Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 15, 2007 at 7:54 AM in reply to: Home prices back to 2003 levels – according to the UT #99706November 15, 2007 at 7:54 AM in reply to: Home prices back to 2003 levels – according to the UT #99780
(former)FormerSanDiegan
ParticipantEven though the article was a typo or a snafu, in some parts of the county prices ARE back to 2003 levels for some types of housing.
El Cajon condos, anyone ? anyone ?
November 15, 2007 at 7:54 AM in reply to: Home prices back to 2003 levels – according to the UT #99799ParticipantEven though the article was a typo or a snafu, in some parts of the county prices ARE back to 2003 levels for some types of housing.
El Cajon condos, anyone ? anyone ?
November 15, 2007 at 7:54 AM in reply to: Home prices back to 2003 levels – according to the UT #99810ParticipantEven though the article was a typo or a snafu, in some parts of the county prices ARE back to 2003 levels for some types of housing.
El Cajon condos, anyone ? anyone ?
November 15, 2007 at 7:54 AM in reply to: Home prices back to 2003 levels – according to the UT #99816ParticipantEven though the article was a typo or a snafu, in some parts of the county prices ARE back to 2003 levels for some types of housing.
El Cajon condos, anyone ? anyone ?
ParticipantNow, my last question is why aren’t they buying the new homes?
They cannot afford them.
ParticipantNow, my last question is why aren’t they buying the new homes?
They cannot afford them.
ParticipantNow, my last question is why aren’t they buying the new homes?
They cannot afford them.
ParticipantNow, my last question is why aren’t they buying the new homes?
They cannot afford them.
ParticipantThe 100x monthly rent is a rule of thumb. As with all rules of thumb, it is fairly gross and is actually dependent on a number of factors. A primary factor is interest rates.
For example, a property for which monthly rents are 100x the purchase price corresponds to gross rent of 12%. In a world where CDs are paying 5% that would be a screaming bargain for a SFR. If interest rates climb to 15%, it would no longer be a bargain and an investor would expect more like 60x or 75x the monthly rent in a 15% interest rate world.
In my opinion the bottom for SFRs to make sense from an investor standpoint could lie between 60x to 150x monthly rent depending on interest rates at the time. I would not use this factor alone to decide when to buy.
Best thing to do is to run today’s prices at today’s interest rates. Then see what a 1% change in rates does to you and assess then likelihood of that happening. At today’s interest rates, prices are still about 20% higher than where I would buy as an investment (Central SD).
ParticipantThe 100x monthly rent is a rule of thumb. As with all rules of thumb, it is fairly gross and is actually dependent on a number of factors. A primary factor is interest rates.
For example, a property for which monthly rents are 100x the purchase price corresponds to gross rent of 12%. In a world where CDs are paying 5% that would be a screaming bargain for a SFR. If interest rates climb to 15%, it would no longer be a bargain and an investor would expect more like 60x or 75x the monthly rent in a 15% interest rate world.
In my opinion the bottom for SFRs to make sense from an investor standpoint could lie between 60x to 150x monthly rent depending on interest rates at the time. I would not use this factor alone to decide when to buy.
Best thing to do is to run today’s prices at today’s interest rates. Then see what a 1% change in rates does to you and assess then likelihood of that happening. At today’s interest rates, prices are still about 20% higher than where I would buy as an investment (Central SD).
ParticipantThe 100x monthly rent is a rule of thumb. As with all rules of thumb, it is fairly gross and is actually dependent on a number of factors. A primary factor is interest rates.
For example, a property for which monthly rents are 100x the purchase price corresponds to gross rent of 12%. In a world where CDs are paying 5% that would be a screaming bargain for a SFR. If interest rates climb to 15%, it would no longer be a bargain and an investor would expect more like 60x or 75x the monthly rent in a 15% interest rate world.
In my opinion the bottom for SFRs to make sense from an investor standpoint could lie between 60x to 150x monthly rent depending on interest rates at the time. I would not use this factor alone to decide when to buy.
Best thing to do is to run today’s prices at today’s interest rates. Then see what a 1% change in rates does to you and assess then likelihood of that happening. At today’s interest rates, prices are still about 20% higher than where I would buy as an investment (Central SD).
ParticipantThe 100x monthly rent is a rule of thumb. As with all rules of thumb, it is fairly gross and is actually dependent on a number of factors. A primary factor is interest rates.
For example, a property for which monthly rents are 100x the purchase price corresponds to gross rent of 12%. In a world where CDs are paying 5% that would be a screaming bargain for a SFR. If interest rates climb to 15%, it would no longer be a bargain and an investor would expect more like 60x or 75x the monthly rent in a 15% interest rate world.
In my opinion the bottom for SFRs to make sense from an investor standpoint could lie between 60x to 150x monthly rent depending on interest rates at the time. I would not use this factor alone to decide when to buy.
Best thing to do is to run today’s prices at today’s interest rates. Then see what a 1% change in rates does to you and assess then likelihood of that happening. At today’s interest rates, prices are still about 20% higher than where I would buy as an investment (Central SD).
November 14, 2007 at 10:08 AM in reply to: Home prices back to 2003 levels – according to the UT #99313ParticipantI saw the article on-line late yesterday and I could have sworn it said 2004 prices. Must have been mis-edited overnight.
November 14, 2007 at 10:08 AM in reply to: Home prices back to 2003 levels – according to the UT #99376ParticipantI saw the article on-line late yesterday and I could have sworn it said 2004 prices. Must have been mis-edited overnight.
-
AuthorPosts
