Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SD Realtor
ParticipantI actually believe quite the opposite. I think that yesterdays election will serve as a catalyst. I think that some in the democratic party are scared straight and now understand that there is one and only one thing Americans care about right now. Jobs. I believe we will see a substantial effort by the political establishment to get people back to work…. meaningful or not they will create jobs and this will be done in 2010. I do not see any huge downtrend and quite honestly I didn’t before yesterdays election. In fact, those in the know, understand the bulk of the stimulus money is targetted for 2010 anyways… anyone wonder why that was? Right now demand for SD real estate is still quite strong. I can EASILY see more govt programs, more incentives to buy homes, and more bond market shenanigans such that long term rates will not go up significantly.
You see… those in power do not like to give up power… dems or pubes… it doesnt matter. Unemployed masses vote for change. So the only way these guys remain in power is to get people employed.
In short the can will be kicked down the road some more.
It is not time yet. Soon, a few more years but the camels back is not quite ready to break. It can take a few more straws.
ParticipantI actually believe quite the opposite. I think that yesterdays election will serve as a catalyst. I think that some in the democratic party are scared straight and now understand that there is one and only one thing Americans care about right now. Jobs. I believe we will see a substantial effort by the political establishment to get people back to work…. meaningful or not they will create jobs and this will be done in 2010. I do not see any huge downtrend and quite honestly I didn’t before yesterdays election. In fact, those in the know, understand the bulk of the stimulus money is targetted for 2010 anyways… anyone wonder why that was? Right now demand for SD real estate is still quite strong. I can EASILY see more govt programs, more incentives to buy homes, and more bond market shenanigans such that long term rates will not go up significantly.
You see… those in power do not like to give up power… dems or pubes… it doesnt matter. Unemployed masses vote for change. So the only way these guys remain in power is to get people employed.
In short the can will be kicked down the road some more.
It is not time yet. Soon, a few more years but the camels back is not quite ready to break. It can take a few more straws.
ParticipantI actually believe quite the opposite. I think that yesterdays election will serve as a catalyst. I think that some in the democratic party are scared straight and now understand that there is one and only one thing Americans care about right now. Jobs. I believe we will see a substantial effort by the political establishment to get people back to work…. meaningful or not they will create jobs and this will be done in 2010. I do not see any huge downtrend and quite honestly I didn’t before yesterdays election. In fact, those in the know, understand the bulk of the stimulus money is targetted for 2010 anyways… anyone wonder why that was? Right now demand for SD real estate is still quite strong. I can EASILY see more govt programs, more incentives to buy homes, and more bond market shenanigans such that long term rates will not go up significantly.
You see… those in power do not like to give up power… dems or pubes… it doesnt matter. Unemployed masses vote for change. So the only way these guys remain in power is to get people employed.
In short the can will be kicked down the road some more.
It is not time yet. Soon, a few more years but the camels back is not quite ready to break. It can take a few more straws.
ParticipantTransplant it breaks down along types of housing as well. For instance Mira Mesa is still considered flat/declining for attached homes but is not considered declining for detached homes. Also this is also only for lending purposes but if you are out there submitting offers you will actually find it is not the case. RB and Poway are definitely not declining for detached. Same with Santee. As for attached I am not sure. Hope that helps.
ParticipantTransplant it breaks down along types of housing as well. For instance Mira Mesa is still considered flat/declining for attached homes but is not considered declining for detached homes. Also this is also only for lending purposes but if you are out there submitting offers you will actually find it is not the case. RB and Poway are definitely not declining for detached. Same with Santee. As for attached I am not sure. Hope that helps.
ParticipantTransplant it breaks down along types of housing as well. For instance Mira Mesa is still considered flat/declining for attached homes but is not considered declining for detached homes. Also this is also only for lending purposes but if you are out there submitting offers you will actually find it is not the case. RB and Poway are definitely not declining for detached. Same with Santee. As for attached I am not sure. Hope that helps.
ParticipantTransplant it breaks down along types of housing as well. For instance Mira Mesa is still considered flat/declining for attached homes but is not considered declining for detached homes. Also this is also only for lending purposes but if you are out there submitting offers you will actually find it is not the case. RB and Poway are definitely not declining for detached. Same with Santee. As for attached I am not sure. Hope that helps.
ParticipantTransplant it breaks down along types of housing as well. For instance Mira Mesa is still considered flat/declining for attached homes but is not considered declining for detached homes. Also this is also only for lending purposes but if you are out there submitting offers you will actually find it is not the case. RB and Poway are definitely not declining for detached. Same with Santee. As for attached I am not sure. Hope that helps.
ParticipantThat is the thing. Nobody has to play. Go find a hard money lender and buy the home from trustee sale. Buy the home and refinance it 6 months down the road.
ParticipantThat is the thing. Nobody has to play. Go find a hard money lender and buy the home from trustee sale. Buy the home and refinance it 6 months down the road.
ParticipantThat is the thing. Nobody has to play. Go find a hard money lender and buy the home from trustee sale. Buy the home and refinance it 6 months down the road.
ParticipantThat is the thing. Nobody has to play. Go find a hard money lender and buy the home from trustee sale. Buy the home and refinance it 6 months down the road.
ParticipantThat is the thing. Nobody has to play. Go find a hard money lender and buy the home from trustee sale. Buy the home and refinance it 6 months down the road.
ParticipantCAR I think you are making immense speculation that plays to the average poster but I don’t believe is close to accurate. Show me ANY sort of proof at all of the 40% number. Any at all. Look through tax rolls all you want, post internet announcements of huge PPIP purchases here in San Diego, I would be more then happy to read about them. That is staggering. So places like Encinitas, 4S, PQ, Carlsbad, Scripps, Tierra Santa, PB, OB, UC… some entities somewhere are scooping up these large quantities of homes (that we dont know about) according to your premise… Sorry no way do I agree. Not in the least.
Second off, how can you even question what a lender will price an REO at? How can you figure a home that fetched 900k will magically even list at 750k, and if it is listed at 750k wouldnt it be a more accurate presumption that it will be bid up if it went pending at 900k? You are making this absolute leap of faith that any REO is priced well below market and it will not ever get bid up. Take a look at the Beechtree listing in Encinitas. It was priced incorrectly by the lender and got swarmed. In fact, flippers most likely have LESS liquidity benefits over institutional lenders and will be MORE likely to cut prices FASTER if a home doesn’t sell.
Third, taking risks doesn’t entitle anyone to any reward big or small. That was never said or implied. The essence of your argument is that EVERYONE should be entitled to EVERY home regardless of individual accrual of resources. That is an awesomely scary statement. The fact is that ANYONE can go to a trustee sale. If you don’t have the cash then you cannot. Why is that not fair? It doesn’t matter if it is a flip or not a flip. People who can buy for cash will have access to additional opportunities. It is a bit scary that you opine that individuals who have worked hard to accrue money should not be allowed to take advantage of that work. What if they were to buy for primary occupancy? Change the system, but do not penalize them. Or should they not even be allowed to buy for cash on the resale market either? Wouldn’t the cash offers they put out drive the market up because someone who finances would have to overbid to get the financed offer accepted?
Again, you are blaming individuals who are trying to make money rather then a system that is inept. A fair system would simply 100% NOT ALLOW people to buy homes who couldn’t afford them. You want equitable solutions then make everyone come in with 30% cash. Yet wouldn’t that eliminate alot of people from being able to buy a home? Stop FHA and low down loans. Prevent the problem by forcing large equity stakes. I think that is best but many would call that highly unfair, perhaps even racist since that could effectively kill the chances of many minorities to buy a home.
-
AuthorPosts
