_assist|nid=6333|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6334|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6335|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]

    January 28, 2008 at 5:49 PM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #144449
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – short on time – but there is not much new insight to add anyway…

    [img_assist|nid=6333|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6334|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6335|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]

    January 28, 2008 at 5:49 PM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #144453
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – short on time – but there is not much new insight to add anyway…

    [img_assist|nid=6333|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6334|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6335|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]

    January 28, 2008 at 5:49 PM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #144479
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – short on time – but there is not much new insight to add anyway…

    [img_assist|nid=6333|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6334|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6335|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]

    January 28, 2008 at 5:49 PM in reply to: The Short Sale Monitor #144551
    Artifact
    Participant

    Figures – short on time – but there is not much new insight to add anyway…

    [img_assist|nid=6333|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6334|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]
    [img_assist|nid=6335|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=239]

    January 25, 2008 at 10:32 AM in reply to: San Elijo Hills commute #142772
    Artifact
    Participant

    I live near there, but only drive into Encinitas on normal days. When I do drive south I generally find that only the two main slow areas – 5 south starts backing up at manchester and 5 North at Via de la Valle are bad – both of those are worse at peak commute times, but even when I am travelling at off times those two places are often backed up.

    I think it is fair to assume that it will always be a minimum of 30 minutes and often at least 45 from SEH to UTC.

    January 25, 2008 at 10:32 AM in reply to: San Elijo Hills commute #143002
    Artifact
    Participant

    I live near there, but only drive into Encinitas on normal days. When I do drive south I generally find that only the two main slow areas – 5 south starts backing up at manchester and 5 North at Via de la Valle are bad – both of those are worse at peak commute times, but even when I am travelling at off times those two places are often backed up.

    I think it is fair to assume that it will always be a minimum of 30 minutes and often at least 45 from SEH to UTC.

    January 25, 2008 at 10:32 AM in reply to: San Elijo Hills commute #143009
    Artifact
    Participant

    I live near there, but only drive into Encinitas on normal days. When I do drive south I generally find that only the two main slow areas – 5 south starts backing up at manchester and 5 North at Via de la Valle are bad – both of those are worse at peak commute times, but even when I am travelling at off times those two places are often backed up.

    I think it is fair to assume that it will always be a minimum of 30 minutes and often at least 45 from SEH to UTC.

    January 25, 2008 at 10:32 AM in reply to: San Elijo Hills commute #143036
    Artifact
    Participant

    I live near there, but only drive into Encinitas on normal days. When I do drive south I generally find that only the two main slow areas – 5 south starts backing up at manchester and 5 North at Via de la Valle are bad – both of those are worse at peak commute times, but even when I am travelling at off times those two places are often backed up.

    I think it is fair to assume that it will always be a minimum of 30 minutes and often at least 45 from SEH to UTC.

    January 25, 2008 at 10:32 AM in reply to: San Elijo Hills commute #143101
    Artifact
    Participant

    I live near there, but only drive into Encinitas on normal days. When I do drive south I generally find that only the two main slow areas – 5 south starts backing up at manchester and 5 North at Via de la Valle are bad – both of those are worse at peak commute times, but even when I am travelling at off times those two places are often backed up.

    I think it is fair to assume that it will always be a minimum of 30 minutes and often at least 45 from SEH to UTC.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 259 total)
1 2 3 4 5 … 16 17 18