[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN]BG, no, lot size is not indicative of value. Location is indicative of value. You can increase your lot size, but you can’t change the zip code or the latitude and longitude of your lot. That’s why the RE mantra is, location location location. Not lot size, lot size, lot size. If this is true:
[quote=BG] In coastal CA counties, a larger lot usually means the property is worth more.[/quote]Then those houses in Ramona with 1/2+ lot would cost more than your cracker box, 0 lot line, detached condo in Carmel Valley. To take this to an extreme, tell me, how big is the lot of this house: http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-120003963-2430_Oceanfront_Ave_Del_Mar_CA_92014? Do you think most houses on many acre (even in RSF) would be more expensive than this one?[/quote]

Of course it’s location first and then lot size (within a location). Clairemont wins both contests over MM (no offense intended).

[quote=AN]I didn’t say 1/1 in MM. Based on the prices from the 70s and 80s, most of the mortgage(if not refied to take cash out) would be around $300-700/month. That’s probably cheaper than most 1/1 anywhere in San Diego County. So, I’d say, a 60 year old with a free and clear house or a 50 year old with 10 year left on their mortgage of about $550 would be more stable than those in their 80s with failing health. Try making repair when you’re on fixed income and your health start failing. Maintain your house would probably be pretty low on your priority list.[/quote]

$300 to $700 in the 70’s was PITI. Remember that if they bought in or before April 1978 and still own the property, their taxes are held down by Prop 13. And 20-year mortgages were prevalent prior to the late 50’s.

Actually, many, many of this age group are NOT on a “fixed income.” They have investment income. Even if they are in so-so or failing health, they STILL have home healthcare workers and people to come over and do landscaping, cleaning and other errands (whether paid or family members).

AN, you bring up an interesting topic, here. I think it would be very time-consuming to cull the public records for this info, but I’ve often wondered which zip codes in the county have the most free and clear homeowners. I know the current 70-90+ age group who still own properties they bought 50-70 years ago have likely never taken “cash out” of it. How do I know it? Because their properties were likely paid off by the 70’s (at the latest) and “cash-out” was virtually unheard of back then unless it was an FHA 203k (purchase/rehab) mortgage. This would have given them a very large portion of their monthly income since that payoff decades ago to live mortgage-free and save for retirement. This would be true unless they found it necessary at some point to take out a reverse mortgage.

I have no proof but believe (anecdotally) that the majority of “cash out” was taken by owners who have purchased their property since 1990, the vast majority since about 2003.

Thus, it would lead one to believe that the older the area is, the more free-and-clear owners it has. So even though this “older area,” at first blush may look “modest” by today’s “mcmansion” standards, most of the residents there likely have a higher net worth than those in newer “mcmansion” tracts.

[quote=AN]BTW, how can you own a house for 50-55 years if you’re only 73? Are you suggesting people who bought in the best area of CM bought when they’re 18-23 years old? I’m not that old, but maybe you’d know something I don’t.[/quote]

In short, yes. It was commonplace at that time to get married, buy a house and start a family all before the age of 22-23. The models on the Mt Streets of Clairemont cost approx $11K to $18K new in 1961-ish, depending on lot size, location and square footage and most originally sold VA/FHA.

[quote]There’s no apple to apple comparison between CM and MM. So, you’re trying to compare something that’s not comparable. Now, if you want to compare the whole area, then if you’re going to pick the best of CM, then it would make sense to compare with the best of MM.[/quote]

AN, even the “best of MM” doesn’t compare with the “best of Clairemont” (92111) due to lot size, topography, setback, very mature landscaping, proximity to ocean/bay, weather … many factors.

It is what it is.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flu]Happens all the time to me. Actually sometimes folks don’t even remember my name…[/quote]

I have a pretty good memory but it’s kinda hard for most Piggs to remember it when you keep changing it :=D

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]The comment was specifically directed to someone who has admitted being at or close to underwater on her home and limited retirement assets. The same person expects to buy properties with an equity partner providing the cash and to have ownership in them? There are two words for that, Realtor and property manager not owner.[/quote]

Oh, brother! There’s some really bad comprehension going on here. Probably due to way too much regular imbibing of a good thing, lol.

I have NEVER been close to being “underwater” on my home nor have I ever complained here about that. I have instead stated that I would not sell unless I could recover out of the net proceeds all my downpayment ($105K) plus a good portion of the substantial improvements on it that I have already made and will continue to make before I sell (IF) I sell it. That would be after 13+ years of ownership. This seems reasonable and maybe it will be possible at that time.

Yes, my “pensions” are definitely “limited.” However, I am not yet eligible to withdraw from of other retirement accounts. When I become eligible is when I will have access to cash but not a day sooner. If I find good potential SFR rentals in the future whose owners are might be receptive to offers, I am considering generating more income for myself by contributing half the purchase price and buying the materials needed for rehab. The “equity partner” (who also could use a retirement supplement) would contribute half the purchase money, do the majority of the rehab and repairs to ready it for tenants and I will do whatever repairs, cleanup and haul-away that I am able to. (I can’t use heavy power tools due to carpal tunnel issues.) Then I’ll vet the tenants and place them there, execute the leases and collect rents, sending “equity partner” a check every month. And no, I won’t be charging a “mgmt fee” for a property that is half mine. The type of house(s) we would buy would likely generate $1500 – $1800 per month rent (unless rents go thru the roof by then).

As usual, you assume too much when you really have no idea what someone’s resources are.

[quote=sdrealtor]My mother has living frugally down to science. 10 years ago she saw an ad for a course at Mira Costa College on how to live frugally. She called up to ask if she could get a senior discount (as a joke-she has a great sense of humor). They asked her if she wanted to be a guest lecturer.[/quote]

sdr, you’ve told all of us this story at least five times on here. That is HER generation. It’s not unusual. Most all of them are like your mom. They have a vivid recollection of what the great depression did to their families. My Lexus-driving 90+ yr old neighbors (Ellis Island arrivals as very young children) have rabbit ears on their TV set and raised two kids in a <1200 sf house in which they still reside. They also have a gardener and other handymen visit regularly :-]

and btw: I don't buy 7-day old bread and neither does anybody else. The policy of the 3 major grocery chains (Vons, Ralph's and Albertsons) is that on the morning of third day their bread (and other perishables that need to be prepared that day) gets picked up by St. Vincent de Paul and Father Joe's kitchens (to feed the homeless). The "day old" bread sold on the second day as well as yesterday's bakery items are what goes into the store clearance section for less than half price or shipped out to Grocery Outlet (along with other surplus). I can't always find whole wheat in this selection so I can't always buy "day old" bread (in actuality "2 days old").

Just some "food for thought" for you "bargain hunters" out there ...

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN]BG, I never claimed MM have big lot. So, I’m not sure why you’re bringing up lot size.[/quote]

I didn’t say you did AN, but lot size is indicative of value. In coastal CA counties, a larger lot usually means the property is worth more. RE is actually LAND. What is built on that land is secondary.

[quote=AN]How is it any different, wrt to the “stable” home owners, when they either own their house for 50+ years and are nearing their death bed and those who either own their home out right for 30+ years to those who are 20 years into their 30 years loan? If anything, those 50+ years owners area might be more likely to have a flood of property hitting the market due to their owner dying vs an area where the owners are just starting to enter retirement. Regardless. Both areas have plenty of owners who are or soon to be retiring who have no plan on moving. Sounds pretty stable to me. I would say an area with owners starting to enter retirement are more stable than those area where its owners are nearing their death beds.[/quote]

AN, the vast majority of original owners still living in their Clairemont properties aren’t “on their deathbeds.” They are in their early to mid-seventies. You stated “mature” owners in MM have monthly mortgage payments which are “cheaper than a 1/1 apartment.” What does a 1 br apt rent for in MM, AN? About $1200 mo perhaps? Could it be that the “mature” owner base in MM is about my age?? My PI is currently <$1200 for a 2200 sf house on a larger-than-std lot! WHO is more "stable?" A <59.5 yo with +/- $1200 mo mortgage payments with 10-15 years left to pay on it who is ineligible to collect SS or their retirement funds OR a 73 yo with a free-and-clear personal residence, monthly SS coming in, Medicare coverage and unfettered access to all their retirement funds?? AN, are you aware of how fast a 50-65 year old can go through their liquid assets if they lose steady employment and health coverage and still have any mortgage at all to pay? What do you think happens to their "budget" when their UI runs out and they STILL can't get hired anywhere and can't touch their retirement funds without a large penalty? Which of these subsets of longtime owners do you think can better afford to make necessary repairs on their homes (fence, roof, painting, etc) which would be visible from the street and thus affect neighboring property values? [quote=AN]You do you the South East corner of MM is the worse part of MM, right? For you to compare the worse part of MM to a better part of CM? hmm... that's a good comparison.[/quote] Both the east side of MM and Clairemont areas are "older." Why would I compare 1990's "stucco box" construction with tile roofs with properties in 50-55 yo Clairemont (92111)? I was trying to keep it an "apples to apples" comparison of the housing stock as much as possible. It IS a good comparison and Clairemont 92111 wins on all counts, IMHO. [quote=AN]Yet, you ended saying it doesn't make one area better or worse than another?[/quote] Better or worse for WHO? That is the $64M question. By far, it is the percentage of free and clear owners who determine the level of “stability” of a micro-area. Why?? Because these owners can NEVER be distressed. The worst that can happen to them is they will qualify for and obtain “senior discounts” on utilities and could get flagged for a tax sale by the assessor if they miss 10 installments and a full five years has elapsed since their last tax installment was paid (very unlikely for longtime owners protected by “Prop 13”). If they are dumb enough to take out a (very expensive) reverse mortgage and there is no knowledgeable family member or friend available to talk them out of it, the “equity stripping” and subsequent resale of their property by the reverse mortgage-lender would not happen until after their death. This could not really be considered to be a “distress sale,” per se, but this kind of sale on a modest MM or Clairemont property would likely leave little to no equity for heirs (if any) to divide.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN]Thanks for the laugh BG. Better location is debatable, but to say it’s worth more because of its “stable” resident, didn’t you read the MM thread you just linked to that say there’s virtually nothing for sale in an area that have over 70k people living in it? Most people who live in MM bought their house for well under $200k 20+ years ago with mortgage payment that’s cheaper than a 1/1 apartment. Which is why they’re not selling and many probably don’t intend to sell. How’s that any different than CM? When’s the last time you’ve been to MM and CM?[/quote]

AN, buying a property in MM +/- 20 years ago in MM is NOT the same thing as buying a property 50+ years ago in Clairemont and having it long paid off. Not only are these two vastly different equity positions (considering the difference in value between the areas), they are two different generations of original owners. MM was but a pipe dream when Clairemont was originally built.

FWIW, I’ve been to BOTH areas in the last few months. I stand by my assertion that MM has been congested from DAY ONE but it is doubly so now. I have nothing against you or your hometown, AN. But MM is too crowded to live in for a lot of people. Clairemont 92111 and even parts of 92117 are more like western Chula Vista (91910/91911) in that there are many more generous lots there (than the 5000 sf std) and a preponderance of SFR’s over condos and apartments. I’m speaking here of the eastern and southern (original) parts of MM and have not been to the *newest* tracts on the west side so have not seen the setbacks and parking situation there for myself. Obviously, many of these “elevation listing photos” shown online were taken while the agent was lying on his/her stomach across the street (to “improve” the look of the listing’s “setback”), lol. Maybe you can fill us in on this, AN.

I visited the “Porcelain Collection” model homes with a friend (can’t remember the builder) around ’90 or ’91 when the first phase was completed. It was dusk and we could still see balloons bobbing in the air to the northeast. Even though only about 1-2 streets were completed at the time, I had the impression even back then that the homes were too close together and most of the driveways were shorter in comparison to what I was used to in South County. What is now the PQ reserve was not developed then and Mercy Road did not go through it. I’m sure the later development of the reserve boosted the property values in these tracts.

As you know, there are a lot of jobs in SV and MM, north and south of Miramar Rd and in the Golden Triangle. For these reasons, it is a convenient area to live in for a worker who works in these areas and wants to avoid the freeway in the daily commute. That’s why a current buyer will get less home for their money in MM than say, western Chula Vista. Historically (before SV really took off), western Chula Vista (91910) was more expensive than MM. In general, the lots in 91910 are bigger and the houses are better-built than in Mira Mesa. 91910 used to be considered “better located” than MM as well and it certainly is more convenient to dtn SD. When SV took off and SD was considered to have “arrived” on the “high-tech map,” MM slowly gained value over areas which were not close to thousands of white-collar jobs. Things change over time. That doesn’t make one area better or worse than another. “Retirees” could care less if they live near jobs. A peaceful and tidy neighborhood and access to great medical care nearby is more important to them than living two streets away from the latest “office park.” So housing choices and preferences depend on one’s station in life and financial resources. Notice that no one here is stating that UC, LJ or DM’s RE market is currently “on fire.” MM is presumably “on fire” because of its proximity to high tech jobs and affordability to workers just starting out. That’s the bottom line.

In young-family and entry-level areas (such as MM) of coastal CA counties, RE values are highly-dependent on nearby well-paying jobs. In “retiree” (WCV or Clairemont) or “wealthy” (LJ) areas, not so much.

Who knows? Perhaps Otay Mesa will later be developed into a mecca of office parks and attract companies with thousands more white-collar jobs to SD County. Then, all the “millenium boom” entry-level tracts down there with values currently in the toilet due to massive distress will suddenly JUMP in value because all the *new* worker bees will then consider these tracts “affordable” and convenient!

[bearishgurl]

92111 Clairemont is a better location overall than MM (discussed on other recent threads), IMHO. In addition, the one-story houses on the “Mtn Sts” tend to be a little larger than one-story houses in MM and the many canyon-rim lots they are situated on certainly are bigger than the average MM lot. Quieter with less traffic and less parked vehicles on the side streets, more mature landscaping and an older, “stable” resident base make this area worth more than MM, IMO. I could certainly understand why there are not many current SFR listings there with asking prices <=$500K. There is a lot of equity in Clairemont but it is tied up in properties whose owners are endeavoring to live out the balance of their remaining lives peacefully :=] sdduuuude, I'm wondering why it is you have stated you want to move (to CV?) if Clairemont is your "hometown." Do I have this correct?? Why not try to score a canyon rim property in the coming months (if you don't already own one) and call it a day? If you already own there and can't get the price you want from your current home, consider renting it out. As you're probably aware, there is a great demand for rental homes in Clairemont. The grass is not always "greener" somewhere else. As flu stated a few moments ago, sometimes it is brown ... or "neon green," lol .... http://piggington.com/mira_mesa_on_fireprices_have_started_increasing

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flu][quote=bearishgurl]

Yes, I also believe that submarkets can change on a dime. They can also fall in popularity on a dime. That dime is only as shiny as the nearby job market is stable and lucrative.

MM is only “semi-hot” today because of nearby well-paying jobs. There are really no other “redeeming qualities” in MM construction over and above other SD County submarkets. If companies close to MM should relocate or decide to import H1B workers instead, MM will fall in value commensurate.[/quote]

1. Explain how an import of H1B workers will cause MM to fall?

2. Since when does any of the latest properties sell based on “redeeming qualities” in the construction these days?

3. If you predict a big doom and gloom like the major employers changing in SD…At that point…Mira Mesa is the last place you have to worry about…Or for that matter coastal areas….Everyone in SD gets hit..So in that scenario (which is unlikely), it’s suck for everyone….Including your hood.[/quote]

flu, my ‘hood is full of “retirees.” Only a small percentage of residents are “working families.” So it wouldn’t matter that much if local jobs left. I am +/- one mile from SD Bay and get those breezes.

That aside, I don’t necessarily predict “doom and gloom” for MM. But we ALL have witnessed the rise, fall and rise again of SM and SC Counties in (No Cal’s) “Silicon Valley.” It is what it is. Right now, RE in this vast area is HOT!! It encompasses roughly 45 miles north to south in comparison to SD County’s SV of 2.5 miles by 1.5 miles.

I don’t need to tell you all this, flu. You were THERE!

In the late summer of 2000, my spouse at the time was considering taking a job in Palo Alto and I was seeing asking prices of 2200-2500 sf 2-story houses in Sunnyvale of $450K to $500K on realtor.com. Just try to find that today, flu! The current asking prices for these SAME homes are TWICE as much and some are still dated inside, lol.

WRT H1B workers, they still have to have somewhere nearby their jobs to live, whether renting or owning. I should have stated “more offshoring of well-paying jobs.” This is always a looming possibility that takes jobs away from Americans.

The “high-tech industry,” historically, has been volatile and cyclical.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN][quote=bearishgurl]Yes, I also believe that submarkets can change on a dime. They can also fall in popularity on a dime. That dime is only as shiny as the nearby job market is stable and lucrative.[/quote]
Talking about jobs, Mira Mesa’s biggest employers are hiring like mad.

[quote=bearishgurl]MM is only “semi-hot” today because of nearby well-paying jobs. There are really no other “redeeming qualities” in MM construction over and above other SD County submarkets. If companies close to MM should relocate or decide to import H1B workers instead, MM will fall in value commensurate.[/quote]
That’s the funniest thing I’ve heard in awhile. This statement alone showed how little you know about the area.[/quote]

You said it, AN. TODAY, they are “hiring like mad.” What about tomorrow??

MM market is “semi-HOT” right now because it is “affordable” and employees who are just starting out (working in 92121) can AFFORD to buy there (as opposed to UC, DM, SV and LJ). Truly, I’m not trying to “condemn” MM! I have nothing against it. It is in an excellent location for SV workers.

What if any of those medium-sized or large firms decide to move to the state of SD .. or LA? It’s been “done” before, you know.

http://www.louisianaeconomicdevelopment.com/led-news/news-releases/high-tech-company%27s-dallas-and-san-diego-operations-relocate-to-baton-rouge.aspx

All I’m saying here is that the typical construction and interior location of MM is not necessarily “desirable” to the masses but for its easy access to well-paying jobs. You must agree that it is 100% ALL on tract! Really, I have no problem with the area … in general … except it tends to be hot in the middle of the business day … but so do many other areas of SD County. In addition, there are other areas of the county that suffer from the same construction defects as MM.

I KNOW that MM is your “hometown,” AN. You are fortunate in that MM is/was a good place to grow up. There’s really nothing wrong with it. I’m simply stating here to “caveat emptor” (as a buyer). This applies to many communities in SD (other than MM).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]If you haven’t bid on, won and closed on a house in the last 30 to 60 days you are operating on yesterday’s news. It was what it was. It ain’t anymore. It is what it is.

How is that for a gaggle of cliches?[/quote]

Yes, I also believe that submarkets can change on a dime. They can also fall in popularity on a dime. That dime is only as shiny as the nearby job market is stable and lucrative.

MM is only “semi-hot” today because of nearby well-paying jobs. There are really no other “redeeming qualities” in MM construction over and above other SD County submarkets. If companies close to MM should relocate or decide to import H1B workers instead, MM will fall in value commensurate.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flu][quote=bearishgurl]Actually, flu, if you’re referring to me here, I’m truly happy for you that you were able to recently obtain a condo in MM for cash and put it into rental service as fast as you did! I sincerely hope everything goes well with your *new* rental and you are able to retain timely-paying tenants for the life of your “ownership.”

Again, congrats to you!![/quote]

I don’t care about that one. But trying to pick up a 2nd or 3rd at this point with similar scenario is pretty hard to do these days. That’s my measure of why I think it’s hot. It’s not that simple as just going their writing a full price offer, and getting the numbers to work. The numbers are getting out of wack…..[/quote]

The only solution I can recommend to you is, cull the public records and knock on doors (these may or may not be the SAME doors as the property you want to buy). Who knows! You might run into an “owner” who is not averse to consummating a “cash sale” with you … sans RE commission.

You have nothing to lose but the time it takes to do this, flu :=}

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flu][quote=bearishgurl]AN, one need only examine the old downtown courthouse basement records on microfilm to see where all the construction defects were in SD County. Until you do this for yourself, you are talking out of your ear.

As far as the accoustical ceiling, I have personally helped friends remove it on problematic ceilings in MM in houses that did not have enough walls, IMHO. Granted, this was quite some time ago and many more owners may have removed it by now.

btw, MM is not the only area that suffers from heavy acoustical ceiling and “dated” stair rails. There are many other areas where these “appointments” were the norm in ’70’s and ’80’s building. But MM is the only area in SD County where I have seen no walls between the kitchen/LR/FR with only a change in floor covering.[/quote]

Ok, BG… Since you brought this up. Let’s discuss this… What are the construction defects?[/quote]

I’d have to go back thru my paper records in a currently-locked file cabinet but can tell you at this time that some early MM tracts (SFR’s) suffered from PBT plumbing (now outlawed) and slab leaks.

[bearishgurl]

Actually, flu, if you’re referring to me here, I’m truly happy for you that you were able to recently obtain a condo in MM for cash and put it into rental service as fast as you did! I sincerely hope everything goes well with your *new* rental and you are able to retain timely-paying tenants for the life of your “ownership.”

Again, congrats to you!!

[bearishgurl]

AN, one need only examine the old downtown courthouse basement records on microfilm to see where all the construction defects were in SD County. Until you do this for yourself, you are talking out of your ear.

As far as the accoustical ceiling, I have personally helped friends remove it on problematic ceilings in MM in houses that did not have enough walls, IMHO. Granted, this was quite some time ago and many more owners may have removed it by now.

btw, MM is not the only area that suffers from heavy acoustical ceiling and “dated” stair rails. There are many other areas where these “appointments” were the norm in ’70’s and ’80’s building. But MM is the only area in SD County where I have seen no walls between the kitchen/LR/FR with only a change in floor covering.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN][quote=no_such_reality][quote=SK in CV]Why on earth would you not consider net present value. Is $50K 30 years from now the same as $50K today?[/quote]

Yes, when you have a cola index. 🙂

It’s worth less if it isn’t, hence, NPV.

Luckily we have the gub’ment workers and their union to protect us ig’nant masses from ourselves.[/quote]
Exactly. However, even with NPV, it’s still a lot of money. Hence, I gave a range. It still doesn’t change the main point. How many people, single, making ~$80k have ~$1.5M (assuming NPV) saved up in 401k (not counting saving accounts and brokerage accounts) by age 55ish?[/quote]

AN, I think you would be surprised … I know a few who have +/- $3M in retirement accounts. You might be SHOCKED to learn that they live in an older home they own in central SD, south or east county. I can assure you that they didn’t get this way by attempting to “keep up with the Joneses” throughout life. :=0

[bearishgurl]

[quote=squat250]…I think there are huge numbers of people out there who’d gladly give up the degree and any benefit or priviliege appertaining thereto to discharge the debt. I mean jeez if someone’s willing to admit they just wasted three or four years of their life, why not cut em some slack?

Eliminating govt guarantee of student loans is really a separate issue.[/quote]

scaredy, they CAN’T simply “give up” the degree. They EARNED it and the education they received is in their minds! We can’t now take this away from the person for the same reason that we can’t take away the past service of a (now “retired”) govm’t bureaucrat. They ALREADY EARNED their degrees/pensions! You can’t fix this now. It is in their MINDS. The rest of us DIDN’T have to go thru what it took to EARN that degree or pension.

You are correct in that eliminating “Sallie Mae” is a separate issue.

[Author]

Posts