Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Rt.66
Participant4 San Diegan housing bulls walk into BofA to bid on BofA owned REOs.
Mr. Banker says: Thanks for coming, today we are bidding on 2 fine REOs, one on Main St. and one on 3rd St. We’ll start at $200k for the Main St. property and $160k for the one on 3rd.
SD Bull #1: But I see 250 REOs on your list for the area we are interested in.
SD Bull #2: Why can’t we just make you an offer on any one of the 250 we prefer?
MR Banker: It does not work that way. There are only 2 available for sale. So there is an extreme, dire shortage of these affordable houses.
SD Bull #3: Makes sense! Here’s my bid on the one on Main St. My realtor said I need to get ahead of the bidding if I expect to win one of these 50% of REOs so I’m gonna go with…. $220k
SD Bull #2: I bid $225k!
SD Bull #1: I want to bid but I am worried because I see 250 REOs on that list right now and I read somewhere that there is a tidal wave of even more foreclosures coming soon.
Mr. Banker: The average wage for people in this area has been re-adjusted upward by removing the lower income earners from the equation so affordability ratios are now at all time lows, first time buyers will now come from wealthy islands and not from apartments anymore, SD has wonderful weather, It’s different here, Its different this time. Mortgage rates are low. Engineers are getting raises. You had better hurry and put an offer in on this house on Main St. because it seems everyone wants that one!
SD Bull #1: Well Bernanke did say he saw some green shoots, and that house on 3rd St. is a mess so….I’ll go $230k on Main St!
SD Bull #4: I’m a winner, and I deserve this house, I’m gonna go $240k!
————————-
The next day Piggs are treated to a new post:“Hey everyone this fence sitter finally snagged one of those super priced REOs!”
Circle jerking and reach arounds from likeminded folks ensue.
Participant4 San Diegan housing bulls walk into BofA to bid on BofA owned REOs.
Mr. Banker says: Thanks for coming, today we are bidding on 2 fine REOs, one on Main St. and one on 3rd St. We’ll start at $200k for the Main St. property and $160k for the one on 3rd.
SD Bull #1: But I see 250 REOs on your list for the area we are interested in.
SD Bull #2: Why can’t we just make you an offer on any one of the 250 we prefer?
MR Banker: It does not work that way. There are only 2 available for sale. So there is an extreme, dire shortage of these affordable houses.
SD Bull #3: Makes sense! Here’s my bid on the one on Main St. My realtor said I need to get ahead of the bidding if I expect to win one of these 50% of REOs so I’m gonna go with…. $220k
SD Bull #2: I bid $225k!
SD Bull #1: I want to bid but I am worried because I see 250 REOs on that list right now and I read somewhere that there is a tidal wave of even more foreclosures coming soon.
Mr. Banker: The average wage for people in this area has been re-adjusted upward by removing the lower income earners from the equation so affordability ratios are now at all time lows, first time buyers will now come from wealthy islands and not from apartments anymore, SD has wonderful weather, It’s different here, Its different this time. Mortgage rates are low. Engineers are getting raises. You had better hurry and put an offer in on this house on Main St. because it seems everyone wants that one!
SD Bull #1: Well Bernanke did say he saw some green shoots, and that house on 3rd St. is a mess so….I’ll go $230k on Main St!
SD Bull #4: I’m a winner, and I deserve this house, I’m gonna go $240k!
————————-
The next day Piggs are treated to a new post:“Hey everyone this fence sitter finally snagged one of those super priced REOs!”
Circle jerking and reach arounds from likeminded folks ensue.
Participant4 San Diegan housing bulls walk into BofA to bid on BofA owned REOs.
Mr. Banker says: Thanks for coming, today we are bidding on 2 fine REOs, one on Main St. and one on 3rd St. We’ll start at $200k for the Main St. property and $160k for the one on 3rd.
SD Bull #1: But I see 250 REOs on your list for the area we are interested in.
SD Bull #2: Why can’t we just make you an offer on any one of the 250 we prefer?
MR Banker: It does not work that way. There are only 2 available for sale. So there is an extreme, dire shortage of these affordable houses.
SD Bull #3: Makes sense! Here’s my bid on the one on Main St. My realtor said I need to get ahead of the bidding if I expect to win one of these 50% of REOs so I’m gonna go with…. $220k
SD Bull #2: I bid $225k!
SD Bull #1: I want to bid but I am worried because I see 250 REOs on that list right now and I read somewhere that there is a tidal wave of even more foreclosures coming soon.
Mr. Banker: The average wage for people in this area has been re-adjusted upward by removing the lower income earners from the equation so affordability ratios are now at all time lows, first time buyers will now come from wealthy islands and not from apartments anymore, SD has wonderful weather, It’s different here, Its different this time. Mortgage rates are low. Engineers are getting raises. You had better hurry and put an offer in on this house on Main St. because it seems everyone wants that one!
SD Bull #1: Well Bernanke did say he saw some green shoots, and that house on 3rd St. is a mess so….I’ll go $230k on Main St!
SD Bull #4: I’m a winner, and I deserve this house, I’m gonna go $240k!
————————-
The next day Piggs are treated to a new post:“Hey everyone this fence sitter finally snagged one of those super priced REOs!”
Circle jerking and reach arounds from likeminded folks ensue.
Participant4 San Diegan housing bulls walk into BofA to bid on BofA owned REOs.
Mr. Banker says: Thanks for coming, today we are bidding on 2 fine REOs, one on Main St. and one on 3rd St. We’ll start at $200k for the Main St. property and $160k for the one on 3rd.
SD Bull #1: But I see 250 REOs on your list for the area we are interested in.
SD Bull #2: Why can’t we just make you an offer on any one of the 250 we prefer?
MR Banker: It does not work that way. There are only 2 available for sale. So there is an extreme, dire shortage of these affordable houses.
SD Bull #3: Makes sense! Here’s my bid on the one on Main St. My realtor said I need to get ahead of the bidding if I expect to win one of these 50% of REOs so I’m gonna go with…. $220k
SD Bull #2: I bid $225k!
SD Bull #1: I want to bid but I am worried because I see 250 REOs on that list right now and I read somewhere that there is a tidal wave of even more foreclosures coming soon.
Mr. Banker: The average wage for people in this area has been re-adjusted upward by removing the lower income earners from the equation so affordability ratios are now at all time lows, first time buyers will now come from wealthy islands and not from apartments anymore, SD has wonderful weather, It’s different here, Its different this time. Mortgage rates are low. Engineers are getting raises. You had better hurry and put an offer in on this house on Main St. because it seems everyone wants that one!
SD Bull #1: Well Bernanke did say he saw some green shoots, and that house on 3rd St. is a mess so….I’ll go $230k on Main St!
SD Bull #4: I’m a winner, and I deserve this house, I’m gonna go $240k!
————————-
The next day Piggs are treated to a new post:“Hey everyone this fence sitter finally snagged one of those super priced REOs!”
Circle jerking and reach arounds from likeminded folks ensue.
Participant“Those that purchased recently, are hoping for a fairy tale market turn around to restore their equity or those just too antsy to remain on the fence will try like the devil to convince themselves and others that this is somehow not just getting started and somehow will avoid getting much worse.”
See what I mean? Now income averages need to have the bottom 1/3 lopped off to be relevant. Renters should be excluded from any ratios? Why, because we will now get our first time buyers, from “first time buyer fantasy island”?
I was surprised at the “It’s different here” posts. 2.5 x earnings here is SD will still be a hefty sunshine tax when fly-over country is selling for 1 x earnings.Temecula Guy,
I’ll beat your $165k challenge. Hows about we start at $150k in SD?
Right now today I have 52 homes for $150k or less in SD to choose from. And that’s excluding condos! Sure at this point they are not the cream of the crop obviously. And I really should not have to explain that SD will have that crazy averages thing happening, so yes coastal SD will be higher than inland, duh.
To assume I meant La Jolla or Carlsbad would have a median of $165k when I say “SD will have a median of $165k” is just more RE Bear word games.
You RE bears are insanely humorous. The banks hold 80k CA houses in shadow inventory, NODs, preforeclosures and foreclosures are rocketing upward and you look at the dummies bidding up the price of the obviously and grossly manipulated supply and use them as some indicator of future RE values?
Participant“Those that purchased recently, are hoping for a fairy tale market turn around to restore their equity or those just too antsy to remain on the fence will try like the devil to convince themselves and others that this is somehow not just getting started and somehow will avoid getting much worse.”
See what I mean? Now income averages need to have the bottom 1/3 lopped off to be relevant. Renters should be excluded from any ratios? Why, because we will now get our first time buyers, from “first time buyer fantasy island”?
I was surprised at the “It’s different here” posts. 2.5 x earnings here is SD will still be a hefty sunshine tax when fly-over country is selling for 1 x earnings.Temecula Guy,
I’ll beat your $165k challenge. Hows about we start at $150k in SD?
Right now today I have 52 homes for $150k or less in SD to choose from. And that’s excluding condos! Sure at this point they are not the cream of the crop obviously. And I really should not have to explain that SD will have that crazy averages thing happening, so yes coastal SD will be higher than inland, duh.
To assume I meant La Jolla or Carlsbad would have a median of $165k when I say “SD will have a median of $165k” is just more RE Bear word games.
You RE bears are insanely humorous. The banks hold 80k CA houses in shadow inventory, NODs, preforeclosures and foreclosures are rocketing upward and you look at the dummies bidding up the price of the obviously and grossly manipulated supply and use them as some indicator of future RE values?
Participant“Those that purchased recently, are hoping for a fairy tale market turn around to restore their equity or those just too antsy to remain on the fence will try like the devil to convince themselves and others that this is somehow not just getting started and somehow will avoid getting much worse.”
See what I mean? Now income averages need to have the bottom 1/3 lopped off to be relevant. Renters should be excluded from any ratios? Why, because we will now get our first time buyers, from “first time buyer fantasy island”?
I was surprised at the “It’s different here” posts. 2.5 x earnings here is SD will still be a hefty sunshine tax when fly-over country is selling for 1 x earnings.Temecula Guy,
I’ll beat your $165k challenge. Hows about we start at $150k in SD?
Right now today I have 52 homes for $150k or less in SD to choose from. And that’s excluding condos! Sure at this point they are not the cream of the crop obviously. And I really should not have to explain that SD will have that crazy averages thing happening, so yes coastal SD will be higher than inland, duh.
To assume I meant La Jolla or Carlsbad would have a median of $165k when I say “SD will have a median of $165k” is just more RE Bear word games.
You RE bears are insanely humorous. The banks hold 80k CA houses in shadow inventory, NODs, preforeclosures and foreclosures are rocketing upward and you look at the dummies bidding up the price of the obviously and grossly manipulated supply and use them as some indicator of future RE values?
Participant“Those that purchased recently, are hoping for a fairy tale market turn around to restore their equity or those just too antsy to remain on the fence will try like the devil to convince themselves and others that this is somehow not just getting started and somehow will avoid getting much worse.”
See what I mean? Now income averages need to have the bottom 1/3 lopped off to be relevant. Renters should be excluded from any ratios? Why, because we will now get our first time buyers, from “first time buyer fantasy island”?
I was surprised at the “It’s different here” posts. 2.5 x earnings here is SD will still be a hefty sunshine tax when fly-over country is selling for 1 x earnings.Temecula Guy,
I’ll beat your $165k challenge. Hows about we start at $150k in SD?
Right now today I have 52 homes for $150k or less in SD to choose from. And that’s excluding condos! Sure at this point they are not the cream of the crop obviously. And I really should not have to explain that SD will have that crazy averages thing happening, so yes coastal SD will be higher than inland, duh.
To assume I meant La Jolla or Carlsbad would have a median of $165k when I say “SD will have a median of $165k” is just more RE Bear word games.
You RE bears are insanely humorous. The banks hold 80k CA houses in shadow inventory, NODs, preforeclosures and foreclosures are rocketing upward and you look at the dummies bidding up the price of the obviously and grossly manipulated supply and use them as some indicator of future RE values?
Participant“Those that purchased recently, are hoping for a fairy tale market turn around to restore their equity or those just too antsy to remain on the fence will try like the devil to convince themselves and others that this is somehow not just getting started and somehow will avoid getting much worse.”
See what I mean? Now income averages need to have the bottom 1/3 lopped off to be relevant. Renters should be excluded from any ratios? Why, because we will now get our first time buyers, from “first time buyer fantasy island”?
I was surprised at the “It’s different here” posts. 2.5 x earnings here is SD will still be a hefty sunshine tax when fly-over country is selling for 1 x earnings.Temecula Guy,
I’ll beat your $165k challenge. Hows about we start at $150k in SD?
Right now today I have 52 homes for $150k or less in SD to choose from. And that’s excluding condos! Sure at this point they are not the cream of the crop obviously. And I really should not have to explain that SD will have that crazy averages thing happening, so yes coastal SD will be higher than inland, duh.
To assume I meant La Jolla or Carlsbad would have a median of $165k when I say “SD will have a median of $165k” is just more RE Bear word games.
You RE bears are insanely humorous. The banks hold 80k CA houses in shadow inventory, NODs, preforeclosures and foreclosures are rocketing upward and you look at the dummies bidding up the price of the obviously and grossly manipulated supply and use them as some indicator of future RE values?
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]The misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
So a proven 100 year old housing affordability ratio (price x average wages) is no longer accurate because we have a new dynamic called renters and low earners to contend with?
If you chop off the bottom 1/3 won’t you logically chop off the top 1/3 as well? SD especially has lots of millionaires and even billionaires that throw the average way up.
Millionaires and billionaires are not players in the housing reality we live in but their houses and incomes are included in ratios.
Those apartment dwellers and renters are future first time buyers, a group housing cannot survive without. You can’t move up if others below are not moving up. So they most certainly are to be considered in housing affordability.
So Cal has gotten around historical affordability ratios with housing bubbles. No more though.
2.5-3 times earnings is a historically proven AFFORDABILITY gage. Meaning people can actually make their payments at those ratios.SD average wage of $61k is probably high and even if not; wage deflation will probably bring it into the $50ks. Even 3x earnings at $55k aver. earnings is $165k for SD housing. So the HIGH end of affordability will probably be $165k.
Unbelievable? In 2006 how people would have thought you could buy a 2500 sq’ house in Temecula for $220k in 2009? Not many, and most would have thought the idea completely absurd. That rushed cut in prices was just the quick fall to “regular” prices. Now the discounts begin.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]The misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
So a proven 100 year old housing affordability ratio (price x average wages) is no longer accurate because we have a new dynamic called renters and low earners to contend with?
If you chop off the bottom 1/3 won’t you logically chop off the top 1/3 as well? SD especially has lots of millionaires and even billionaires that throw the average way up.
Millionaires and billionaires are not players in the housing reality we live in but their houses and incomes are included in ratios.
Those apartment dwellers and renters are future first time buyers, a group housing cannot survive without. You can’t move up if others below are not moving up. So they most certainly are to be considered in housing affordability.
So Cal has gotten around historical affordability ratios with housing bubbles. No more though.
2.5-3 times earnings is a historically proven AFFORDABILITY gage. Meaning people can actually make their payments at those ratios.SD average wage of $61k is probably high and even if not; wage deflation will probably bring it into the $50ks. Even 3x earnings at $55k aver. earnings is $165k for SD housing. So the HIGH end of affordability will probably be $165k.
Unbelievable? In 2006 how people would have thought you could buy a 2500 sq’ house in Temecula for $220k in 2009? Not many, and most would have thought the idea completely absurd. That rushed cut in prices was just the quick fall to “regular” prices. Now the discounts begin.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]The misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
So a proven 100 year old housing affordability ratio (price x average wages) is no longer accurate because we have a new dynamic called renters and low earners to contend with?
If you chop off the bottom 1/3 won’t you logically chop off the top 1/3 as well? SD especially has lots of millionaires and even billionaires that throw the average way up.
Millionaires and billionaires are not players in the housing reality we live in but their houses and incomes are included in ratios.
Those apartment dwellers and renters are future first time buyers, a group housing cannot survive without. You can’t move up if others below are not moving up. So they most certainly are to be considered in housing affordability.
So Cal has gotten around historical affordability ratios with housing bubbles. No more though.
2.5-3 times earnings is a historically proven AFFORDABILITY gage. Meaning people can actually make their payments at those ratios.SD average wage of $61k is probably high and even if not; wage deflation will probably bring it into the $50ks. Even 3x earnings at $55k aver. earnings is $165k for SD housing. So the HIGH end of affordability will probably be $165k.
Unbelievable? In 2006 how people would have thought you could buy a 2500 sq’ house in Temecula for $220k in 2009? Not many, and most would have thought the idea completely absurd. That rushed cut in prices was just the quick fall to “regular” prices. Now the discounts begin.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]The misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
So a proven 100 year old housing affordability ratio (price x average wages) is no longer accurate because we have a new dynamic called renters and low earners to contend with?
If you chop off the bottom 1/3 won’t you logically chop off the top 1/3 as well? SD especially has lots of millionaires and even billionaires that throw the average way up.
Millionaires and billionaires are not players in the housing reality we live in but their houses and incomes are included in ratios.
Those apartment dwellers and renters are future first time buyers, a group housing cannot survive without. You can’t move up if others below are not moving up. So they most certainly are to be considered in housing affordability.
So Cal has gotten around historical affordability ratios with housing bubbles. No more though.
2.5-3 times earnings is a historically proven AFFORDABILITY gage. Meaning people can actually make their payments at those ratios.SD average wage of $61k is probably high and even if not; wage deflation will probably bring it into the $50ks. Even 3x earnings at $55k aver. earnings is $165k for SD housing. So the HIGH end of affordability will probably be $165k.
Unbelievable? In 2006 how people would have thought you could buy a 2500 sq’ house in Temecula for $220k in 2009? Not many, and most would have thought the idea completely absurd. That rushed cut in prices was just the quick fall to “regular” prices. Now the discounts begin.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy]The misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
So a proven 100 year old housing affordability ratio (price x average wages) is no longer accurate because we have a new dynamic called renters and low earners to contend with?
If you chop off the bottom 1/3 won’t you logically chop off the top 1/3 as well? SD especially has lots of millionaires and even billionaires that throw the average way up.
Millionaires and billionaires are not players in the housing reality we live in but their houses and incomes are included in ratios.
Those apartment dwellers and renters are future first time buyers, a group housing cannot survive without. You can’t move up if others below are not moving up. So they most certainly are to be considered in housing affordability.
So Cal has gotten around historical affordability ratios with housing bubbles. No more though.
2.5-3 times earnings is a historically proven AFFORDABILITY gage. Meaning people can actually make their payments at those ratios.SD average wage of $61k is probably high and even if not; wage deflation will probably bring it into the $50ks. Even 3x earnings at $55k aver. earnings is $165k for SD housing. So the HIGH end of affordability will probably be $165k.
Unbelievable? In 2006 how people would have thought you could buy a 2500 sq’ house in Temecula for $220k in 2009? Not many, and most would have thought the idea completely absurd. That rushed cut in prices was just the quick fall to “regular” prices. Now the discounts begin.
-
AuthorPosts
