[sdnerd]

So it sounds like we are in agreement – if you wanted to buy in RSF, La Jolla, (insert prime area), etc anytime in the near future, you should not be expecting to do so at 60% off just because Temecula hits that level (should it).

I get the impression some people on this site do, as did the original poster that I was agreeing with.

Sound reasonable?

We could go on all day about different long term scenarios. If Honda drops it’s price, how long until Lamborgini has to drop theirs, etc.

[sdnerd]

Thanks sdduuuude – yes that graph speaks volumes and does explain better.

I just think people who see an X percent drop in the boondocks, and then presume the nicer areas are going to have the same % cuts are in for a surprise.

I would still argue there are neighborhoods with a lot of competition to get into, that will hold up stronger regardless. Another example would be Beverly Hills; an address within BH means a lot to some people. The house right next door, but not in the right zip is worth a fraction to it’s neighbor. Large number of people want in, fewer distressed sellers, fewer foreclosures, areas where foreign investors actually do buy frequently (especially with the falling dollar), etc.

How many people in RSF really have to sell? How many are going to be foreclosed on? I’d wager a lot of money nowhere near the same % as Temecula.

[sdnerd]

Thanks sdduuuude – yes that graph speaks volumes and does explain better.

I just think people who see an X percent drop in the boondocks, and then presume the nicer areas are going to have the same % cuts are in for a surprise.

I would still argue there are neighborhoods with a lot of competition to get into, that will hold up stronger regardless. Another example would be Beverly Hills; an address within BH means a lot to some people. The house right next door, but not in the right zip is worth a fraction to it’s neighbor. Large number of people want in, fewer distressed sellers, fewer foreclosures, areas where foreign investors actually do buy frequently (especially with the falling dollar), etc.

How many people in RSF really have to sell? How many are going to be foreclosed on? I’d wager a lot of money nowhere near the same % as Temecula.

[sdnerd]

Thanks sdduuuude – yes that graph speaks volumes and does explain better.

I just think people who see an X percent drop in the boondocks, and then presume the nicer areas are going to have the same % cuts are in for a surprise.

I would still argue there are neighborhoods with a lot of competition to get into, that will hold up stronger regardless. Another example would be Beverly Hills; an address within BH means a lot to some people. The house right next door, but not in the right zip is worth a fraction to it’s neighbor. Large number of people want in, fewer distressed sellers, fewer foreclosures, areas where foreign investors actually do buy frequently (especially with the falling dollar), etc.

How many people in RSF really have to sell? How many are going to be foreclosed on? I’d wager a lot of money nowhere near the same % as Temecula.

[sdnerd]

Thanks sdduuuude – yes that graph speaks volumes and does explain better.

I just think people who see an X percent drop in the boondocks, and then presume the nicer areas are going to have the same % cuts are in for a surprise.

I would still argue there are neighborhoods with a lot of competition to get into, that will hold up stronger regardless. Another example would be Beverly Hills; an address within BH means a lot to some people. The house right next door, but not in the right zip is worth a fraction to it’s neighbor. Large number of people want in, fewer distressed sellers, fewer foreclosures, areas where foreign investors actually do buy frequently (especially with the falling dollar), etc.

How many people in RSF really have to sell? How many are going to be foreclosed on? I’d wager a lot of money nowhere near the same % as Temecula.

[sdnerd]

Thanks sdduuuude – yes that graph speaks volumes and does explain better.

I just think people who see an X percent drop in the boondocks, and then presume the nicer areas are going to have the same % cuts are in for a surprise.

I would still argue there are neighborhoods with a lot of competition to get into, that will hold up stronger regardless. Another example would be Beverly Hills; an address within BH means a lot to some people. The house right next door, but not in the right zip is worth a fraction to it’s neighbor. Large number of people want in, fewer distressed sellers, fewer foreclosures, areas where foreign investors actually do buy frequently (especially with the falling dollar), etc.

How many people in RSF really have to sell? How many are going to be foreclosed on? I’d wager a lot of money nowhere near the same % as Temecula.

[sdnerd]

re: patiently

Assuming Temecula falls 60%; you honestly believe homes in Rancho Santa Fe will as well?

Honestly? I’m curious as to your answer.

I don’t. Too few homes, too nice of an area, too many people wanting into that neighborhood. That’s just IMHO of course.

[sdnerd]

re: patiently

Assuming Temecula falls 60%; you honestly believe homes in Rancho Santa Fe will as well?

Honestly? I’m curious as to your answer.

I don’t. Too few homes, too nice of an area, too many people wanting into that neighborhood. That’s just IMHO of course.

[sdnerd]

re: patiently

Assuming Temecula falls 60%; you honestly believe homes in Rancho Santa Fe will as well?

Honestly? I’m curious as to your answer.

I don’t. Too few homes, too nice of an area, too many people wanting into that neighborhood. That’s just IMHO of course.

[sdnerd]

re: patiently

Assuming Temecula falls 60%; you honestly believe homes in Rancho Santa Fe will as well?

Honestly? I’m curious as to your answer.

I don’t. Too few homes, too nice of an area, too many people wanting into that neighborhood. That’s just IMHO of course.

[sdnerd]

re: patiently

Assuming Temecula falls 60%; you honestly believe homes in Rancho Santa Fe will as well?

Honestly? I’m curious as to your answer.

I don’t. Too few homes, too nice of an area, too many people wanting into that neighborhood. That’s just IMHO of course.

[sdnerd]

I believe the point TANSTAAFL was trying to make in re: to Temecula was – just because Temecula falls X percentage, does not mean the coastal areas or RSF, etc will do the same.

It’s all connected, but as it works it’s way in the price declines will probably decrease.

[sdnerd]

I believe the point TANSTAAFL was trying to make in re: to Temecula was – just because Temecula falls X percentage, does not mean the coastal areas or RSF, etc will do the same.

It’s all connected, but as it works it’s way in the price declines will probably decrease.

[sdnerd]

I believe the point TANSTAAFL was trying to make in re: to Temecula was – just because Temecula falls X percentage, does not mean the coastal areas or RSF, etc will do the same.

It’s all connected, but as it works it’s way in the price declines will probably decrease.

[sdnerd]

I believe the point TANSTAAFL was trying to make in re: to Temecula was – just because Temecula falls X percentage, does not mean the coastal areas or RSF, etc will do the same.

It’s all connected, but as it works it’s way in the price declines will probably decrease.

[Author]

Posts