Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 2, 2007 at 11:56 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107943December 2, 2007 at 11:56 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107951
Eugene
ParticipantHow much is quite?
December 2, 2007 at 11:56 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107965ParticipantHow much is quite?
December 2, 2007 at 11:23 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107781Participantjust check out ziprealty, communities like Evergreen, silihoutte are all about the same price range, including the upgrades, incentives and also commission rebate none of which was available in 2001.
http://www.4sranch.com/home_search.aspx
Evergreen is $240-250/sf, no word about any incentives. Silhouette has one floor plan that starts at $220/sf.
Neither one existed in 2001 so it’s hard to make a direct comparison, but here’s a 5br in the general area that sold for $133/sf in 2002
December 2, 2007 at 11:23 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107881Participantjust check out ziprealty, communities like Evergreen, silihoutte are all about the same price range, including the upgrades, incentives and also commission rebate none of which was available in 2001.
http://www.4sranch.com/home_search.aspx
Evergreen is $240-250/sf, no word about any incentives. Silhouette has one floor plan that starts at $220/sf.
Neither one existed in 2001 so it’s hard to make a direct comparison, but here’s a 5br in the general area that sold for $133/sf in 2002
December 2, 2007 at 11:23 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107913Participantjust check out ziprealty, communities like Evergreen, silihoutte are all about the same price range, including the upgrades, incentives and also commission rebate none of which was available in 2001.
http://www.4sranch.com/home_search.aspx
Evergreen is $240-250/sf, no word about any incentives. Silhouette has one floor plan that starts at $220/sf.
Neither one existed in 2001 so it’s hard to make a direct comparison, but here’s a 5br in the general area that sold for $133/sf in 2002
December 2, 2007 at 11:23 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107921Participantjust check out ziprealty, communities like Evergreen, silihoutte are all about the same price range, including the upgrades, incentives and also commission rebate none of which was available in 2001.
http://www.4sranch.com/home_search.aspx
Evergreen is $240-250/sf, no word about any incentives. Silhouette has one floor plan that starts at $220/sf.
Neither one existed in 2001 so it’s hard to make a direct comparison, but here’s a 5br in the general area that sold for $133/sf in 2002
December 2, 2007 at 11:23 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107935Participantjust check out ziprealty, communities like Evergreen, silihoutte are all about the same price range, including the upgrades, incentives and also commission rebate none of which was available in 2001.
http://www.4sranch.com/home_search.aspx
Evergreen is $240-250/sf, no word about any incentives. Silhouette has one floor plan that starts at $220/sf.
Neither one existed in 2001 so it’s hard to make a direct comparison, but here’s a 5br in the general area that sold for $133/sf in 2002
December 2, 2007 at 10:51 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107755ParticipantMany houses, especially new houses (size 3000+ sqft) in Northern Inland are about $220 per square feet while many houses sold in 2001 in the same communities were about $170 per square feet.
In 4S Ranch and the such, $220 per square foot is an exception rather than the rule. Even those sold much cheaper than 170 per sq.ft. in 2001.
These are some of the cheapest (in terms of ppsf) relatively new homes for sale in North County.
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-0FE9FC83-10707_El_Caballo_Ave_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $145/sf in 2001, asking $232/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-594D70C1-10212_Lone_Dove_St_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $174/sf in 2003, asking $242/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9613223B-15011_Palomino_Mesa_Rd_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $160/sf in 2003, asking $234/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-071055333-7056_Santa_Fe_Canyon_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $258/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9E235A33-7024_Chapala_Canyon_Ct_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $233/sfI might consider paying 25% over 2001 price for such a house, but unfortunately we’re not there yet.
December 2, 2007 at 10:51 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107856ParticipantMany houses, especially new houses (size 3000+ sqft) in Northern Inland are about $220 per square feet while many houses sold in 2001 in the same communities were about $170 per square feet.
In 4S Ranch and the such, $220 per square foot is an exception rather than the rule. Even those sold much cheaper than 170 per sq.ft. in 2001.
These are some of the cheapest (in terms of ppsf) relatively new homes for sale in North County.
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-0FE9FC83-10707_El_Caballo_Ave_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $145/sf in 2001, asking $232/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-594D70C1-10212_Lone_Dove_St_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $174/sf in 2003, asking $242/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9613223B-15011_Palomino_Mesa_Rd_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $160/sf in 2003, asking $234/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-071055333-7056_Santa_Fe_Canyon_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $258/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9E235A33-7024_Chapala_Canyon_Ct_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $233/sfI might consider paying 25% over 2001 price for such a house, but unfortunately we’re not there yet.
December 2, 2007 at 10:51 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107888ParticipantMany houses, especially new houses (size 3000+ sqft) in Northern Inland are about $220 per square feet while many houses sold in 2001 in the same communities were about $170 per square feet.
In 4S Ranch and the such, $220 per square foot is an exception rather than the rule. Even those sold much cheaper than 170 per sq.ft. in 2001.
These are some of the cheapest (in terms of ppsf) relatively new homes for sale in North County.
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-0FE9FC83-10707_El_Caballo_Ave_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $145/sf in 2001, asking $232/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-594D70C1-10212_Lone_Dove_St_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $174/sf in 2003, asking $242/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9613223B-15011_Palomino_Mesa_Rd_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $160/sf in 2003, asking $234/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-071055333-7056_Santa_Fe_Canyon_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $258/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9E235A33-7024_Chapala_Canyon_Ct_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $233/sfI might consider paying 25% over 2001 price for such a house, but unfortunately we’re not there yet.
December 2, 2007 at 10:51 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107897ParticipantMany houses, especially new houses (size 3000+ sqft) in Northern Inland are about $220 per square feet while many houses sold in 2001 in the same communities were about $170 per square feet.
In 4S Ranch and the such, $220 per square foot is an exception rather than the rule. Even those sold much cheaper than 170 per sq.ft. in 2001.
These are some of the cheapest (in terms of ppsf) relatively new homes for sale in North County.
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-0FE9FC83-10707_El_Caballo_Ave_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $145/sf in 2001, asking $232/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-594D70C1-10212_Lone_Dove_St_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $174/sf in 2003, asking $242/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9613223B-15011_Palomino_Mesa_Rd_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $160/sf in 2003, asking $234/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-071055333-7056_Santa_Fe_Canyon_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $258/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9E235A33-7024_Chapala_Canyon_Ct_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $233/sfI might consider paying 25% over 2001 price for such a house, but unfortunately we’re not there yet.
December 2, 2007 at 10:51 PM in reply to: housing already in 2001 prices considering inflation, how low can it go? and why? #107910ParticipantMany houses, especially new houses (size 3000+ sqft) in Northern Inland are about $220 per square feet while many houses sold in 2001 in the same communities were about $170 per square feet.
In 4S Ranch and the such, $220 per square foot is an exception rather than the rule. Even those sold much cheaper than 170 per sq.ft. in 2001.
These are some of the cheapest (in terms of ppsf) relatively new homes for sale in North County.
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-0FE9FC83-10707_El_Caballo_Ave_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $145/sf in 2001, asking $232/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-594D70C1-10212_Lone_Dove_St_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $174/sf in 2003, asking $242/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9613223B-15011_Palomino_Mesa_Rd_San_Diego_CA_92127
Sold for $160/sf in 2003, asking $234/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-071055333-7056_Santa_Fe_Canyon_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $258/sf
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-9E235A33-7024_Chapala_Canyon_Ct_San_Diego_CA_92129
Sold for $157/sf in 2002, asking $233/sfI might consider paying 25% over 2001 price for such a house, but unfortunately we’re not there yet.
ParticipantDoes that mean the homes are worth 11-27% of what they were when the mortgages were written
I think it’s much more complicated than that.
Basically here’s the situation (as far as I understand it)
Suppose that some company offers you a bond that pays 1000 dollars a year in interest for 10 years. What’s that bond worth?
If it has zero probability of default (e.g. it’s a government bond), the value of that bond is $1000 divided by 10-year treasury rate, give or take. Let’s say it’s 25k.
If some respectable credit agency tells you that the bond is AAA-rated, you might be willing to pay 20k for it.
The company takes your 20k and gives a subprime loan with 10% interest rate to someone. At 10% rate, it’s only necessary to loan 10k to generate enough revenue to pay you back. As long as home prices are rising, default rates are low, the company can spend the remaining 10k whichever way it wants (e.g. pay big dividends or do a stock buyback).
Subprime crisis hits, and now it suddenly turns out that the bond is not really AAA. (And you don’t really know what it is, because the market for those bonds is frozen solid) You do know that only 10k out of your 20k was really spent on the actual house. Besides, home prices are declining and the company will only get maybe 7-8k out of 10k if that house forecloses. Furthermore, the company will bear legal expenses and pay all sorts of fees before the house is sold, so you will only get 5k back. Finally, there is a good possibility that the company goes bankrupt and you will have to jump through all sorts of hoops before you see a singe penny.
Under these circumstances, you might consider yourself fortunate if someone agrees to buy the bond from you for 5k which is only 25% of what you paid for it.
ParticipantDoes that mean the homes are worth 11-27% of what they were when the mortgages were written
I think it’s much more complicated than that.
Basically here’s the situation (as far as I understand it)
Suppose that some company offers you a bond that pays 1000 dollars a year in interest for 10 years. What’s that bond worth?
If it has zero probability of default (e.g. it’s a government bond), the value of that bond is $1000 divided by 10-year treasury rate, give or take. Let’s say it’s 25k.
If some respectable credit agency tells you that the bond is AAA-rated, you might be willing to pay 20k for it.
The company takes your 20k and gives a subprime loan with 10% interest rate to someone. At 10% rate, it’s only necessary to loan 10k to generate enough revenue to pay you back. As long as home prices are rising, default rates are low, the company can spend the remaining 10k whichever way it wants (e.g. pay big dividends or do a stock buyback).
Subprime crisis hits, and now it suddenly turns out that the bond is not really AAA. (And you don’t really know what it is, because the market for those bonds is frozen solid) You do know that only 10k out of your 20k was really spent on the actual house. Besides, home prices are declining and the company will only get maybe 7-8k out of 10k if that house forecloses. Furthermore, the company will bear legal expenses and pay all sorts of fees before the house is sold, so you will only get 5k back. Finally, there is a good possibility that the company goes bankrupt and you will have to jump through all sorts of hoops before you see a singe penny.
Under these circumstances, you might consider yourself fortunate if someone agrees to buy the bond from you for 5k which is only 25% of what you paid for it.
-
AuthorPosts
