Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
North County Jim
ParticipantMay the good reverend find his way over to the Anglican/Episcopal Church, where this stuff is celebrated, and he’s now eligible for a bishopric (pun intended).
jg, that reminds of a joke I must share.
Q. Why don’t Episcopalians play chess?
A. They don’t know the difference between a queen and a bishop.
North County Jim
ParticipantI hear you sdr. If that’s the case, why not the caveats you see on house square footage such as ESF and buyer to verify…
North County Jim
ParticipantSteve,
That makes sense to me but it doesn’t explain why the early wave of foreclosures are hitting places like Colorado, Indiana and Georgia.
While bubble pricing may be limited to the areas you mentioned, the MEW ATM seems to have been a nationwide phenomenon. If so, the fallout from housing could take a serious bite out of the national economy.
North County Jim
ParticipantI view N/A as a euphemism for small lot.
North County Jim
ParticipantAs much as I’d like to believe it, there’s got to be more to this than meets the eye. Why don’t we look a little deeper into this?
Okay, here goes.
The $910k transaction was on Unit E, which county records indicate is 1,071 sq ft. This transaction closed on 2/17/06.
There were two transactions for $679k. Unit B and Unit D, both of which closed in June. These are both 900 sq ft.
I’ll assume Unit E is a two bedroom while B & D are one bedroom units.
Since we’re in a coastal community, we also have the wild card of views.
While we’re at it, Unit A (1,071 sq ft) sold last October for $999k.
North County Jim
Participantdeadzone,
Spoken with a true air of superiority. Well done!
Please share with us your thoughts about the democratic party’s dependence on the under-educated inner city vote.
North County Jim
Participantbgates,
I like the Walter Duranty reference.
For those scratching their heads, you may want to check this link.
North County Jim
ParticipantWhat is truly laughable about this thread is the knee-jerk reaction to the mere mention of Fox News. From BikeRider’s original post, it sounds to me like they had a panel of money managers (like the type seen on their Saturday business shows).
Unlike many of the commenters, I actually went to the Fox News web site and viewed the segment in question. It was exactly what I suspected (it was from Saturday’s broadcast of Cashin’ In). A round table discussion of housing with 6 panelists including a Fox News reporter.
End result: 3 bears, 3 bulls.
Among the bulls was Tom Adkins of RE/Max. Among the bears was the Fox News reporter (gasp!), the delectable Dagen McDowell.
For all of the posters here up in arms over Fox News’ alleged RE bullishness, have you ever watched CNBC?
North County Jim
ParticipantI find the Fox News bashing laughable. Yes, we should all get our news from Tim Russert (former staffer for Daniel Moynihan) or Chris Matthews (former staffer for Jimmy Carter and Tip O’Neill).
Let’s not forget Dan “Fraudulent but Accurate” Rather or the New York Times, which gave us Jayson Blair.
North County Jim
ParticipantPS,
For a short-seller, a move from $5 to $2.50 is not a double. It’s a 50% gain.
The best a short-seller can do is double his/her money if the stock goes to zero.
North County Jim
Participantocrenter has gone through the partial history of this place here.
North County Jim
ParticipantI think Cagan misused the word in the story.
Well that settles it. Cagan’s wording was poor.
Someone should write him and let him know how his poor choice of words caused some bad feelings here.
Any volunteers?
North County Jim
ParticipantI wouldn’t worry too much. Here’s what I consider to be the nut graf from a more expansive version of the story:
Leamer cautioned that the outlook was based on data trumped by recent reports showing that housing sales and starts were sliding more rapidly than the group had projected.
If the trend accelerates, he said, “then our forecast is too optimistic.”
As we’ve discussed here previously, can these guys really issue extremely bearish forecasts?
North County Jim
ParticipantGF,
My argument is certainly based on semantics. As you said, there’s a difference (huge IMO) between “at risk” and “expected”.
Powayseller’s thread title was extremely misleading and I see nothing wrong with pointing that out.
I read the same tone in the article you do. Do you see the same tone in the title of the thread?
-
AuthorPosts
