[SD Realtor]

heheheh tg no worries at all….. read above, you see I did not counter not because of anything except that I have a pretty anal retentive of my budget and anything outside of it doesn’t get purchased.

My reasons for purchasing are well outside the scope of the depreciation cycle and the number of dollars saved by not making the purchase. No argument that Scripps will go down and many parts of it have already gone down. Even throughout all of Scripps what I am looking for is pretty darn selective. Given those parameters I do not envision the steeper depreciation to occur until 09. Which is okay. Maybe we hold out until then… maybe not.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

heheheh tg no worries at all….. read above, you see I did not counter not because of anything except that I have a pretty anal retentive of my budget and anything outside of it doesn’t get purchased.

My reasons for purchasing are well outside the scope of the depreciation cycle and the number of dollars saved by not making the purchase. No argument that Scripps will go down and many parts of it have already gone down. Even throughout all of Scripps what I am looking for is pretty darn selective. Given those parameters I do not envision the steeper depreciation to occur until 09. Which is okay. Maybe we hold out until then… maybe not.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

heheheh tg no worries at all….. read above, you see I did not counter not because of anything except that I have a pretty anal retentive of my budget and anything outside of it doesn’t get purchased.

My reasons for purchasing are well outside the scope of the depreciation cycle and the number of dollars saved by not making the purchase. No argument that Scripps will go down and many parts of it have already gone down. Even throughout all of Scripps what I am looking for is pretty darn selective. Given those parameters I do not envision the steeper depreciation to occur until 09. Which is okay. Maybe we hold out until then… maybe not.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

heheheh tg no worries at all….. read above, you see I did not counter not because of anything except that I have a pretty anal retentive of my budget and anything outside of it doesn’t get purchased.

My reasons for purchasing are well outside the scope of the depreciation cycle and the number of dollars saved by not making the purchase. No argument that Scripps will go down and many parts of it have already gone down. Even throughout all of Scripps what I am looking for is pretty darn selective. Given those parameters I do not envision the steeper depreciation to occur until 09. Which is okay. Maybe we hold out until then… maybe not.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Rico the simple answer is that real estate cycles move at a much slower pace as they go through the secular cycle. The past two depreciation cycles we have seen each appeared to run about 6 years from peak to trough. While it is arguable that this cycle will run for the same amount of time, the raw data seems to suggest that this cycle may be somewhat more devastating then the previous two due to a few factors. These factors include financing vehicles that were never present, rampant mortgage fraud, and an unprecendented price runup the likes which we have never seen. Moreover the collateralization of mortgage debt is the final factor that really entwines the housing market to the domestic and even international economy that again is unique. Finally because of all these facotrs, there is a potential for more serious affects to the economy while the housing market adjusts, thus there is incentive by Wall St and even the government to delay or smooth out the correction process. Thus it is more likely that the depreciation cycle will take at least a few more years, rather then correct immediately. (This is all my guess)

Now with that all said, many people who post here and many more who do not post but simply read, do so because they want to buy a house. Some will wait, others will not. Your decision to buy a home may be based on sheer economics and if it is then no you should not buy now. If it is based on other factors then perhaps you don’t need to wait for the bottom and simply waiting another year or two will bleed enough of the downside risk out that you will feel more secure about the economics of buying a home.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Rico the simple answer is that real estate cycles move at a much slower pace as they go through the secular cycle. The past two depreciation cycles we have seen each appeared to run about 6 years from peak to trough. While it is arguable that this cycle will run for the same amount of time, the raw data seems to suggest that this cycle may be somewhat more devastating then the previous two due to a few factors. These factors include financing vehicles that were never present, rampant mortgage fraud, and an unprecendented price runup the likes which we have never seen. Moreover the collateralization of mortgage debt is the final factor that really entwines the housing market to the domestic and even international economy that again is unique. Finally because of all these facotrs, there is a potential for more serious affects to the economy while the housing market adjusts, thus there is incentive by Wall St and even the government to delay or smooth out the correction process. Thus it is more likely that the depreciation cycle will take at least a few more years, rather then correct immediately. (This is all my guess)

Now with that all said, many people who post here and many more who do not post but simply read, do so because they want to buy a house. Some will wait, others will not. Your decision to buy a home may be based on sheer economics and if it is then no you should not buy now. If it is based on other factors then perhaps you don’t need to wait for the bottom and simply waiting another year or two will bleed enough of the downside risk out that you will feel more secure about the economics of buying a home.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Rico the simple answer is that real estate cycles move at a much slower pace as they go through the secular cycle. The past two depreciation cycles we have seen each appeared to run about 6 years from peak to trough. While it is arguable that this cycle will run for the same amount of time, the raw data seems to suggest that this cycle may be somewhat more devastating then the previous two due to a few factors. These factors include financing vehicles that were never present, rampant mortgage fraud, and an unprecendented price runup the likes which we have never seen. Moreover the collateralization of mortgage debt is the final factor that really entwines the housing market to the domestic and even international economy that again is unique. Finally because of all these facotrs, there is a potential for more serious affects to the economy while the housing market adjusts, thus there is incentive by Wall St and even the government to delay or smooth out the correction process. Thus it is more likely that the depreciation cycle will take at least a few more years, rather then correct immediately. (This is all my guess)

Now with that all said, many people who post here and many more who do not post but simply read, do so because they want to buy a house. Some will wait, others will not. Your decision to buy a home may be based on sheer economics and if it is then no you should not buy now. If it is based on other factors then perhaps you don’t need to wait for the bottom and simply waiting another year or two will bleed enough of the downside risk out that you will feel more secure about the economics of buying a home.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Rico the simple answer is that real estate cycles move at a much slower pace as they go through the secular cycle. The past two depreciation cycles we have seen each appeared to run about 6 years from peak to trough. While it is arguable that this cycle will run for the same amount of time, the raw data seems to suggest that this cycle may be somewhat more devastating then the previous two due to a few factors. These factors include financing vehicles that were never present, rampant mortgage fraud, and an unprecendented price runup the likes which we have never seen. Moreover the collateralization of mortgage debt is the final factor that really entwines the housing market to the domestic and even international economy that again is unique. Finally because of all these facotrs, there is a potential for more serious affects to the economy while the housing market adjusts, thus there is incentive by Wall St and even the government to delay or smooth out the correction process. Thus it is more likely that the depreciation cycle will take at least a few more years, rather then correct immediately. (This is all my guess)

Now with that all said, many people who post here and many more who do not post but simply read, do so because they want to buy a house. Some will wait, others will not. Your decision to buy a home may be based on sheer economics and if it is then no you should not buy now. If it is based on other factors then perhaps you don’t need to wait for the bottom and simply waiting another year or two will bleed enough of the downside risk out that you will feel more secure about the economics of buying a home.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Rico the simple answer is that real estate cycles move at a much slower pace as they go through the secular cycle. The past two depreciation cycles we have seen each appeared to run about 6 years from peak to trough. While it is arguable that this cycle will run for the same amount of time, the raw data seems to suggest that this cycle may be somewhat more devastating then the previous two due to a few factors. These factors include financing vehicles that were never present, rampant mortgage fraud, and an unprecendented price runup the likes which we have never seen. Moreover the collateralization of mortgage debt is the final factor that really entwines the housing market to the domestic and even international economy that again is unique. Finally because of all these facotrs, there is a potential for more serious affects to the economy while the housing market adjusts, thus there is incentive by Wall St and even the government to delay or smooth out the correction process. Thus it is more likely that the depreciation cycle will take at least a few more years, rather then correct immediately. (This is all my guess)

Now with that all said, many people who post here and many more who do not post but simply read, do so because they want to buy a house. Some will wait, others will not. Your decision to buy a home may be based on sheer economics and if it is then no you should not buy now. If it is based on other factors then perhaps you don’t need to wait for the bottom and simply waiting another year or two will bleed enough of the downside risk out that you will feel more secure about the economics of buying a home.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

rankandfile it happens. I posted way back when about the Transfer Tax which in my opinion is an OUTRAGE and it got 0 responses… Most likely the most discussed topics are those that stir emotions.

Allan/TG

I am not sold on the bolts yet. Rivers still has not developed to the point where he can look off his primary receiver nor has he commanded the art of getting the team to the line with much time on the play clock. In reality the beatdown they give to the likes of the Chiefs, Lions, Ravens, Broncos, and other clunker teams does not convince me of much. The Titans game was won due to a missed call by the officials (Chambers trapping a poorly thrown pass) while the Colts game was won by an act of God.

I agree that winning on Sunday in this league is quite difficult and winning 10-11 games does distinguish a team to be “better” then the rest of the muck. While the Chargers D has played better it has not faced an exceptional QB sans the Colts game or a team with a dynamic offense. Nor can they muster much of a rush with the base 4 and must always send at least another LB or DB in to get any heat on. Which is okay by me as long as they keep disguising it.

I am pretty concerned about playing the Brownies but I would rather face them then the Jags. It is a winnable game if Rivers doesn’t turn the ball over. After that though, to even fathom that they can go on the road and beat Indy or the Brady’s akin to finding a 500k home in Carmel Valley. They may have a small chance at Indy simply because they have won there and on turf our outside rush is pretty damn quick.

Once we go to Foxboro though…. yikes…

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

rankandfile it happens. I posted way back when about the Transfer Tax which in my opinion is an OUTRAGE and it got 0 responses… Most likely the most discussed topics are those that stir emotions.

Allan/TG

I am not sold on the bolts yet. Rivers still has not developed to the point where he can look off his primary receiver nor has he commanded the art of getting the team to the line with much time on the play clock. In reality the beatdown they give to the likes of the Chiefs, Lions, Ravens, Broncos, and other clunker teams does not convince me of much. The Titans game was won due to a missed call by the officials (Chambers trapping a poorly thrown pass) while the Colts game was won by an act of God.

I agree that winning on Sunday in this league is quite difficult and winning 10-11 games does distinguish a team to be “better” then the rest of the muck. While the Chargers D has played better it has not faced an exceptional QB sans the Colts game or a team with a dynamic offense. Nor can they muster much of a rush with the base 4 and must always send at least another LB or DB in to get any heat on. Which is okay by me as long as they keep disguising it.

I am pretty concerned about playing the Brownies but I would rather face them then the Jags. It is a winnable game if Rivers doesn’t turn the ball over. After that though, to even fathom that they can go on the road and beat Indy or the Brady’s akin to finding a 500k home in Carmel Valley. They may have a small chance at Indy simply because they have won there and on turf our outside rush is pretty damn quick.

Once we go to Foxboro though…. yikes…

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

rankandfile it happens. I posted way back when about the Transfer Tax which in my opinion is an OUTRAGE and it got 0 responses… Most likely the most discussed topics are those that stir emotions.

Allan/TG

I am not sold on the bolts yet. Rivers still has not developed to the point where he can look off his primary receiver nor has he commanded the art of getting the team to the line with much time on the play clock. In reality the beatdown they give to the likes of the Chiefs, Lions, Ravens, Broncos, and other clunker teams does not convince me of much. The Titans game was won due to a missed call by the officials (Chambers trapping a poorly thrown pass) while the Colts game was won by an act of God.

I agree that winning on Sunday in this league is quite difficult and winning 10-11 games does distinguish a team to be “better” then the rest of the muck. While the Chargers D has played better it has not faced an exceptional QB sans the Colts game or a team with a dynamic offense. Nor can they muster much of a rush with the base 4 and must always send at least another LB or DB in to get any heat on. Which is okay by me as long as they keep disguising it.

I am pretty concerned about playing the Brownies but I would rather face them then the Jags. It is a winnable game if Rivers doesn’t turn the ball over. After that though, to even fathom that they can go on the road and beat Indy or the Brady’s akin to finding a 500k home in Carmel Valley. They may have a small chance at Indy simply because they have won there and on turf our outside rush is pretty damn quick.

Once we go to Foxboro though…. yikes…

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

rankandfile it happens. I posted way back when about the Transfer Tax which in my opinion is an OUTRAGE and it got 0 responses… Most likely the most discussed topics are those that stir emotions.

Allan/TG

I am not sold on the bolts yet. Rivers still has not developed to the point where he can look off his primary receiver nor has he commanded the art of getting the team to the line with much time on the play clock. In reality the beatdown they give to the likes of the Chiefs, Lions, Ravens, Broncos, and other clunker teams does not convince me of much. The Titans game was won due to a missed call by the officials (Chambers trapping a poorly thrown pass) while the Colts game was won by an act of God.

I agree that winning on Sunday in this league is quite difficult and winning 10-11 games does distinguish a team to be “better” then the rest of the muck. While the Chargers D has played better it has not faced an exceptional QB sans the Colts game or a team with a dynamic offense. Nor can they muster much of a rush with the base 4 and must always send at least another LB or DB in to get any heat on. Which is okay by me as long as they keep disguising it.

I am pretty concerned about playing the Brownies but I would rather face them then the Jags. It is a winnable game if Rivers doesn’t turn the ball over. After that though, to even fathom that they can go on the road and beat Indy or the Brady’s akin to finding a 500k home in Carmel Valley. They may have a small chance at Indy simply because they have won there and on turf our outside rush is pretty damn quick.

Once we go to Foxboro though…. yikes…

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

rankandfile it happens. I posted way back when about the Transfer Tax which in my opinion is an OUTRAGE and it got 0 responses… Most likely the most discussed topics are those that stir emotions.

Allan/TG

I am not sold on the bolts yet. Rivers still has not developed to the point where he can look off his primary receiver nor has he commanded the art of getting the team to the line with much time on the play clock. In reality the beatdown they give to the likes of the Chiefs, Lions, Ravens, Broncos, and other clunker teams does not convince me of much. The Titans game was won due to a missed call by the officials (Chambers trapping a poorly thrown pass) while the Colts game was won by an act of God.

I agree that winning on Sunday in this league is quite difficult and winning 10-11 games does distinguish a team to be “better” then the rest of the muck. While the Chargers D has played better it has not faced an exceptional QB sans the Colts game or a team with a dynamic offense. Nor can they muster much of a rush with the base 4 and must always send at least another LB or DB in to get any heat on. Which is okay by me as long as they keep disguising it.

I am pretty concerned about playing the Brownies but I would rather face them then the Jags. It is a winnable game if Rivers doesn’t turn the ball over. After that though, to even fathom that they can go on the road and beat Indy or the Brady’s akin to finding a 500k home in Carmel Valley. They may have a small chance at Indy simply because they have won there and on turf our outside rush is pretty damn quick.

Once we go to Foxboro though…. yikes…

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

OC Scam good for finding what you want.

FLU made the most insightful statement. I have tried to expand on his point in many posts. Home ownership is not as much about investment as a lifestyle. Many on this site vehemently disagree with that sort of statement and I respect AND understand that stance.

RO I think that your statement was more to stir the pot then anything else. Come on now, you are probably quite successful financially and whether you made your money through real estate or through other means, to make a statement such as the one you made above really was…. well it was kind of a laugher dude.

SD Realtor

[Author]

Posts