anyone get the feeling this guy is homeless JK nothin wrong with renting---- If I had my way we still be renting in Lincoln Park Chicago one thing I will say is ALOT of people are locked in at the highs of property taxes after trading up Jayford, where did you decide to move?
Ever? Someday inflation will get us back up there. But don't get me wrong, I am in total agreement that this market is hating it big time.
Thats a good point about property taxes. The next set of bargain buyers will be paying half in property taxes. Havent decided where to buy. But in the 2-3 year time frame after we have reverted a bit more I plan to buy a 3 bedroom for cash somewhere in san diego. Im thinking closer to down town, somewhere north of the airport out of noise range. Within the cooling effect of the ocean. Dont think ill nail the bottom but as long as I get anywhere close ill get a good deal, far better than anyone who bought in the last few years for sure.
I'm in PB on Diamond St. I've been eying Solana Beach also however. Its quite a bit slower there, but at least the people are my age (mid 40's), and damn that place is pretty. I am definitely going to stay near the water if I remain here long term. Can't handle the summer time heat inland even a few miles.
very wrong. every boom and bust is caused by different factors. the last boom in los angeles was caused by a strong economy (aerospace and defense), and the bust was caused by reduced government spending in those areas. they said the housing market wouldn't recover until those industries recovered. well, real estate boomed again for a different reason (low interest rates and loose lending). next time it'll be something else. maybe a new industry will emerge, may the dollar will fall and cause foreign investors to snap up real estate, maybe environmental laws will reduce available land. who knows. but we do not need loose underwriting to reach the 2006 highs again.
Jayford, Without loose underwriting standards (and all the creative financing that consequences from these standards), res. RE is anchored to wages. Global wage arbitrage suggests that wages will not increase, denominated in dollars, despite rising commodity prices (also when denominated in USD). This is the primary reason housing will remain in a deflation trend for the forseeable future. Unless everyone becomes a day-trader making thousands per day, housing will never reach the previous highs. That is, of course, unless those underwriting standards come crashing down again (unlikely). RT
There's an element of truth to what you're saying, but consider the magnitude of the most recent boom compared to booms prior. Just glancing at the Case-shiller index (not to mention the indexes for more local california markets), this booms was ORDERS of magnitude larger than previous. Case in point is the NASDAQ. While the DJIA made new all-time highs in the rally of 2007, the NASDAQ never even came close to the territory it explored during the tech boom. The reason? A bubble of unprecedented magnitude occured primarily in tech stocks, with some bubble growth spillover into the remaining indexes. It is *difficult* to imagine another financial engine that will bring the NASDAQ to and beyond the highs of 2000, within our lifetime at least. Granted that is an assumption, but one that is very likely true. Res. RE in CA experienced the same type of isolated bubble where valuations reached *stratospheric* levels. In the same line of thinking, it is unlikely in the next 30 to 40 years that another catalyst, *specific to residential RE*, will cause those valuations to topple the highs of this most recent bubble. RT
the real ugliness is that realtors go around telling people to not worry about deficiency judgments because we are a deed of trust state. They then tell the people that to do a short sale they have to default on their loans. This plays right into the hands of sold out juniors. (on refinanced loans) The Realtors and the banks are causing people with good jobs to be exposed to hundreds of thousands of dollar deficiency judgments.
I have a client/friend who purchased a 5 acre piece of dirt at the top of Carmel Valley in the mid 1960's for $40K-ish. he sold out in 1998 with a consortium of adjacent landowners for $1.8M (his share). At that time he exchanged most of the proceeds for a personal residence and strategically purchased five other properties. He has sold two of those to diversify his holdings and give some $$ to his heirs. He called me a few weeks back to look at some bank owned property. We did. I told him I thought prices would likely go lower before stabilizing. He agreed but said that didn't really matter to him. I told him before he pulled the trigger on a certain bank owned property I wanted to do a bit of research for him. It was a pretty nice 3BR townhome that could easily cash flow. Before I shared with him my findings he called a few days later and told me he was going to spend and give away his cash (he has a lot of it) rather than increase his holdings as a landlord. I told him I was thinking he should do the same thing and thanked him for lunch. Good times. Not everyone got sucked into the greed vortex or made bad financial decisions during this cycle.