[balasr]

According to Realtor-Jim, at least one of the lower priced sales was the one with the “view”. See:

http://www.bubbleinfo.com/journal/2006/6/28/bressi-boondoogle.html
http://www.bubbleinfo.com/journal/2006/6/29/bressi-boondoogle-part-2.html

[balasr]

Thanks for the comments 4plexowner. So it’s much worse than I thought from the investment point of view. Is the 8-10 times you mention derivable from some assumptions on costs, or is it a general rule of thumb that you have developed from your investing experience?

Thanks!

[balasr]

Bugs,

Thanks for the comment and all the participation in this forum. I personally have benefited from the “free consultations”.

That said, let me suggest an alternative point of view. You say:

“These people are not rock stars and they haven’t agreed to trade their privacy for fame and fortune.”

I don’t see why rock stars or any other stars are entitled to any less privacy. I don’t think Angelina Jolie appreciates 10 photographers tagging behind her when she is buying clothes or something. It is certainly ok if someone *agrees* to some publicity so that it helps their movie. I don’t think that translates into them agreeing to trade all their privacy (all the time) for money. But it’s part of their life and unfortunately they have to deal with it. I would say that homeowners in “rock star” living places like San Diego, will have the same problem. There will be people like me who are fiscally conservative and who want to buy. But if I put 100K down in a 500K loan (a stretch for my 105K salary already), I’ll get a shack. We are looking for supporting analysis on when to buy and I for one appreciate ocrenters analysis. It helps me a lot. People like me are going to be analysing this stuff and reading about it. That’s the bottom-line and there’s going to be a “market” for it just like the “National Enquirer”, although I think we are “better” than the National Enquirer :-).

Re: privacy. It’s not like I published their names or anything. Actually I don’t know anything other than what I wrote in my post and am not bothered to find out either. That’s of no use to me. My motivation is to see if the market is at least turning, and following ocrenters examples in his blog, I have been looking at the Shadowridge area in Vista.

Note that it’s *quite different* for realtors and appraisers. You have access to things like social security numbers, bank account information, salaries, etc., which are sensitive. So you do need to be subject to privacy laws. But publicly available info like selling prices are fair game. In any case, it doesn’t warrant angry outbursts about “armchair analysis” etc. I do admit that my comment about hummers was gratuitous, but my point was merely that there are a number of people who have squandered their equity away. This might bring prices down faster, I don’t know (I certainly hope so).

We can disagree on what to write in a public forum in something other than an in-your-face way. It doesn’t serve any purpose. I respect your point of view, but that’s an opinion and not facts, and we are not going to come to any agreement if our premises on what is “private” are different. I have written above, why I think I haven’t violated anyones privacy.

BTW, I’d be surprised if more than a few hundred people are reading this forum (*). I consider it more as a support group for me than anything else. My point of view is so different from other people regarding house-prices that I need some forum to virtually meet some like-minded people. I don’t see anyones privacy being violated practically, even if house sale prices are assumed to be sensitive information.

(*) with all due repects to Rich of course. It’s a fine web-site and I do think more people need to read the stuff here!

[balasr]

Thanks for the info about the 60,000 purchase price. But, what’s your problem with me speculating about *another* house which is in forclosure, and which was purchased for much less than the current sale price? Is it not fair to assume that he must have tapped his equity since it is in foreclosure?

Many of us are trying to buy homes and using tools to examine areas we are interested in. Is that being nosey? If it is, then so be it.

[balasr]

I think they do. Try “The Great Crash” by Galbraith. He mentions how it is better to be wrong using the “correct methods” than being right using the “wrong” methods. BTW, there was a Harvard society which got everything completely wrong during the 1929 crash and dissolved later. Galbraith talks about this. As Galbraith wryly observes “Economics is very useful – as a source of employment for economists”. I’ll have to agree with Fleckensteins comments forwarded by Powayseller on forecasts by economists.

[balasr]

A little off-topic. But regarding the Bressi-Ranch homes (also in North county), there is an ad in todays tribune. The Wisteria houses are advertised from the high 600s. That doesn’t square with the verbal offer someone got for 620 and with 20-30K off for something or the other. Any ideas why they aren’t advertising the lower price? Or are they offering 620 verbally to people and will suddenly raise it to high 600s at sign on time by putting in some “options” which are unavoidable?

[balasr]

You said in your reply to bugs:

“The real decline in these homes based upon builder concessions looks to be about $70,000 which is a roughly 10% discount. Additional financing concessions and free upgrades could push this up higher and its not out of the question for the discount to be closer to $100,000.”

So are you contesting your own statement now?

I just see rampant speculation in your posts. Plus unwarranted insults to Powayseller. Bugs, it seems has actually appraised homes out at Bressi Ranch and he says that even with additions, prices have slipped by around 70K and you agreed originally.

I asked you a straight question. You claim to be a real estate bear. Do you say so to your clients or give them spiel about coastal property, will apppreciate 6% every year, etc., which I have heard from every single realtor I talked to? Forget about forecasts from you or Forbes. Do you feel that it’s your duty to warn that prices may slip by 10% (optimistic case) over the next five years, especially you being a “real-estate bear”? Well, it may not start this year or next, but you being a “bear” must be sure that it’ll slip sometime?

[balasr]

I agree that 25% is not 13%, and that 13% seems to be the number right now. But it does seem to me that you are trying hard to make it sound that prices are not going down much. For example, you first expressed doubts that any house there sold for 875K.

Just curious, do you tell your clients that you are a real estate bear and that prices could go down by 10-20% (very optimistic scenario) over the next few years and that their equity could get wiped out?

[balasr]

I don’t think he is lying, but I do think the phrase “won’t go down” has to be qualified. Even if someone had bought in the 1989 peak, he wouldn’t have lost “real” (accounting for inflation) money if he sold it in 2002 or 2003. But can everyone afford to wait? The answer is no. Any asset price *has* to go up and down, over the short term. Otherwise the price increase would be arbitraged away. That would then be a contradiction of the premise that the price will always increase. Yes you should be able to do the arbitrage for real-estate too, if price increases were a given.

I don’t see why residents in Poway are immune to divorce, lay-offs, etc., which would drive prices down in other areas during “bust” times.

[Author]

Posts