Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 30, 2007 at 1:34 PM in reply to: 10% population in SD county are millionaires (exclude Primary RE)?! #93248October 30, 2007 at 1:34 PM in reply to: 10% population in SD county are millionaires (exclude Primary RE)?! #93260
(former)FormerSanDiegan
ParticipantBorat – I thought the same thing, but the priginal post addressed this. 2.95 million population, but less than 1 million HOUSEHOLDS. The 100K was number of HOUSEHOLDS with net worth greater than 1 mil.
ParticipantAlthough I’m sure there are other zip codes that are also considered distressed, I’m not being asked to put down at least 15% in the other neighborhoods I’m considering – just North Park.
Thanks for clarifying that. Just wanted to see how local the lenders are getting.
What other zip codes are you considering ?ParticipantAlthough I’m sure there are other zip codes that are also considered distressed, I’m not being asked to put down at least 15% in the other neighborhoods I’m considering – just North Park.
Thanks for clarifying that. Just wanted to see how local the lenders are getting.
What other zip codes are you considering ?ParticipantAlthough I’m sure there are other zip codes that are also considered distressed, I’m not being asked to put down at least 15% in the other neighborhoods I’m considering – just North Park.
Thanks for clarifying that. Just wanted to see how local the lenders are getting.
What other zip codes are you considering ?ParticipantThe problem is that based on today’s futures prices on the CME, The November 2011 contract for San Diego prices is priced at 16.5% below todays prices.
To make money you would need to bet on a further downside than that. We already have about 12% off nominal prices. The projection would make it a total of about 30% decline in nominal prices. Add to that the effects of inflation from 2005 to 2011 (another 18-21% or so) and you get a 50% decline in real home prices.
I think it’s quite risky to bet on more than a 50% real price decline.
Now, as for hedging against a purchase, the problem is similar. Since the futures market is pricing in 16% declines over the next 4 years. Trying to produce a product that ensures 0% decline in that kind of environment would be quite expensive.
ParticipantThe problem is that based on today’s futures prices on the CME, The November 2011 contract for San Diego prices is priced at 16.5% below todays prices.
To make money you would need to bet on a further downside than that. We already have about 12% off nominal prices. The projection would make it a total of about 30% decline in nominal prices. Add to that the effects of inflation from 2005 to 2011 (another 18-21% or so) and you get a 50% decline in real home prices.
I think it’s quite risky to bet on more than a 50% real price decline.
Now, as for hedging against a purchase, the problem is similar. Since the futures market is pricing in 16% declines over the next 4 years. Trying to produce a product that ensures 0% decline in that kind of environment would be quite expensive.
ParticipantThe problem is that based on today’s futures prices on the CME, The November 2011 contract for San Diego prices is priced at 16.5% below todays prices.
To make money you would need to bet on a further downside than that. We already have about 12% off nominal prices. The projection would make it a total of about 30% decline in nominal prices. Add to that the effects of inflation from 2005 to 2011 (another 18-21% or so) and you get a 50% decline in real home prices.
I think it’s quite risky to bet on more than a 50% real price decline.
Now, as for hedging against a purchase, the problem is similar. Since the futures market is pricing in 16% declines over the next 4 years. Trying to produce a product that ensures 0% decline in that kind of environment would be quite expensive.
ParticipantOr the other way to look at is the opportunity cost. I would rather have that money sitting somewhere collecting 5% interest than waiting to get it back in my tax return. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to explain that concept to people….
Not to defend the other position …
But, why do you think you need to wait for a tax return to have the benefit of lower taxes. You should simply set your withholding (or quarterly payments if you are not a W-2 employee) such that you pay approximately what you owe.
Paying too much and getting a refund later is giving Uncle Sam a tax-free loan. Like you said, I would rather have that money collecting 5% interest somewhere. One shouldn;t wait for their tax refund to benefit from lower taxes, regardless of the tax strategy deployed, whether it’s real estate, moving a few-hundred K into tax-free Munis, or whatever. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to explain that concept to people…
ParticipantOr the other way to look at is the opportunity cost. I would rather have that money sitting somewhere collecting 5% interest than waiting to get it back in my tax return. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to explain that concept to people….
Not to defend the other position …
But, why do you think you need to wait for a tax return to have the benefit of lower taxes. You should simply set your withholding (or quarterly payments if you are not a W-2 employee) such that you pay approximately what you owe.
Paying too much and getting a refund later is giving Uncle Sam a tax-free loan. Like you said, I would rather have that money collecting 5% interest somewhere. One shouldn;t wait for their tax refund to benefit from lower taxes, regardless of the tax strategy deployed, whether it’s real estate, moving a few-hundred K into tax-free Munis, or whatever. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to explain that concept to people…
ParticipantOr the other way to look at is the opportunity cost. I would rather have that money sitting somewhere collecting 5% interest than waiting to get it back in my tax return. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to explain that concept to people….
Not to defend the other position …
But, why do you think you need to wait for a tax return to have the benefit of lower taxes. You should simply set your withholding (or quarterly payments if you are not a W-2 employee) such that you pay approximately what you owe.
Paying too much and getting a refund later is giving Uncle Sam a tax-free loan. Like you said, I would rather have that money collecting 5% interest somewhere. One shouldn;t wait for their tax refund to benefit from lower taxes, regardless of the tax strategy deployed, whether it’s real estate, moving a few-hundred K into tax-free Munis, or whatever. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to explain that concept to people…
ParticipantI wonder if it they considered it being in a distressed market because it is :
a.) in Zip code 92104
b.) in San Diego
or
c.) in Southern CaliforniaParticipantI wonder if it they considered it being in a distressed market because it is :
a.) in Zip code 92104
b.) in San Diego
or
c.) in Southern CaliforniaParticipantI wonder if it they considered it being in a distressed market because it is :
a.) in Zip code 92104
b.) in San Diego
or
c.) in Southern CaliforniaParticipantLast week some $75 million of “fed funds” (that is, interbank overnight credit) was transacted at a rate of 15%, and “a bunch” went through in the low to mid 7s.
No, I didn’t mistype that. You can find the actual data at this link.
Originally I, and everyone else, assumed that the “high” was an error. A bad print. That there was no chance this was “real”.
It was.
What exactly is “a bunch”.
The MOST that could have been transacted at 15% would be about 2% of the daily volume. I see no indication of a “bunch”
The low was 4.65 and the volume weighted average was 4.86.
The high was 15. Using a little algebra would tell us that the maximum possible amount transacted at 15% would be about 2% of the daily volume. And that’s the maximum amount.
Is that a bunch ? Less than 2% of a single day’s volume ?Let’s look into the facts before sounding the alarms.
Expect a quarter-point cut.
-
AuthorPosts
