Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
ocrenter
ParticipantAN, Palomino Valley is in a different league compared to Avaron.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]It’s not my fault, oc posted the comps, how was I supposed to know they weren’t in that tract? While we are on the topic, 2000 pricing is a little optimistic, what would 2003 pricing be? or 2001? I have an itchy trigger finger, i say anything sub 2003 is good, the closer to 2001 the better but sub 03 is where I think it lands. Regardless of how nice it is, it was nice then too, if some areas never get below or to 2003 pricing during cycles but enjoy the same upward percentage, over time they get too far out of whack. If home x is worth double home y in 1985 and 1995 and 2003, it will end up worth double in 2010, not triple and not the same, the market ripples will put it at it’s percentage higher eventually.[/quote]
tg, the two subdivisions are less than a couple of minutes apart. lots in avaron slightly less, but not 50% less like sdr like to suggest.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]It’s not my fault, oc posted the comps, how was I supposed to know they weren’t in that tract? While we are on the topic, 2000 pricing is a little optimistic, what would 2003 pricing be? or 2001? I have an itchy trigger finger, i say anything sub 2003 is good, the closer to 2001 the better but sub 03 is where I think it lands. Regardless of how nice it is, it was nice then too, if some areas never get below or to 2003 pricing during cycles but enjoy the same upward percentage, over time they get too far out of whack. If home x is worth double home y in 1985 and 1995 and 2003, it will end up worth double in 2010, not triple and not the same, the market ripples will put it at it’s percentage higher eventually.[/quote]
tg, the two subdivisions are less than a couple of minutes apart. lots in avaron slightly less, but not 50% less like sdr like to suggest.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]It’s not my fault, oc posted the comps, how was I supposed to know they weren’t in that tract? While we are on the topic, 2000 pricing is a little optimistic, what would 2003 pricing be? or 2001? I have an itchy trigger finger, i say anything sub 2003 is good, the closer to 2001 the better but sub 03 is where I think it lands. Regardless of how nice it is, it was nice then too, if some areas never get below or to 2003 pricing during cycles but enjoy the same upward percentage, over time they get too far out of whack. If home x is worth double home y in 1985 and 1995 and 2003, it will end up worth double in 2010, not triple and not the same, the market ripples will put it at it’s percentage higher eventually.[/quote]
tg, the two subdivisions are less than a couple of minutes apart. lots in avaron slightly less, but not 50% less like sdr like to suggest.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]It’s not my fault, oc posted the comps, how was I supposed to know they weren’t in that tract? While we are on the topic, 2000 pricing is a little optimistic, what would 2003 pricing be? or 2001? I have an itchy trigger finger, i say anything sub 2003 is good, the closer to 2001 the better but sub 03 is where I think it lands. Regardless of how nice it is, it was nice then too, if some areas never get below or to 2003 pricing during cycles but enjoy the same upward percentage, over time they get too far out of whack. If home x is worth double home y in 1985 and 1995 and 2003, it will end up worth double in 2010, not triple and not the same, the market ripples will put it at it’s percentage higher eventually.[/quote]
tg, the two subdivisions are less than a couple of minutes apart. lots in avaron slightly less, but not 50% less like sdr like to suggest.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]It’s not my fault, oc posted the comps, how was I supposed to know they weren’t in that tract? While we are on the topic, 2000 pricing is a little optimistic, what would 2003 pricing be? or 2001? I have an itchy trigger finger, i say anything sub 2003 is good, the closer to 2001 the better but sub 03 is where I think it lands. Regardless of how nice it is, it was nice then too, if some areas never get below or to 2003 pricing during cycles but enjoy the same upward percentage, over time they get too far out of whack. If home x is worth double home y in 1985 and 1995 and 2003, it will end up worth double in 2010, not triple and not the same, the market ripples will put it at it’s percentage higher eventually.[/quote]
tg, the two subdivisions are less than a couple of minutes apart. lots in avaron slightly less, but not 50% less like sdr like to suggest.
Participantuh, 1/4 acre is 10k lots, did a few measurements of avaron, none of them are 10k lots.
avaron homes average more like 1/3 acre to 2/5 acre lots.
as for the homes in the Silver Gum/Tea Tree subdivision, we are looking at mostly 2/5 acre with a few near 1/2 acre lots.
the Rising River home is basically fully done, just need to spend say $10k to $20k to get new appliances in. where as the Silver Gum/Tea Tree homes were brand new, some of the cheaper ones probably without upgrades.
to say Rising River is not at 2000 pricing is splitting hairs.
Participantuh, 1/4 acre is 10k lots, did a few measurements of avaron, none of them are 10k lots.
avaron homes average more like 1/3 acre to 2/5 acre lots.
as for the homes in the Silver Gum/Tea Tree subdivision, we are looking at mostly 2/5 acre with a few near 1/2 acre lots.
the Rising River home is basically fully done, just need to spend say $10k to $20k to get new appliances in. where as the Silver Gum/Tea Tree homes were brand new, some of the cheaper ones probably without upgrades.
to say Rising River is not at 2000 pricing is splitting hairs.
Participantuh, 1/4 acre is 10k lots, did a few measurements of avaron, none of them are 10k lots.
avaron homes average more like 1/3 acre to 2/5 acre lots.
as for the homes in the Silver Gum/Tea Tree subdivision, we are looking at mostly 2/5 acre with a few near 1/2 acre lots.
the Rising River home is basically fully done, just need to spend say $10k to $20k to get new appliances in. where as the Silver Gum/Tea Tree homes were brand new, some of the cheaper ones probably without upgrades.
to say Rising River is not at 2000 pricing is splitting hairs.
Participantuh, 1/4 acre is 10k lots, did a few measurements of avaron, none of them are 10k lots.
avaron homes average more like 1/3 acre to 2/5 acre lots.
as for the homes in the Silver Gum/Tea Tree subdivision, we are looking at mostly 2/5 acre with a few near 1/2 acre lots.
the Rising River home is basically fully done, just need to spend say $10k to $20k to get new appliances in. where as the Silver Gum/Tea Tree homes were brand new, some of the cheaper ones probably without upgrades.
to say Rising River is not at 2000 pricing is splitting hairs.
Participantuh, 1/4 acre is 10k lots, did a few measurements of avaron, none of them are 10k lots.
avaron homes average more like 1/3 acre to 2/5 acre lots.
as for the homes in the Silver Gum/Tea Tree subdivision, we are looking at mostly 2/5 acre with a few near 1/2 acre lots.
the Rising River home is basically fully done, just need to spend say $10k to $20k to get new appliances in. where as the Silver Gum/Tea Tree homes were brand new, some of the cheaper ones probably without upgrades.
to say Rising River is not at 2000 pricing is splitting hairs.
Participant[quote=mdk]the comp killer recently closed
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-090031679-15595_S_Rising_River_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92127
-mdk[/quote]
15595 S Rising River Pl
–4,464sqft
–listing price: $899,900
–sold price: $882,500
–price/sqft: $198just re-read some of the comments back in ’08 about price drops down to $1.1 million. I say $882k is pretty much bottom and at 2000 pricing. not saying everyone can get the price, but this once again shows that Eugene and I were not the only two that got homes at 2000 pricing:
17257 Silver Gum Way, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 5,128 sq ft
–12/05/2000: $815,50017269 Silver Gum Way, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 5,450 sq ft
–11/09/2000: $946,0009446 Tea Tree Ln, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 4,790 sq ft
–11/14/2000: $894,5009433 Tea Tree Ln, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 5,128 sq ft
–11/28/2000: $817,000Participant[quote=mdk]the comp killer recently closed
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-090031679-15595_S_Rising_River_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92127
-mdk[/quote]
15595 S Rising River Pl
–4,464sqft
–listing price: $899,900
–sold price: $882,500
–price/sqft: $198just re-read some of the comments back in ’08 about price drops down to $1.1 million. I say $882k is pretty much bottom and at 2000 pricing. not saying everyone can get the price, but this once again shows that Eugene and I were not the only two that got homes at 2000 pricing:
17257 Silver Gum Way, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 5,128 sq ft
–12/05/2000: $815,50017269 Silver Gum Way, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 5,450 sq ft
–11/09/2000: $946,0009446 Tea Tree Ln, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 4,790 sq ft
–11/14/2000: $894,5009433 Tea Tree Ln, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 5,128 sq ft
–11/28/2000: $817,000Participant[quote=mdk]the comp killer recently closed
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-090031679-15595_S_Rising_River_Pl_San_Diego_CA_92127
-mdk[/quote]
15595 S Rising River Pl
–4,464sqft
–listing price: $899,900
–sold price: $882,500
–price/sqft: $198just re-read some of the comments back in ’08 about price drops down to $1.1 million. I say $882k is pretty much bottom and at 2000 pricing. not saying everyone can get the price, but this once again shows that Eugene and I were not the only two that got homes at 2000 pricing:
17257 Silver Gum Way, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 5,128 sq ft
–12/05/2000: $815,50017269 Silver Gum Way, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 5,450 sq ft
–11/09/2000: $946,0009446 Tea Tree Ln, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 4,790 sq ft
–11/14/2000: $894,5009433 Tea Tree Ln, San Diego, CA 92127
–5 beds, 5.5 baths, 5,128 sq ft
–11/28/2000: $817,000 -
AuthorPosts
