[sdcellar]

You definitely did the right thing hanging on to get a house. You really can’t worry about what’s going to happen with prices, and it sounds like you don’t plan to. I’m pretty sure you’ll do better with your place than I’ll do with mine. Maybe I’ll catch back up further down the road…

I’ve been through this before and maybe I didn’t know enough at the time, but it’s fairly easy to get back to living your life and your house price does whatever it does. You avoided the big hit and that’s what matters.

[sdcellar]

I got them by running 2000-2250 homes with a cap of $500K in 92126 and then zooming in on the number closest to your neighborhood until detail popped up (this varies by window size). It mostly includes houses between the major roads to the north, west and east of you.

Interest rates in 2000 were 8%, and 7% in 2001. Also turns out I was wrong on 1990 as interest rates were just a little higher than 10%. By ’91, there were 9.25% and got lower from there. 2000 was actually a bad year. The peak was 1981 at 18.46% (and 2.3 points!)

[sdcellar]

I got them by running 2000-2250 homes with a cap of $500K in 92126 and then zooming in on the number closest to your neighborhood until detail popped up (this varies by window size). It mostly includes houses between the major roads to the north, west and east of you.

Interest rates in 2000 were 8%, and 7% in 2001. Also turns out I was wrong on 1990 as interest rates were just a little higher than 10%. By ’91, there were 9.25% and got lower from there. 2000 was actually a bad year. The peak was 1981 at 18.46% (and 2.3 points!)

[sdcellar]

I got them by running 2000-2250 homes with a cap of $500K in 92126 and then zooming in on the number closest to your neighborhood until detail popped up (this varies by window size). It mostly includes houses between the major roads to the north, west and east of you.

Interest rates in 2000 were 8%, and 7% in 2001. Also turns out I was wrong on 1990 as interest rates were just a little higher than 10%. By ’91, there were 9.25% and got lower from there. 2000 was actually a bad year. The peak was 1981 at 18.46% (and 2.3 points!)

[sdcellar]

I got them by running 2000-2250 homes with a cap of $500K in 92126 and then zooming in on the number closest to your neighborhood until detail popped up (this varies by window size). It mostly includes houses between the major roads to the north, west and east of you.

Interest rates in 2000 were 8%, and 7% in 2001. Also turns out I was wrong on 1990 as interest rates were just a little higher than 10%. By ’91, there were 9.25% and got lower from there. 2000 was actually a bad year. The peak was 1981 at 18.46% (and 2.3 points!)

[sdcellar]

I got them by running 2000-2250 homes with a cap of $500K in 92126 and then zooming in on the number closest to your neighborhood until detail popped up (this varies by window size). It mostly includes houses between the major roads to the north, west and east of you.

Interest rates in 2000 were 8%, and 7% in 2001. Also turns out I was wrong on 1990 as interest rates were just a little higher than 10%. By ’91, there were 9.25% and got lower from there. 2000 was actually a bad year. The peak was 1981 at 18.46% (and 2.3 points!)

[sdcellar]

I think you should always avoid using a single property when trying to go through these things and that was my point in the first place. I’m sure both the specific 2000 property and the 2001 have their considerations and I wouldn’t latch onto either one. That’s why I offered averages for 2000 (again, what’s supposed to be the working year for the exercise). I ran it for 2001 and here’s what I’ve got:

Year Sales Median Average
2000 30 $267,250 $285,800
2001 18 $322,750 $331,361

My data source is Redfin and as I mentioned before, at least one of the shortcomings is that it only provides information about the last sale of any given property. This will exclude properties that have sold since. One thing that’s really nice is that Redfin let’s you export the data, so it becomes easy to slice and dice it. That makes it easy to come up with metrics (like the ones above) quickly, but it’s important to realize that it’s also not the same thing as detailed property analysis (which is kind of in between the picking one or two houses, i.e. model matches and specific properties that are still pretty close). The latter could, of course, be used to achieve more tightly tuned (i.e. accurate) numbers.

You should check it out, it’s kind of fun. What I do is pick a zip, set basic criteria for maybe square footage and if I’m trying to weed out newer stuff, maybe a lower maximum price. Then I see what I get, zoom in and start exporting data. For the numbers above I got back 492 results and from there I could drill into years. There are flaws with the method to be sure, but seems like a reasonable proxy for tract homes.

[sdcellar]

I think you should always avoid using a single property when trying to go through these things and that was my point in the first place. I’m sure both the specific 2000 property and the 2001 have their considerations and I wouldn’t latch onto either one. That’s why I offered averages for 2000 (again, what’s supposed to be the working year for the exercise). I ran it for 2001 and here’s what I’ve got:

Year Sales Median Average
2000 30 $267,250 $285,800
2001 18 $322,750 $331,361

My data source is Redfin and as I mentioned before, at least one of the shortcomings is that it only provides information about the last sale of any given property. This will exclude properties that have sold since. One thing that’s really nice is that Redfin let’s you export the data, so it becomes easy to slice and dice it. That makes it easy to come up with metrics (like the ones above) quickly, but it’s important to realize that it’s also not the same thing as detailed property analysis (which is kind of in between the picking one or two houses, i.e. model matches and specific properties that are still pretty close). The latter could, of course, be used to achieve more tightly tuned (i.e. accurate) numbers.

You should check it out, it’s kind of fun. What I do is pick a zip, set basic criteria for maybe square footage and if I’m trying to weed out newer stuff, maybe a lower maximum price. Then I see what I get, zoom in and start exporting data. For the numbers above I got back 492 results and from there I could drill into years. There are flaws with the method to be sure, but seems like a reasonable proxy for tract homes.

[sdcellar]

I think you should always avoid using a single property when trying to go through these things and that was my point in the first place. I’m sure both the specific 2000 property and the 2001 have their considerations and I wouldn’t latch onto either one. That’s why I offered averages for 2000 (again, what’s supposed to be the working year for the exercise). I ran it for 2001 and here’s what I’ve got:

Year Sales Median Average
2000 30 $267,250 $285,800
2001 18 $322,750 $331,361

My data source is Redfin and as I mentioned before, at least one of the shortcomings is that it only provides information about the last sale of any given property. This will exclude properties that have sold since. One thing that’s really nice is that Redfin let’s you export the data, so it becomes easy to slice and dice it. That makes it easy to come up with metrics (like the ones above) quickly, but it’s important to realize that it’s also not the same thing as detailed property analysis (which is kind of in between the picking one or two houses, i.e. model matches and specific properties that are still pretty close). The latter could, of course, be used to achieve more tightly tuned (i.e. accurate) numbers.

You should check it out, it’s kind of fun. What I do is pick a zip, set basic criteria for maybe square footage and if I’m trying to weed out newer stuff, maybe a lower maximum price. Then I see what I get, zoom in and start exporting data. For the numbers above I got back 492 results and from there I could drill into years. There are flaws with the method to be sure, but seems like a reasonable proxy for tract homes.

[sdcellar]

I think you should always avoid using a single property when trying to go through these things and that was my point in the first place. I’m sure both the specific 2000 property and the 2001 have their considerations and I wouldn’t latch onto either one. That’s why I offered averages for 2000 (again, what’s supposed to be the working year for the exercise). I ran it for 2001 and here’s what I’ve got:

Year Sales Median Average
2000 30 $267,250 $285,800
2001 18 $322,750 $331,361

My data source is Redfin and as I mentioned before, at least one of the shortcomings is that it only provides information about the last sale of any given property. This will exclude properties that have sold since. One thing that’s really nice is that Redfin let’s you export the data, so it becomes easy to slice and dice it. That makes it easy to come up with metrics (like the ones above) quickly, but it’s important to realize that it’s also not the same thing as detailed property analysis (which is kind of in between the picking one or two houses, i.e. model matches and specific properties that are still pretty close). The latter could, of course, be used to achieve more tightly tuned (i.e. accurate) numbers.

You should check it out, it’s kind of fun. What I do is pick a zip, set basic criteria for maybe square footage and if I’m trying to weed out newer stuff, maybe a lower maximum price. Then I see what I get, zoom in and start exporting data. For the numbers above I got back 492 results and from there I could drill into years. There are flaws with the method to be sure, but seems like a reasonable proxy for tract homes.

[sdcellar]

I think you should always avoid using a single property when trying to go through these things and that was my point in the first place. I’m sure both the specific 2000 property and the 2001 have their considerations and I wouldn’t latch onto either one. That’s why I offered averages for 2000 (again, what’s supposed to be the working year for the exercise). I ran it for 2001 and here’s what I’ve got:

Year Sales Median Average
2000 30 $267,250 $285,800
2001 18 $322,750 $331,361

My data source is Redfin and as I mentioned before, at least one of the shortcomings is that it only provides information about the last sale of any given property. This will exclude properties that have sold since. One thing that’s really nice is that Redfin let’s you export the data, so it becomes easy to slice and dice it. That makes it easy to come up with metrics (like the ones above) quickly, but it’s important to realize that it’s also not the same thing as detailed property analysis (which is kind of in between the picking one or two houses, i.e. model matches and specific properties that are still pretty close). The latter could, of course, be used to achieve more tightly tuned (i.e. accurate) numbers.

You should check it out, it’s kind of fun. What I do is pick a zip, set basic criteria for maybe square footage and if I’m trying to weed out newer stuff, maybe a lower maximum price. Then I see what I get, zoom in and start exporting data. For the numbers above I got back 492 results and from there I could drill into years. There are flaws with the method to be sure, but seems like a reasonable proxy for tract homes.

[sdcellar]

The 2000 lot is the same as the 2001 lot. The 1999s, same thing. I don’t know what ’98 place you’re talking about, but yeah, there are view lots near you (you’d have to adjust downward for that). You’re just looking at so much stuff it’s making your head spin. There was this thing called the bubble, you may have heard about it. Again, the 2001 looks like a tad bit of an outlier, we’re supposed to be using 2000, I gave you the average, a solid comp and you’re going further and further away from it. As I was saying, we can extrapolate from both ends, but when you have actuals…

[sdcellar]

The 2000 lot is the same as the 2001 lot. The 1999s, same thing. I don’t know what ’98 place you’re talking about, but yeah, there are view lots near you (you’d have to adjust downward for that). You’re just looking at so much stuff it’s making your head spin. There was this thing called the bubble, you may have heard about it. Again, the 2001 looks like a tad bit of an outlier, we’re supposed to be using 2000, I gave you the average, a solid comp and you’re going further and further away from it. As I was saying, we can extrapolate from both ends, but when you have actuals…

[sdcellar]

The 2000 lot is the same as the 2001 lot. The 1999s, same thing. I don’t know what ’98 place you’re talking about, but yeah, there are view lots near you (you’d have to adjust downward for that). You’re just looking at so much stuff it’s making your head spin. There was this thing called the bubble, you may have heard about it. Again, the 2001 looks like a tad bit of an outlier, we’re supposed to be using 2000, I gave you the average, a solid comp and you’re going further and further away from it. As I was saying, we can extrapolate from both ends, but when you have actuals…

[sdcellar]

The 2000 lot is the same as the 2001 lot. The 1999s, same thing. I don’t know what ’98 place you’re talking about, but yeah, there are view lots near you (you’d have to adjust downward for that). You’re just looking at so much stuff it’s making your head spin. There was this thing called the bubble, you may have heard about it. Again, the 2001 looks like a tad bit of an outlier, we’re supposed to be using 2000, I gave you the average, a solid comp and you’re going further and further away from it. As I was saying, we can extrapolate from both ends, but when you have actuals…

[Author]

Posts