Your advice needed
A few weeks ago, there was this exchange:
Five Reasons Houses Beat Stocks [Burbed.com]
Crossroads Says:
February 20th, 2008 at 6:08 pmHello RealEstater,
I need your wisdom. I make a standard starter Valley salary (125k) ,I just bought a new Sienna for the children (800 a month) ,and I have some money from stock (150k).
The calculator at Move.com shows that I can afford a 577,767$ house. There are no houses in Palo Alto for that price.
RealEstater, what should I do? Where should I buy?
The reply?
RealEstater Says:
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:34 pmCrossroads,
First of all, you should’ve paid cash for the Sienna, but let’s work with what you’ve got.
You make over 10 grand a month. That means very conservatively you can afford $3K a month of payment. Working backwards, you can borrow somewhere in the neighborhood of $500K, although up to $600K is doable.
With a down payment of $150K, you can afford a home in the $650K-$700K range. You can buy a house in any number of neighborhoods within Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, or San Jose.
You’re not going to make it to Palo Alto right away, unless you want to live in a Condo. Palo Alto is considered a “destination neighborhood”. You get there only after trading up a couple of times.
In other words, you’re in a good position to own a home. I don’t see you as being priced out.
Good advice? Bad advice? Do you agree with Real Estater?
What would you tell Crossroads to do?
March 29th, 2008 at 6:11 am
Jesus,
This has got to be the first time I’ve seen the site operator trolling in her/his own forum!
March 29th, 2008 at 9:46 am
You can rent in Palo Alto for under $3k/month. Wait another few years for prices to drop before you buy.
RealEstater doesn’t want to bring up renting, because renters don’t give realtors a commission.
In a realtor’s view, it’s never a bad time to buy.
March 29th, 2008 at 10:24 am
Here’s what I’d do. I’d look for a nice older, known good, car. And older Volvo can be bought quite cheaply, and there are Volvo shops all over the Bay Area. Or, my choice would be a BMW 5-series or if you can find one, the 3-series wagon. You can get something like that for 5 thou max, take care of it, and you may spend $800 a year rather than $800 a month on it. Insurance will also be cheaper.
I’d also look at a food budget. As a single person in the BA, I’m sad to say that I had a very hard time spending less than $12 a day on food. But if you work on it, as a family, you can cut your food budget way down. Pork chops on sale, brown rice, brussels sprouts and broccoli, adopt a 50′s type diet and you’ll be healthier and cut your food budget at least in half.
Now, you’ve taken $1000/month off of your costs right there!
There are other things like buying classic, last-forever type clothes, quality shoes rather than sneakers that wear out every year, etc. Get into frugalism, because no matter how much you make, even if you make a LOT, you’ll be miserable and as far as you can tell poor as hell, if you don’t. Honest!
Now, here’s the most radical step. RENT. Rent a nice place, and you’ll save a couple of thou a month over what it would take to buy, and you won’t get socked with the minimum of $50k a year depreciation there will be over the next few years. Rent and save.
So far the biggest budgeters and penny-counters I know are fairly rich people. Do not feel ashamed of counting pennies and budgeting, since there’s a groundswell of interest in this in the US right now.
And I wish you luck, and good living! I’m hoping to move back to the BA soon, and my income will be 1/10th of yours, and I plan to have a GREAT life.
March 29th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Considering the current market, the concept of “trading up” is going to be a matter of very long long term now. Unlike the bubble period in last 5-6 years, you may not have enough equity to “trade up” for many years, unless you want to pour some additional money in this process. So, the idea “let’s buy this shit today and I am going to trade up within few years anyway” is not going to work for many people in coming years.
Therefore, buy a home you like. Buy where the neighborhood you like. Buy home with enough space for your children for coming years. And most importantly, buy a home where you won’t mind to get stuck.
If it does not work out, just rent.
Of course, if you rent, it is a problem, according to RealEstater. Your problem is that you won’t be able to “water your OWN lawn”. And his problem is that he won’t get commissions.
March 29th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
You want to live in Palo Alto? Great. Rent.
You want to buy a house? Wait two years and rent until then.
You want to buy a house now? Go ahead, but you can’t afford Palo Alto. Neither can I. Figure out the best school district you can afford, and buy there. I started at PA (couldn’t afford anything but South PA and didn’t like the Eichlers), looked at Los Altos (untouchable then, untouchable now), then Saratoga (only affordable part was Campbell school district, nuh-uh). Next stop was Cupertino. Well, there are lots of cities with portions in CUSD, look in West San Jose, South Sunnyvale, Southeast Santa Clara. (If you can’t afford the places I mentioned above, then you can’t afford CUSD in Saratoga or Los Altos.)
Even then you will be looking at very small houses. If you want a big house, reduce the quality of the school district some more.
Remember, if you spend all your bucks on a house, there’s nothing left for private school. School district matters.
March 29th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
This has got to be the first time I’ve seen the site operator trolling in her/his own forum!
Hey I resent that remark. Sienna? Burbed? No way.
March 29th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
“A $150,000 down payment…”
Whoa there, spinach-chin, let’s just take a close look at that. That’s more than a year’s GROSS salary. That is not just something we can hand-wave out of the picture.
See, I think that this is really what’s causing the housing slowdown. It isn’t that people are suddenly making less money, or have fewer available assets; it’s that the lenders are now jumping on the “down payment” bandwagon because they all want to look responsible.
So now that prices have all gone up 20% in five years, we’re all suddenly supposed to come up with the cash to cover the down payments. Because, y’know, lending someone $800,000 to buy a $1,000,000 house is just fine, but lending someone $800,000 to buy an $800,000 house is fiscally irresponsible.
March 30th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Shall I say, I told you so? The info given by the amateur types here are plain wrong. The market is extremely healthy. Yes, inventory is up if you go by the numbers, but that’s normal for the time of year when a lot of homes come to the market. Pretty soon you’ll see sales volume ramp up as well, as we saw in February. During the winter months, the biggest problem in the real Bay Area is lack of inventory. Most of the homes offered for sale were either marginal or down right undesirable. That was the primary reason sales were down. Whenever you see sales being held back, that just signals demand is building up. Whatever happened before in Southern Cal is not applicable here. The BA is way more special — take it from someone who’s lived in SCAL.
March 30th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
density duck,
If one does not have $150K saved up, I would strongly advise against that person buying a home in the BA. Basically, one needs to be able to show he’s credit worthy. If a person does not have some basic dough saved up, there’s no good reason to believe that person will have any money in the future to pay off the mortgage.
Pralay,
Pay attention to the above. I am not advocating real estate for everyone.
March 30th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Madhaus,
>>You want to buy a house now? Go ahead, but you can’t afford Palo Alto. Neither can I.
Are you sure about that? Crossroads may not be able to afford it, but you sure can. I just checked a bunch of listings that came out in 94087, they are mostly over $1M. You said you bought your home for $300K, right? That means you have a whopping $700K equity. That kind of down payment will buy you almost anything.
I’m sure you’re happy where you are, but the point being — the reason you are leaving the crowd behind is because you did buy a house in the real Bay Area. Look around at the renters. Density Duck is overwhelmed by $150K, and Pralay still doesn’t have a lawn to water in the morning!
March 30th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Correction:
The post that starts with:
>>Shall I say, I told you so?
…is meant for a different thread. Burb, you may delete if possible.
March 30th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Basically, put yourself on a The Waltons budget and eating style and buy, or better, rent for now.
March 30th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
RE,
I am not going to take advice from someone who cannot understand the difference between inventory being up spring over winter and inventory being up March 2008 over March 2007 (71%!). You are either unable or unwilling to admit that the current market is a terrible time to buy, and that anyone who could wait a year or two would be amply rewarded.
One of the reasons our mortgage will be completely paid off in less than 7 years is because we didn’t keep trading up every round like all those homedebtors who find themselves up Special Creek without a paddle. When we refi’d, we reduced the loan instead of increasing it, and reduced the loan term as well (15 year, then 10). If we chose to sell this place and move to PA, we’d find our property taxes quadrupling, our mortgage payment doubling (but 30 year loan not 10), and our mortgage itself probably tripling.
To paraphrase Dave Barry, ask a real estate agent how to chose a good property and he’ll say say, “Location, Location, Location.” Then ask him what the square root of 64 is, and he’ll say, “Location, Location, Location.” Ask him who he likes in the Mets versus Phillies game and he’ll say, “Location, Location, Location.”
March 30th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Madhaus,
Unless you’re near retirement age, it’s not a good idea to be paying off your mortgage. Right now, you’ve got all this money locked into this one house that cannot be used for anything. Not only do you have no leverage, you also have little in the way of tax shelter. Essentially, you’ve given up some of the most significant benefits of home ownership. Go ask a financial planner. He’ll tell you the same thing I’m telling ya.
March 30th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
100 year interest only loans! BOOYAH!
March 30th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
RealEstater: well, in point of fact I do own a home. From the looks of things, I managed to squeak in just before everyone jumped on the down-payment bandwagon–I did indeed finance 100%. However, I got fixed-rate mortgages; having a relocation package that paid points helped out with that, but even so I damn near had to threaten bodily harm to get the loan agent to show me fixed-rate loans.
If I can cover the fixed-rate loans at my existing salary, then what’s the trouble? How would throwing money into the house have helped?
If I’d had to, I could have paid 5%; and there are still some places that will finance you for 95% of the value. However–as I’ve said elsewhere–I got a better return rate by using the money differently. In this case, I paid off my car; the “return” on that investment, in terms of reduced expenses, is better than I’d have gotten by putting that amount of money into the house.
And indeed, you’re telling Madhaus that he shouldn’t necessarily focus on paying down the house. Why is it bad for him to put money into property, but good for me to do it?
I understand where you’re going, and it’s kind of the same thing I just said about the car. If Madhaus sits down and looks at what he could do with the money, he may find that he’ll come out ahead by investing it.
At the time of closing, I worked out that every $1000 I put into the house reduced the monthly payment by $6. Meanwhile, the credit union’s savings account returns $4 per month on every $1000. So if I keep that $1000 in the bank, I’m only “paying” $2 per month. If I’d put in 20%, about $80,000, I’d have reduced the monthly payment by $480; but it would only be a net reduction of $160 a month! And I’d have given up a pretty good-sized chunk of cash to achieve that. Heck, I’m pretty sure I could find a way to invest $80,000 that would return more than $480 a month, meaning I’d come out ahead and still have the cash.
March 30th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
I wouldn’t pay 150k down. If you have 150k, you need to place at least some of it in a vehicle that will grow (ie. the stock market). Down payments help lenders, not necessarily borrowers. Equity has zero return and thus is a very, very poor investment. Invest that 150k in a down payment now, its worth 150k in 20 years. Invest it in the stock market and get 8%, you’ll have appr. 600k (roughly, based on Rule of 72). I know what I would choose. Buy a house that you can afford without putting much down.
March 30th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Oh, us poor amateur types with our advanced degrees that actually can quote numbers in this market versus the alleged professional (who’s not bias (of course)).
I think some poster asked you awhile back to post some listing in Santa Clara county that you deem an acceptable starter home.
Here’s one of those Lakehaven starter homes on Craigslist–rent is $1800 for a 3/2 1108 square feet.
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/apa/621805520.html
Here’s a home in that neighborhood ($680,000) for a 3/2 in a bad part of down.
Real Estater, that’s just brilliant professional advice!! Can you give us your contact info, so I can implement your advice and then report you to the FBI white collar crime devision?
March 30th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Oops, here’s the sales link
http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1490936
March 31st, 2008 at 6:35 am
“Unless you’re near retirement age, it’s not a good idea to be paying off your mortgage. ”
Is this guy for real? Seriously, I can’t decide if he’s merely parodying (or parroting) idiotic advice or of he actually buys into it. And the advice about the stock market re: 8% returns, good luck with that. Warren Buffet has warned that the market won’t be returning to historical norms any time soon; he figured 2-3% will be the new norm. Sweet.
March 31st, 2008 at 7:51 am
Lionel: Over a thirty-year period, though, even 2-3% return can be better than you’d expect from a house. (Unless you’re going to tell me that we’ll return to historical real-estate growth!)
March 31st, 2008 at 8:02 am
“Lionel: Over a thirty-year period, though, even 2-3% return can be better than you’d expect from a house. (Unless you’re going to tell me that we’ll return to historical real-estate growth!)”
Good point, Duck, but you also have to take into consideration the interest you’re paying on that mortgage. Neither are very attractive. (I sure as hell would not buy anything right now, stocks or houses.)
March 31st, 2008 at 8:24 am
The market is extremely healthy.
…..
…..
Whatever happened before in Southern Cal is not applicable here. The BA is way more special — take it from someone who’s lived in SCAL.
————-
RE,
Go down to SoCal and ask any real estate agent. He will tell you same thing “Market is extremely healthy. SoCal is special”. People who live in San Diego and Orange Country – they also think they are special.
March 31st, 2008 at 8:31 am
The info given by the amateur types here are plain wrong.
——————
Somehow this PROFESSIONAL cannot point out what is wrong. So, when he cannot have any clue about the facts and data, he just labels them as “amateur info” or “useless data”. Then he talks about “pulse of the market”, “market activity” etc.
March 31st, 2008 at 8:35 am
“Shall I say, I told you so? The info given by the amateur types here are plain wrong”
Yeah, “amateur” being someone who isn’t getting paid! As opposed to the pros (like Real Estater) who have a financial interest in the answer.
March 31st, 2008 at 8:54 am
I am not going to take advice from someone who cannot understand the difference between inventory being up spring over winter and inventory being up March 2008 over March 2007 (71%!).
—————-
Madhaus,
As someone said:
“It is difficult to make someone understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
March 31st, 2008 at 9:02 am
As opposed to the pros (like Real Estater) who have a financial interest in the answer.
—————
I quoted it many times:
“Beware the glib helper who fills your head with fantasies while he fills his pockets with fees.”
- Warren Buffett
March 31st, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Density Duck is overwhelmed by $150K, and Pralay still doesn’t have a lawn to water in the morning!
———–
Wow! Again “watering lawn”! That’s not a good reason get into million dollar debt!
Having it or not having it! Let me figure out more what the other things are I am missing in life. May be I need a hitech degree too so that I don’t have to PRETEND a make-belief hitech guy.
And of course I need an employment, just like RealEstater – for getting paid for posting comments here.
March 31st, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Pralay,
Pay attention to the above. I am not advocating real estate for everyone.
———-
RE,
You should frame your “above” comment (post #9). And I am guessing you had the same/similar recommendation 2-3 years back, right? If not, any idea what changed meanwhile?
You are just describing the obvious – due to strict lending standard. This is not something that came out from your brain.
March 31st, 2008 at 12:45 pm
BTW, this is where RealEstater said:
“These days mortgage company will require around $150K down.”
Post #8 here http://www.burbed.com/2008/03/22/150k-income-750k-mortgage-thoughts/#comments
Of course he is “not advocating real estate for everyone”, because everyone won’t qualify for loan. How convenient!
March 31st, 2008 at 3:16 pm
This from the ever-entertaining (but not useful) RE:
Unless you’re near retirement age, it’s not a good idea to be paying off your mortgage. Right now, you’ve got all this money locked into this one house that cannot be used for anything. Not only do you have no leverage, you also have little in the way of tax shelter. Essentially, you’ve given up some of the most significant benefits of home ownership. Go ask a financial planner. He’ll tell you the same thing I’m telling ya.
Talk to folks who survived the Great Depression — they never wanted to be in debt. What makes you think we aren’t headed for another global market meltdown?
Love how you still won’t acknowledge your conflation of Spring Bounce with seasonally-adjusted stats, but then, why would I expect a “tech guy” like you to know squat about math?
March 31st, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Pralay,
Looks like you cannot deny that my position has been consistent all along.
If you disagree about market conditions, why don’t you show us where in the Real Bay Area I can find a house at downturn prices? How about a 3/2 in Madhaus’ neighobrhood (94087 zip)? Show us some data, please! I’d love to hear that you’re right and I’m wrong.
March 31st, 2008 at 3:24 pm
RE, you were asked to provide data. You never did. The request was made to you, not to Pralay.
March 31st, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Pralay,
Looks like you cannot deny that my position has been consistent all along.
———
RE,
You don’t have any position. You are just describing the current lending market condition and trying to take credit by saying “I would strongly advise…..”. Well, if someone does not quality for loan without $150K in bank, he doesn’t need your “strong advise” anyway. So, what is the point of giving that kind of nonsense (not a strong one) advise?
And talk about consistency! Let’s draw some conclusion from your post #9 in this thread and post#8 in another thread (link given earlier).
You are not strongly advocating for buying home to those people who don’t have $150K in bank (because they don’t qualify anyway
). But you are advocating real estate for EVERYONE who quality for loans (who have $150K in bank).
What a piece you are!
March 31st, 2008 at 4:00 pm
If you disagree about market conditions, why don’t you show us where in the Real Bay Area I can find a house at downturn prices? How about a 3/2 in Madhaus’ neighobrhood (94087 zip)? Show us some data, please! I’d love to hear that you’re right and I’m wrong.
————-
RE,
How about YOU showing some PROFESSIONAL DATA to prove that “market is extremely healthy” (ref: post #8)?
So far the only “professional data” with “complete view” we got from you:
1. your grandmother as data source
2. Some “Custom Data” from PropertyMinder.
3. “Feb sale is up”.
Anything else that contradicts your viewpoint, you declare as either USELESS DATA or AMATEUR INFO and enter into your vague world of “pulse of the market” and “activities in market”.
March 31st, 2008 at 4:17 pm
I hearby announce the burbed drinking game.
For every property featured, take a drink.
For every property shown to have the price reduced within 48 hours, take a drink.
If you have actually been inside the featured property, shout “Been there, done that!” and take a drink.
For each mention of Spring Bounce, take a drink and jump once.
For each mention of “priced out forever” take a drink and pull out your empty wallet.
Every time RealEstater says prices are up when they are actually down, take a drink and stand on your head.
Every time Pralay rips RE a new one, take a drink and drop trou.
When ex-sunnyvale-renter makes a racist remark, take a shot of Jack Daniels and shout “White Trash!”
When burbed reminds everyone to keep it civil, take a drink with pinky extended
For each mention of “tech guy” drink a San Jose Iced Tea. It’s a Long Island Iced Tea mixed with a chip extractor.
March 31st, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Well, if everybody drinks too much, who is going to “water the lawn”? Lawn needs drink too.
Although it does not apply to my lawn because I am “Priced Out Forever” and “living cold in winter”. Sneeze! Sneeze! I am badly waiting for “Spring (Temperature) Bounce”.
March 31st, 2008 at 7:51 pm
if everybody drinks too much, who is going to “water the lawn”?
Ahem. It depends on how much everyone’s drinking…
March 31st, 2008 at 7:52 pm
I would totally play that drinking game, incidentally.
March 31st, 2008 at 8:41 pm
You’re all wrong. here’s what you do…
-Never put money down, go zero down, 100% financing with 3/1 Interest only (VERY IMPORTANT) ARM. You should be able to refinance before the 3 years is up, no problem.
DO NOT repeat DO NOT tell the bank you only make $125k. You should tell them you make $200k, then you can get a bigger loan and hence a SWEET bigger house…
Bid up the price for the house of your dreams. Don’t let some punk take *your* dream house from you. (You’re not a punk are you?) Show them you got FAT STACKS of cash…
-Work with an appraiser who will appraise above cost, (many houses have “instant equity” priced in) cash out the rest with a HELOC, and go buy a Porche Cayenne, and don’t forget some bling. Only losers don’t have bling. I used to live in Palo Alto, I should know (not East PA). You can still find appraisers who are willing to “work” with you.
-Take your $150k and invest it in SF condos. You CANNOT lose, as prices only go up, and they’re not making any more San Francisco. I GUARANTEE you will turn a profit, just flip them.
-After a few years when your house appreciates 20-40% you can just move up the “housing ladder” into a sweet $1.5M+ chalet in PA or Los Altos or wherever you like.
-Break out the wine and cheese and entertain in swanky Palo Alto….
RealEstater is WAY too conservative, don’t listen to him, he just wants to put you into one of the ghetto (meaning sub $800k) houses he can’t move…
March 31st, 2008 at 9:12 pm
Area 51, have your people call my people. I can sell my million dollar Sunnyvale shack, get a 3/1 liar loan (hey! I make a million a year!) and move into 65 acres with an 8000 sf palace in Los Altos Hills, then get a few HELOCS and buy 5 more Sunnyvale shacks, let Pralay rent one so he can water my lawn.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Pralay,
I think it’s quite obvious you are unable to back up your claims. What I’m asking you is quite simple. If the market is down, show me some houses that I can buy at a bargain price. Folks are suffering and sellers are desparate, right? Where are these houses?
March 31st, 2008 at 9:22 pm
I think it’s quite obvious you are unable to back up your claims. What I’m asking you is quite simple. If the market is down, show me some houses that I can buy at a bargain price. Folks are suffering and sellers are desparate, right? Where are these houses?
————-
RE The Make-belief Hitech Guy,
You love to make straw man argument.
When I reply you, I quote your comments on top to mention the specific context I am replying. Care to quote my specific comment/post? If not, what the hell you are talking about?
It is YOU who claimed “market is extremely healthy”. Read post #8. How about some PROFESSIONAL DATA to back up that claim?
March 31st, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Area 51,
You may be right. I was in SF last weekend, and passed by a realtor’s office. What I saw on the window postings surprised me. All those houses in Cow Hollow, Pacific Heights, Presidio Heights were practically “flying out the window”. The listings ranged from $2-5 million, and they are all stamped as sold. All that’s left was a rental – $17K a month to live in Pacific Heights. Another one was a condo renting for $5k / month, and it’s gone already.
SF sure makes the Peninsula and South Bay look cheap. Personally I think the Peninsula is a better place to live. More land, no parking problems, and warmer weather.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:39 pm
SF sure makes the Peninsula and South Bay look cheap. Personally I think the Peninsula is a better place to live. More land, no parking problems, and warmer weather.
————
See, that’s why it’s better to buy home at South Bay. And it is ALWAYS good time to buy home.
It also helps me to get the commission.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:46 pm
let Pralay rent one so he can water my lawn.
———–
Watering lawn without owning it – that’s really not “watering lawn” in classical term. I really don’t feel the zing on a rented lawn.
And did I tell you that I am “living cold in winter”? Heater in rented home heats only your body, not your heart. Don’t you get it?
March 31st, 2008 at 10:45 pm
You may be right. I was in SF last weekend, and passed by a realtor’s office. What I saw on the window postings surprised me. All those houses in Cow Hollow, Pacific Heights, Presidio Heights were practically “flying out the window”. The listings ranged from $2-5 million, and they are all stamped as sold. All that’s left was a rental – $17K a month to live in Pacific Heights. Another one was a condo renting for $5k / month, and it’s gone already.
And we know that Real Estate agents never, ever, ever misrepresent things by putting “sold” on properties that were sold 2 years ago. They would never make it look like properties were “flying out the window” to water the lawn. No, no, if it’s in the window, it must be true! And it’s coming from RE, why would anyone doubt it?
\sarcasm
March 31st, 2008 at 10:52 pm
let Pralay rent one [$1M Sunnyvale shack] so he can water my lawn.
———–
Watering lawn without owning it – that’s really not “watering lawn” in classical term. I really don’t feel the zing on a rented lawn.
No, no, no, you get to water my lawn. I didn’t say anything about the joy of watering your own lawn. If you want your own lawn then buy some sod. You can roll it on top of my lawn, then water “your” lawn.
And did I tell you that I am “living cold in winter”? Heater in rented home heats only your body, not your heart. Don’t you get it?
Oh Pralay, Pralay, Pralay, I am renting you a house. A heater is not included. If you want heat go buy any heater you like, then feel the warmth of your own heater, paid for by yourself.
Also I am going to hook up the other 4 houses to your PG&E meter so you can feel the warmth of 4 other families.
Oh, what do you think is a fair price to pay to rent this Sunnyvale shack, 3/2 94087? Since the condo in San Francisco goes for $5000 (a real estate agent wouldn’t lie!), I think for an actual house with a lawn you should pay $9000 a month. Have your people call mine.
April 1st, 2008 at 8:21 am
And we know that Real Estate agents never, ever, ever misrepresent things by putting “sold” on properties that were sold 2 years ago.
—————
I am getting a good idea about how to get “pulse of the market” and “market activity”. May be from now onwards I should look for “sold” signs on the glass window of real estate agents’ offices. So far I wasted my times on all the “useless data” for YTY sale/inventory, CS index etc. RealEstater opened my eyes.
April 1st, 2008 at 8:35 am
Oh Pralay, Pralay, Pralay, I am renting you a house. A heater is not included. If you want heat go buy any heater you like, then feel the warmth of your own heater, paid for by yourself.
————-
Then RealEstater is right. If I have to buy a heater, why not buy a house itself. It’s all same – I am buying something. In addition, there no tax break for buying heater, but there is for mortgage. There is no “Pride of Ownership” in buying heater. “They are not making anymore land”, but they are making new heaters in every minute.
I just came back from a realtor’s office in my neighborhood. Homes are practically “flying out the window”. That’s a proof that “market is extremely healthy”. I am motivated to buy a home now. No more “living cold in winter”. No more “watering other’s lawn”. I shall “water my own lawn”. Plus I am getting the tax break.
April 1st, 2008 at 10:29 am
Pralay,
Where’s the beef? Can you show me how I can be Madhaus’ neighbor at bargain basement prices?
How about let’s start with 1 house?
April 1st, 2008 at 10:47 am
Where’s the beef? Can you show me how I can be Madhaus’ neighbor at bargain basement prices?
RE — you first. We are waiting for actual data proving that the market is not in decline. You don’t get to ask for anything until you respond to this in a “tech guy” manner.
But here is a lovely 4/3 for under a million in my zip code. Can’t afford it? Here’s a 3/2 for only $725,888. Oh dang, it’s pending with release.
burbed, something is really fubar’d with the previewing, lots of trouble with the a href labels.
April 1st, 2008 at 10:55 am
Pralay,
Where’s the beef? Can you show me how I can be Madhaus’ neighbor at bargain basement prices?
How about let’s start with 1 house?
————–
RE,
You are sounding like a broken record. Not unusual and surprising for a real estate agent though. Read my post #43 for answer.
April 1st, 2008 at 12:00 pm
RE, you don’t get it. All the downturn-worshippers have to do is keep claiming that the market’s going down. They don’t have to provide numbers because they KNOW what’s happening. If the market hasn’t gone super-cheap the way they want, well, it just hasn’t hit bottom quite yet. If the market’s actually going up, well, that’s just because of everyone being stupid. If the market goes way up, well, just wait for the NEXT crash, mutter mutter.
It’s always more fun to live at the End Of The World.
April 1st, 2008 at 12:22 pm
If the market’s actually going up, well, that’s just because of everyone being stupid.
———
DensityDuck,
We are waiting for PROFESSIONAL DATA from RealEstater to prove exactly this so that we can counter RealEstater’s other argument that only “smart people” with “brain power” live in RBA.
April 1st, 2008 at 12:27 pm
They don’t have to provide numbers because they KNOW what’s happening.
———
DD,
No point of providing “useless data” and “amateur info”. All that matters is “pulse of the market”, “market activity” and some peek on the glass window of Realtors’ offices.
April 1st, 2008 at 12:46 pm
madhaus,
>>But here is a lovely 4/3 for under a million in my zip code.
You just proved my point. $930K to live on the wrong side of Wolf – Santa Clara school district. You call that a downturn?
Pralay,
Can you at least try to provide an inkling of proof? Madhaus failed, but at least he tried.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:02 pm
>>Here’s a 3/2 for only $725,888. Oh dang, it’s pending with release.
The house backs up to a busy street. It was sold in 2005 for $565K, and now some buyer snapped it up at $726K (or higher), yet even you think it’s a bargain. Where’s the downturn???
April 1st, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Pralay,
Can you at least try to provide an inkling of proof? Madhaus failed, but at least he tried.
————
Broken record. Read post #43.
As an background info (and “useless data”), just check the inventory level in various cities. Take the example of Sunnyvale. Normally inventory level goes that high in Sep-Oct. And this is only End of March – 6 months away from Labor Day. I am sure you have not seen anything like this in last 5-6 years. Or since you got your license for real estate agent.
But all these info is “useless data” to you anyway. And I don’t expect any serious analysis from an real estate agent anyway, because it would be too much for a guy whose only data source is the glass window of Realtor’s office. You still would claim “market is extremely healthy”. So I will rather wait for your PROFESSIONAL DATA to show “pulse of the market”.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:06 pm
RE,
The only failure here is you. Zero, zip, nada from you proving the market is up. And no comment on the palace on Wolfe for $725K?
And you asked for 94087 zip code, never a mention of CUSD being a requirement, so you fail in your request as well. You are big FAIL.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Backs up onto a busy street? You mean busier than Wolfe?
Ahahaha! Now check all the foreclosures in my neighborhood, 2 years ago there weren’t very many.
RE, you big FAIL.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Pralay,
I got a place for you to rent, lawn needs watering now!
Then come to big party at my new palace in Los Altos Hills. Never would have bought it if it weren’t for Area 51. Everyone on the blog invited. x-SVL-renter can harass the hired help, RE can tell us how great the market is that I could buy this place for only $2.4 million, and you can water this lawn too.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:31 pm
It was sold in 2005 for $565K, and now some buyer snapped it up at $726K (or higher), yet even you think it’s a bargain. Where’s the downturn???
———–
What could be better demonstration of RealEstater’s PROFESSIONAL DATA! He cherry picks data according to his convenience and SHAPES UP like “professional data”. That’s called professionalism!
This house was sold on 01/20/2006 for $790K. He skipped this information (as “useless data”) and picked only 2005 sale record to prove his point.
Damn, $790K in 2006 and $725K in 2008. Listed for $65K less???????? This seller got to be stupid. Considering the fact the home price doubles in 10 years, listed price of this home should have been at least $900K. Zillow zestimate says $888K. Stupid! Stupid! Stupid! Hopefully this sellers is moving out from Real Bay Area. After all RBA is for “smart people” with “brain power”. There is no place for stupid people here. Go away, stupid seller.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:44 pm
On the top of that, this seller mentions in listing “New LOW Price”. Low Price in RBA??????? This seller ruined the reputation of RBA. Enough is enough!
Burbed,
Please label this seller as economic terrorist.
April 1st, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Whoever bought that 725K on Wolfe made a bad investment. that house is on Wolfe and will always be on Wolfe. They could have taken that 725K and gone to a less expensive but still desirable area like Campbell or Cambrian and bought a quality house. Schools change too as areas gentrify and I’ll bet the Cambrian school district starts to pick up (it is not bad now).
April 1st, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Pralay,
…….
……
RE can tell us how great the market is that I could buy this place for only $2.4 million, and you can water this lawn too.
————
Great idea! I will be able to meet some “smart people” with “brain power” who live in “management class” neighborhood. Hopefully once I meet them (especially RealEstater), they will allow me to “water their lawns” too – to share the joy of watering lawn. I will water their lawns and sing:
I am a poor guy,
But my expectations are high
Then they will teach me the tricks of investment and how to present PROFESSIONAL DATA.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Whoever bought that 725K on Wolfe made a bad investment.
———
How could a home be “bad investment” when “market is extremely healthy”?
What changed over time which bring people from blindness (in 2005-2006) to reality in 2008 to realize “ok, it was a bad idea to buy this shit in 2005″?
Ok, I understand that this seller probably “traded up” in PA or Cupertino (what RealEstater is touting all along), but for a loss of $65K!
April 1st, 2008 at 3:28 pm
I have posted professional data to show the market is going up. According to this 94087 is up 12.4% year over year. Now don’t go saying that the others areas of sunnyvale like 94086 are down, because we KNOW that. Its the good areas that are going up. 95125 up 14.5%, 95124 up 3.4%. And before you say 3.4% is not keeping up with savings rates, that is the 3.4% on the entire house purchase price when you likely put down 10-20%. 3.4% on a 700K house is almost 24K, say you put down 140K (20% which is high)- you just made 17% on your money. Thats the 3.4% house, not to mention the 12 and 14%-ers.
http://www.mercurynews.com/realestatenews/ci_8739233
April 1st, 2008 at 3:45 pm
and if you want to look at the higher end of the market, watch this house go up… and come back down… and sit on the market untouched.
Listing Price History:
Jun 13, 2007 $14,600,000
Oct 08, 2007 $16,400,000
Nov 13, 2007 $13,600,000
Prop tax pd in 2006: $51,000. Right in line with the Zestimate of $5+ million.
And this place, listing price also coming down. These are Real Bay Area properties!
Listing Price History:
Jan 30, 2008 $2,349,000
Mar 03, 2008 $2,250,000
Yes, properties in Palo Alto are just flying out the window, look at this one left alone 49 days.
Listing Price History:
Feb 12, 2008 $2,269,000
Mar 08, 2008 $2,150,000
My gosh, how could this be happening? During the Spring Bounce every one of these properties should be snapped up the minute the seller puts down the phone after calling the agent!
SO you say, unsold in a couple months, no big deal? Okay, this one. Unsold in almost a year, wonder what they were saying during 2007 Spring Bounce?
Listing Price History:
Apr 25, 2007 $1,598,000
Jun 07, 2007 $1,550,000
Feb 20, 2008 $1,498,000
Maybe the Spring isn’t as bouncy as you want!
April 1st, 2008 at 3:56 pm
WillowGlenner says: I have posted professional data to show the market is going up. According to this 94087 is up 12.4% year over year.
But WG, according to that chart you link to, 94087 median price is up but sales volume is down 15.4%. So fewer houses sold but what was sold was on the higher end.
And Palo Alto, the Real Bay Area, sales volume is down more than 50% in 2 zip codes (only 2 reported). Los Altos, one zip code median price up, one down (by a lot), both have reduced sales volume.
Check out the monthly chart from DataQuick, looks like that Mercury News chart was a little too optimistic.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:11 pm
But WG, according to that chart you link to, 94087 median price is up but sales volume is down 15.4%.
———–
Is there anybody still here who wants to demonstrate the health of market with skewed median-price?
I remember even the Stockton/Tracy median-price was going up, when sale volume and price was dropping dramatically.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Pralay,
Do you pay for a house based on sales volume or based on price?
Madhaus,
>>My gosh, how could this be happening? During the Spring Bounce every one of these properties should be snapped up the minute the seller puts down the phone after calling the agent!
In any market, you can find certain properties that are over-priced or have significant issues. Usually, it doesn’t long for a Pro to figure out the reason. Please don’t show us random examples without first doing some thinking. Take that Palo Alto house, for instance. It’s on an extremely small lot (5200 sq. ft.), and located next to Oregon Expressway. That listing price of over $2M is obviously out of line.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Conclusion: No one can demonstrate there’s any kind of downturn in the Real Bay Area market. No one can find even a single property on the MLS that is selling at bargain prices.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:57 pm
You can only conclude that if you’ve determined your conclusion independent of any facts. (smacks head). Oh wait! You already have!
April 1st, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Do you pay for a house based on sales volume or based on price?
———
That raises a very basic question: Did you ever do ANY kind of investment in your lifetime? Do you invest just looking at the current price (e.g “Wow! Google stock price $650! That’s looks BIG and interesting!”) or analyzing the future outlook of stock?
It would be pointless to discuss with someone who does not understand the relation between inventory, sale volume and price.
Simple word: It’s a supply-demand market. If supply goes up and demand drops – price destined to drop.
April 1st, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Conclusion: No one can demonstrate there’s any kind of downturn in the Real Bay Area market. No one can find even a single property on the MLS that is selling at bargain prices.
————
Wow! That’s an interesting conclusion. You claimed that “market is extremely healthy”. But you could not back up with any data.
So it goes like that:
1. Theory A: “market extremely healthy”
2. Theory B: “there is a downturn in market”.
Two theories not necessarily cancel each other. Market can be extremely-healthy/just-healthy/half-healthy, but still there can be downward trend. On other hand, there can a upward turn for an very unhealthy market.
Even for the sake of argument (all though there are enough data given to show that) let’s assume Theory B is incorrect. That does not make theory A correct. Even a 5th grade student understand this logic.
If you want to prove your Theory A correct, you just show data to demonstrate that. Can you do that? I doubt. Because the guy who claims “I live in magagement class” or “I live among smart people” is not necessarily very bright guy. A smart and bright guy does not need to tell all these. His comments/posts/words should demonstrate that.
Do you remember there is a quote by Rousseau: “If you have to keep telling people how honest you are, you are not.” Same way it can be said that if you have to keep touting how smart you are, you are not. Getting “pulse of the market” from the glass window of Realtor’s office is certainly not a good demonstration of a smart and bright guy.
April 1st, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Please don’t show us random examples without first doing some thinking.
————-
Let’s review some data (Ooops, I forgot the “professional” part) provided by RealEstater:
1. Grandmother
2. A “CustomPage” from PropertyMinder.
3. “Feb sale is up”.
3. “Sold” sign on the properties on glass window of Realtor’s office.
That’s quite a NON-random data to prove that market is “extremely healthy”.
I am convinced!
April 1st, 2008 at 5:56 pm
It would be pointless to discuss with someone who does not understand the relation between inventory, sale volume and price.
———–
Or I should just rehash post #26:
“It is difficult to make someone understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
April 1st, 2008 at 6:04 pm
In any market, you can find certain properties that are over-priced or have significant issues.
————–
RE,
).
You sound like a cry-baby who wants to change the rule of game every time he loses or about to lose. It is YOU who asked to show “certain properties”. Now, you don’t like “ramdom example”. So, what kind of “non-random” data you are talking about? What about some data from you (ooops, I again forgot “professional” part
April 1st, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Pralay: You claim that “the crash is happening”. I want to see proof. So far, I haven’t. You’re right that POS properties aren’t moving sight-unseen, but that’s not the same thing as a crash.
You know what? I think that you need to suck it up and just deal with the fact that those McMansions on the outskirts of Los Gatos will never, ever be in the price range of a third-rate coder at a fourth-rate startup. I know that you’ve been sustaining yourself with the fantasy of owning an acre of land and a four-bedroom house for $175K here in California, but that just ain’t gonna happen.
April 1st, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Pralay: You claim that “the crash is happening”.
————-
And where exactly you found I said so? Could you quote it exactly? It seems you started making straw man argument just like RealEstater.
April 1st, 2008 at 8:37 pm
You know what? I think that you need to suck it up and just deal with the fact that those McMansions on the outskirts of Los Gatos will never, ever be in the price range of a third-rate coder at a fourth-rate startup.
—————-
And how exactly do you know I am dreaming for that? Now, so called “first-rate coders” or “management class people” started reading people’s mind too?
Okay, lety’s get the facts straight. You are a long time visitor for burbed.com. If your memory is not short, you would remember that in past I said in future the RBA will shrink dramatically. It does not mean it will disappear completely. May be it will consists of a few blocks of PA, a few blocks of Cupertino, a few blocks of Atherton and “those McMansions on the outskirts of Los Gatos” as you mentioned.
Lastly, you need to “suck it up and just deal with the fact” that impersonating others (especially “Pralay” user name) does not take you ANYWHERE.
April 1st, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Pralay,
Are you off your med today? You seem rather hysterical.
Didn’t WillowGlenner alrady provide the sales data? Why do you keep asking for data that’s published weekly in the Mercury News, and is publicly available?
April 1st, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Average percentage of List Price received in March:
Los Altos: 100.2%
Palo Alto: 102.8%
Menlo Park: 100.7%
Cupertino: 100%
Sunnyvale: 99.7%
Santa Clara: 97.1%
Looks like the only fire sale is in Santa Clara. Wow, a whopping 2.9% off sticker!
April 1st, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Are you off your med today? You seem rather hysterical.
————
Too hard to digest all the comments about you?
If I am on med today, that’s makes you look more pathetic. Cannot reply a few comments by Medicated-Pralay?
April 1st, 2008 at 9:20 pm
Didn’t WillowGlenner alrady provide the sales data? Why do you keep asking for data that’s published weekly in the Mercury News, and is publicly available?
—————
What stopped you reading rebuttals posted by madhaus? Too much data? Hard to handle?
Weekly data in Mercury News? How does it prove your point “market is extremely healthy”? Is your another “Feb sale is up” kind of vague info that points nowhere?
April 1st, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Average percentage of List Price received in March:
Los Altos: 100.2%
Palo Alto: 102.8%
Menlo Park: 100.7%
Cupertino: 100%
Sunnyvale: 99.7%
Santa Clara: 97.1%
Looks like the only fire sale is in Santa Clara. Wow, a whopping 2.9% off sticker!
————
One more set of professional data. No comparison with 2007 and 2006 data. No mention of inventory/sale volume.
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:54 am
There little difference from previous years. Go dig up the data from any number of publicly available sources, and stop wasting our time here by spinning your wheels. You know why despite your prolific postings, it has never been featured by Burbs as a subject for discussion? Because as everyone can see what you post is of little to no value. I ask you a simple question to defend your long-held position that the market is sliding. So far, we have seen nothing from you. Nada. You probably don’t even know which neighborhood is 94087, and you certainly haven’t been to many open houses. Spending too much time in your rental unit is making you stale!
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:46 am
There little difference from previous years. Go dig up the data from any number of publicly available sources, and stop wasting our time here by spinning your wheels.
————–
I understand that contracting you is “waste of time”. I am not spinning any wheel. It is you who is doing by spreading propaganda “market is extremely healthy” (but no data to support that). Now you are angry because I exposed your agenda. Now, tell me who is spinning wheel? You or me?
Fox guards hen-house! A real estate agent is giving investment advise!
Now go back to street, start distributing flyers, keep selling/buying homes and make living on commissions.
BTW, don’t dump too many fiyers on front of WG’s home. He does not like that.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:56 am
You know why despite your prolific postings, it has never been featured by Burbs as a subject for discussion?
————–
Wow! Someone scored some points! Give him some certificate so that he can frame it and put up in his office wall. After getting his real estate agent license, this is his 2nd achievement.
Well, I come to burbed for fun. I guess many of visitors come for same reason. Unlike you, I don’t carry NAR’s water. And for time being, you are the greatest fun in this blog. So, you know why Burbed featured you and you should get certificate for that.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:58 am
I ask you a simple question to defend your long-held position that the market is sliding.
————–
I and Madhaus asked simple question to support YOUR OWN statement that “market is extremely healthy”.
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:02 pm
You probably don’t even know which neighborhood is 94087, and you certainly haven’t been to many open houses.
————
But I visited Realtor’s office, went through the “sold” listing on glass window and figured out every home is “flying through the window”. And I stayed in Holiday Express Inn too.
It’s not good enough?
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Spending too much time in your rental unit is making you stale!
————
Probably! It’s possible. But I am 100% sure that living in rental unit makes some other people “stale” too. They are:
1. Real Estate Agents. Not only it makes them “stale”, they go hungry.
2. People who paid inflated price for their homes and there is no buyer for their homes.
Which category are you belong to? Or both?
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:11 pm
I live in 94087, there are quite a few houses for sale around us and many of them are sitting on the market. Some have reduced their asking prices (like the one on parkington and the other on Bernardo). I don’t know if it will continue like this or if they will suddenly start selling, time will tell. The other houses further into the neighborhood from Bernardo seemed to have sold quickly. Obviously there are still a lot of people with money around here. I’m fine with people buying houses they can afford, but hopefully the liar loans and exotic funding will be stopped.
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:15 pm
You know why despite your prolific postings, it has never been featured by Burbs as a subject for discussion?
———–
One more question in this regard.
Most of the times Burbed features all the trashy homes in bay area so that visitors can make fun and sarcastic comments.
If he features YOU, does it make you look like trashy real estate agent?
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Pralay,
Which dictatorship country are you from? It seems that any opinion contrary to yours is considered by you as “trash”.
The point here is that your contributions are not noteworthy as subjects for discussion, due to lack of content. Most of your effort is spent on bad-mouthing others, although you don’t have anything to offer yourself.
I’m giving you a chance to correct that impression by showing us 1 actual house that justifies your position. Will you do that rather than spinning some more?
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Which dictatorship country are you from? It seems that any opinion contrary to yours is considered by you as “trash”.
——–
I just asked a question, RE? Answer YES or NO.
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:30 pm
The point here is that your contributions are not noteworthy as subjects for discussion, due to lack of content.
————–
And what content RE is offering? I am curious. “Sold” signs from Realtor’s window? Or “Feb sale is up” flyer?
————-
Most of your effort is spent on bad-mouthing others, although you don’t have anything to offer yourself.
———
Let’s be precise. Bad-mouthing RealEstater. But that’s deserved for a propagandist anyway, right?
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:38 pm
I’m giving you a chance to correct that impression by showing us 1 actual house that justifies your position. Will you do that rather than spinning some more?
————-
Giving me chance? Who the hell are you?
“Correcting impression”? Ha ha ha! Don’t you know that I am “Priced Out Forever” who cannot “water lawn” and “living cold in winter”? Why should I need to correct impression? Let me try to guess who needs to correct impression – a real estate agent who is faking as “hitech” guy, who claimed to live in “management class” and among “smart people”. Is it too shameful to be real estate agent? I never thought so!
Just do your own job – prove that “market is extremely healthy”.
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Pralay,
Let me repeat,I am not a realtor. I have not charged you a single penny for my advice. How can I benefit from any kind of hidden agenda? All of this conspiracy theory is cooked up by you to slam someone who does not share your opinion.
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Let me repeat,I am not a realtor. I have not charged you a single penny for my advice. How can I benefit from any kind of hidden agenda? All of this conspiracy theory is cooked up by you to slam someone who does not share your opinion.
———–
So I am guessing you belong to 2nd category.
If someone slams you, you know what to do – just lay out some facts and show some data (oooops, I forgot “professional” part again). I am sure that would shut down everybody contradicting you. Rest is just for fun! He he!
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Pralay,
No amount of data can help someone who has a closed mind. Various people here have given you all kinds of information that is publicly accessible. Yet it is your constant excuse for not recognizing the true market condition. If the market were truly bad, it should take you less than 1 minute to find me a bargain house. After all, you have all the data, right?
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Pralay,
By the way, if you noticed, this topic was started by me. If you don’t have any relevant comments, I suggest that you go elsewhere.
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:45 pm
No amount of data can help someone who has a closed mind.
————–
RE,
Atleast help OTHERS who are not in closed mind. Read post #77 where I listed down all the MASSIVE “amount of data” you have provided so far.
Did I miss anything? Oh, yes. That skipping 2006 sale price (because it is higher than current listed price) and quoting only 2005 sale price.
And, yes, some meaningless SP/LP data without historical comparison. Do you want to know how much meaningless? I just figured from Trulia that average SP/LP 3bd SFH in Stockton is 96.1%. Not bad compare to Santa Clara’s 97.1%, right? It’s just “little difference”. I thought it SP/LP for Stockton will be something like 50% or 40% or may be 25%.
So, based on this SP/LP number of 96.1%, can I claim “market is extremely healthy” in Stockton? Of course I can, if I follow your logic. Who cares for all those “little difference”?
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Whoa… let’s all take a deep breath and take a 1 hour break.
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:53 pm
By the way, if you noticed, this topic was started by me. If you don’t have any relevant comments, I suggest that you go elsewhere.
————-
This one takes the cake!
No, RE The Crybaby, you did not start this topic. Learn some basics of blogging. It was started by Burbed – as always have been, in this site. He asked specifically “Good advice? Bad advice? Do you agree with Real Estater?”
I disagree with RealEstater. So I will be posting all my disagreement here.
I have no reason to “go elsewhere”, unless Burbed tells me so. You are grossly over-estimating your ability and hence crossing the boundary as a result – for what you can do and cannot.
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:06 pm
In post #96: Which dictatorship country are you from? It seems that any opinion contrary to yours is considered by you as “trash”.
In post #8: The info given by the amateur types here are plain wrong.
In post #103: By the way, if you noticed, this topic was started by me. If you don’t have any relevant comments, I suggest that you go elsewhere.
————-
Does it sound like all above statements is made by same person. Unfortunately, YES.
He accuses me for coming from a country of dictatorship, all though he starts his rhetoric in this thread by labeling everything that contradicts his viewpoint as “amateur types”.
Then when he cannot take it anymore, he asks me to “go elsewhere”.
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Various people here have given you all kinds of information that is publicly accessible.
————-
Some did like WG. But that discussion concluded when Madhaus posted comment #70.
Did you provide any useful info? Nope. If so, just refer the post number.
————
Yet it is your constant excuse for not recognizing the true market condition. If the market were truly bad, it should take you less than 1 minute to find me a bargain house. After all, you have all the data, right?
————-
Just show some data to prove “market is extremely healthy”, RE. Ooops,
I again forgot “professional” part —- PROFESSIONAL DATA.
April 2nd, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Pralay,
After showing you the latest data from March 2008, you’re still saying I’ve not given you anything to back up my assertions.
If homes are selling at or above asking, how is that not a healthy market (by any standard)?
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:16 pm
After showing you the latest data from March 2008, you’re still saying I’ve not given you anything to back up my assertions.
If homes are selling at or above asking, how is that not a healthy market (by any standard)?
————–
Read Post #104.
In Stockton, if the SP/LP ratio is 96.1%, how it is NOT a healthy market? It should be a healthy market, right? Most of the homes are selling very close to asking price. It’s just 1% lower from Santa Clara SP/LP ratio. Very “little difference”, right?
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:20 pm
RE,
It’s very apparent that you either don’t read other comments or you have serious problem of comprehension. Either way, it is not a sign of “smart” person.
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Wow, this thread just keeps going, and going, and going.
Let me repeat,I am not a realtor. I have not charged you a single penny for my advice.
And a good thing, because I must say your advice is worth every penny and not one cent more.
RE, you’re funny but what’s funny once isn’t necessarily funny 100 times.
Pralay, RE’s really not worth it.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:15 pm
http://sfbay.redfin.com/blog/2008/03/the_state_of_the_market_in_los_gatos_-2.html#comments dedicated to Pralay
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:39 pm
I am going to suggest the heatmaps on Trulia for a data source.
http://www.trulia.com/home_prices/California/San_Jose-heat_map/
Theres one really HUGE caviat to all real estate sales data available now, though. The foreclosures are showing up as SALES back to the bank, for the amt of the loan- usually a number like $693,227. or some unlikely actual sales figure that a buyer would negotiate. These started coming out last year and are skewing the sales figures, lots of times they are less than the house is actually selling for too. Here is one:
http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1158407
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:27 pm
WillowGlenner,
You’re absolutely right. This is what happens when an amateur looks at the data without knowing what’s really going on.
If you look at Trulia’s heat map for Palo Alto, :
http://www.trulia.com/home_prices/California/Palo_Alto-heat_map/
You’d think there are lots of home selling at Sunnyvale prices!
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Look at that, bought for $680K in 11/2006 and already sitting unsold for a couple of weeks at a price less than that.
Also note the house is selling for less than that “loan” figure.
How were you able to show this was a foreclosure loan amount?
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:32 pm
madhaus,
If you had asked for my advice back when you bought your home, I would’ve given you the exact same advice. Fortunately for you, you came to the same conclusion on your own. Unfortunately, Pralay is not so lucky, and lost out on more than a few pennies.
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:34 pm
madhaus,
>>How were you able to show this was a foreclosure loan amount?
This is very common scenario. If you ever shop for a foreclosure property, you’ll come across it right away.
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:37 pm
RE -
I asked WG, not you, because WG can actually answer the question asked.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:03 pm
RealEstater: My point (if you had clicked on the link you’d know) Brenda, a “professional” is repetitively corrected by an “amateur” on statistics interpretation (foreclosure prices, MLS listings, crime rate). I am sure she is very good at many aspects of her job… but a RE license does not qualify one to interpret statistical data correctly. If anything, it seems to be taken as a license to misinterpret it. So please stop the “professional” nonsense.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Burbed, did you move your servers to Alaska? Or did I misconfigure my timezone somewhere?
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Unfortunately, Pralay is not so lucky, and lost out on more than a few pennies.
————-
Don’t worry about me, RE? Worry about your comprehension problem (or reading problem). And worry about your “PROFESSIONAL DATA”.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Pralay,
I bet you I can find at least 1 house in Stockton that’s selling at bargain basement price. Can you do the same for the Real Bay Area where you claim the market is down?
I can’t believe you’re sleeping already. Will you get up and answer the question?
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:27 pm
WillowGlenner,
You’re absolutely right. This is what happens when an amateur looks at the data without knowing what’s really going on.
——-
RealEstater,
The difference between you and WG is that he is consistent and provides data to back up his point. You don’t. You just throw some meaningless SP/LP ratio data to prove your imaginary theory.
So, here you got someone whom you can learn from. Instead of calling others “amateur”, just back up your point with relevant data.
It seems the only amateur here is YOU…..and a crybaby too, who throws up tantrum like “this is MY topic. Go elsewhere.”
That was really funny!
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:31 pm
I bet you I can find at least 1 house in Stockton that’s selling at bargain basement price. Can you do the same for the Real Bay Area where you claim the market is down?
——-
You are deviating from the point, RE. It’s YOU who showed SP/LP ratio to prove the “market is extremely healthy”. I just showed you that even a crappy housing market like Stockton has SP/LP ratio 96.1%. So, how does it prove that Santa Clara with 97.1% is in any better situation than Stockton?
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:37 pm
RE -
I asked WG, not you, because WG can actually answer the question asked.
————
One can answer only if he understands the question properly. And one can understand the question only if he can comprehend it.
He, delightfully, threw some SP/LP numbers to prove “market is extremely good”. Now he cannot defend it anymore. Therefore, he is back to his old “basement price”.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:42 pm
DreamT,
Before you pick a fight, make sure you can hold your ground. Brenda is correct, Los Gatos Mountains is a different market from Los Gatos, just as East Palo Alto is a different market from Palo Alto. If you don’t believe it, go to mlslistings.com, and click on View All next to “Cities”. One is listed as LGM, and the other as LG. Prices in LGM is generaly lower than LG. It doesn’t make sense to lump the crime statistics of the two places together.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:44 pm
If you had asked for my advice back when you bought your home, I would’ve given you the exact same advice.
————
The problem with you that you don’t understand the difference between 1989 and 1993. For you it is “always great time to buy”.
Madhaus did not have that problem.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:53 pm
RealEstater,
You’re correct, there are indeed two categories for search purposes. But, lo and behold, search by Los Gatos only, and you find Los Gatos Mountains listings (ex: http://mlslistings.com/Reports/Main.aspx?propertyId=787370). What happened? I guess MLS forgot to ask for your advice to segregate the listings by market.
By the way I am not picking fights, just pointing out faulty logic, incomplete research or wrong assumptions. I encourage due diligence before posting.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Pralay,
Are you slow or what? Your irrelevant example was already refuted by WG.
I give you another day to find 1 house that justifies your position. Better start working on it soon.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:02 am
DreamT,
If you simply type in the text, the database will do a string search, and naturally both will come up. However, if you search by checking the box for LG, then only Los Gatos will come up.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:21 am
RE, I’m with you on how to use MLS properly. But Brenda did not – she uses the Yahoo! site which includes many Los Gatos mountains properties. Check for yourself. So her post is misleading, albeit without malice.
Nice cross-posting of yours on her blog by the way. I am sure she will feel better.
April 3rd, 2008 at 7:01 am
to whoever asked up there- I don’t think there is really any way to tell that a house on the market is a foreclosure or not. There are definitely a lot of them out there, but the banks list the foreclosures with agents so you can’t tell by the listing that this is a foreclosure. HOWEVER, one telltale sign is to look on Redfin at the last sales price, and if it is an odd number like the one below, this is a foreclosure bought back by the bank as the last “sale”.
http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1411272
You would THINK that almost all foreclosures would have offer prices lower than the last sale when the bank took the house back. In the case of all the condos I have seen, that is true. But when you get to the houses in the good areas, it is the opposite usually, where the foreclosure is for less than the current asking price (I was very disappointed to discover this). For the good houses, the foreclosure is usually because the owner had a spike in his payments and can’t pay, and the house has not appreciated enough to make it worth his while to sell (he needs to sell at 6% over to break even). The bank then gets that house and is offering those for almost the same, OR MORE than they foreclosed for. The banks all have their own foreclosed houses sites to look at on the web. This is the one for countrywide. You can see that they have an enormous number of properties in places like Salinas. But get into the RBA, or even the extended RBA which includes places like fremont, and these foreclosure sites have almost no houses, just condos and even then they aren’t priced like a firesale or anything.
http://www.reoexperts.net/
http://www.countrywide.com/purchase/f_reo.asp
April 3rd, 2008 at 7:29 am
Here is an example of what I see all the time. banks charging MUCH MORE for a foreclosure than the loan amt.
There’s a house from the downey savings foreclosure website for 775K in san jose (2775 Gilham court, looks like a pretty nice house, must be ESJ somewhere). Downey savings has 350 or so CA foreclosed properties on their site and a whopping 5 – yes FIVE properties listed in foreclosure in all of santa clara valley. The direct links to the house don’t work so go to their site and query on san jose and select it.
http://www.downeysavings.com/ffs
Here’s the house on Redfin
http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1430940
The bank bought this back for 600K in December. Must have been an interest only loan for that even dollar amt, and there was probably a SECOND on that house too which doesn’t get anything when it forecloses. But that doesn’t matter- the banks LIABILITY on this house is $600K, and yet they are selling it for 775K, probably to recoup their losses in other areas of their business. That is typical. So the county records show a completely bogus sale of 600K on the books for this foreclosure, and then whatever the sales price turns out to be.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:13 am
Are you slow or what? Your irrelevant example was already refuted by WG.
I give you another day to find 1 house that justifies your position. Better start working on it soon.
————–
RE The Dumb Guy,
Acting like “smart” ass does not make you “smart” guy. You better justify how your SP/LP numbers shows the health of the market. You haven’t done it so far.
WG just described how the sale data could be skewed due to all the foreclosed units. And I don’t disagree with him.
OMG, foreclosure in real bay area!!!! Didn’t you say month back that there not much foreclosures in real bay area? In fact you made a very funny and stupid argument that the percentage of foreclosure is so low compare total number of housing units in California that there is no impact in market. If so, they should not skew sale data that much, right? Basically, if you agree with WG, you are contradicting your own past argument.
It seems you don’t have any argument left anymore. That’s why you are referring WG’s argument. Well, WG never threw meaningless SP/LP data to prove anything. YOU did.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:44 am
Meaningless data from March 2008? If buyers in multiple cities are paying above asking on the average, how would you characterize the market condition? Duh….
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:53 am
>>In fact you made a very funny and stupid argument that the percentage of foreclosure is so low compare total number of housing units in California that there is no impact in market. If so, they should not skew sale data that much, right?
Read your own statement above. I was clearly referring to foreclosures not impacting California as a whole. You’re confusing that with the impact to a single market like Stockton.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:55 am
Pralay,
The clock is ticking…it’d be really pathetic if you cannot find a single house to back up your position.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:13 am
burbed, my comment #133 says “your comment is awaiting moderation” when I look at it. It starts with “to whoever asked…” – if it isn’t showing up then there is some kind of bug
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:19 am
burbed, my comment #133 says “your comment is awaiting moderation” when I look at it. It starts with “to whoever asked…” – if it isn’t showing up then there is some kind of bug
————–
WG,
I think it happens when you reach the limit of max links you can provide.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:22 am
Read your own statement above. I was clearly referring to foreclosures not impacting California as a whole. You’re confusing that with the impact to a single market like Stockton.
————-
Does that contradict for RBA if foreclosure records skews sale data too much?
Why don’t you take some basic course of logic? Your “smart” brain lacks very basic logical reasoning – something that even an average 5th grade kid has.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:24 am
Fixed
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:35 am
Meaningless data from March 2008? If buyers in multiple cities are paying above asking on the average, how would you characterize the market condition? Duh….
————–
It would have been meaningful if you compared the data with past. But without historical comparison it is pretty much meaningless.
I gave the analogy of Stockton where current SP/LP is 96.1%. I don’t have data for Stockton for 2005 or 2006. Let’s assume it was 100%. Only 3.9% drop, right? Not much difference. But we all know how Stockton market was then (in 2005) and how it is now.
So, could you provide 2005/2006 SP/LP data for all the RBA cities you listed down?
It’s a well known fact that SP/LP ratio always has affinity towards 100%. It’s amazing that a licensed real agent like you does not know that. So, unless you start considering all the “little difference” which you are trying to ignore so badly to make your dubious point, it is pretty much meaningless.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:41 am
The clock is ticking…it’d be really pathetic if you cannot find a single house to back up your position.
——-
Nobody cares for your clock. If you were “smart” and bright, you would have been known that already. Apparently you are not.
Unless you post some substance with “PROFESSIONAL DATA” (cherry-picking acceptable for your case), you won’t get any reply.
What happened RE? Suddenly stopped throwing “this is MY topic, go elsewhere” tantrum??????
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:48 am
Before you pick a fight, make sure you can hold your ground.
———–
I missed this gem earlier.
DreamT,
This is RealEstater’s topic. Go elsewhere.
Disclaimer: Any disagreement with RealEstater will be considered “picking a fight”. So beware!
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:55 am
Nice cross-posting of yours on her blog by the way. I am sure she will feel better.
—————
Bad time! Realtors should help and support each other (at least for time being, before ccannibalism starts).
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:08 am
Pralay,
The Stockton argument has already been shot out of the water. Don’t want to hear about it anymore.
Look, if buyers are paying more than list price, that’s a strong indication that the market is healthy. Folks don’t pay more just because they’re in a good mood. They pay because that’s the only way to get into a house.
Last year, and the year before, folks were also paying above asking. The Real Bay Area is just one party after another.
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:17 am
The Stockton argument has already been shot out of the water. Don’t want to hear about it anymore.
———-
You didn’t RE. If so, refer post #.
———
Last year, and the year before, folks were also paying above asking. The Real Bay Area is just one party after another.
———–
Just show the numbers, RE. You just pulling words from your ass, not data/statistics.
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:21 am
Look, if buyers are paying more than list price, that’s a strong indication that the market is healthy. Folks don’t pay more just because they’re in a good mood. They pay because that’s the only way to get into a house.
————
Some homes? Yes. Not ALL. The real question is if the number dropping gradually, staying same or increasing? That would tell the direction the market is heading.
How the 2005 SP/LP was in Sunnyvale? Any idea?
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:37 am
>>Some homes? Yes. Not ALL.
LOL. The market is not healthy because not all homes are selling above 100% of list?
>>The real question is if the number dropping gradually, staying same or increasing? That would tell the direction the market is heading.
The real question is what is your position after all the time wasting personal attacks?
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:46 am
LOL. The market is not healthy because not all homes are selling above 100% of list?
———-
So, why don’t tell me if the number is down or up?
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:49 am
The real question is what is your position after all the time wasting personal attacks?
———
What is your position after throwing tantrum like “this is my topic. go elsewhere”? Still feeling like throwing more tantrum, Mr. RealEstater The Tantrum Guy?
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:05 am
Unlike you, I’m not afraid to state my position: The market is extremely healthy, with Real Bay Area cities selling at or above list on the average. I can find plenty of homes to back up my position.
What about you?
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:24 am
Unlike you, I’m not afraid to state my position: The market is extremely healthy, with Real Bay Area cities selling at or above list on the average. I can find plenty of homes to back up my position.
What about you?
———–
Go back to post #52 and start reading down. Oh, I forgot, you have serious comprehension problem. In that case I cannot help you. You need to seek professional help. But it seems you are not “smart” and bright enough to seek professional help either.
I have an idea. When you get your next client and a transaction goes through (hopefully), instead of taking the commission, ask him/her to teach you how to comprehend. That is the easiest way I can think of.
Wait a minute. You are delusional too. First you asked to show property, then termed it as “random data”. This is a serious problem. You need some “smart” professional to help in this regard. But, wait! You live in “management class” neighborhood, right? Hooray! Spring is here (and “Spring Bounce” is here too). Do a neighborhood BBQ and find someone to help you.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:36 am
Pralay,
I don’t get it. Rather than just stating your position, you waste all this effort beating around the bush. Could be be because you now realize you’re on shaky ground?
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
don’t get it. Rather than just stating your position, you waste all this effort beating around the bush. Could be be because you now realize you’re on shaky ground?
————-
Nope. My position is already stated by me. You just need to read my older posts (again comprehension problem?).
It’s pointless to repeat the same thing to a person who gets “pulse of the market” from the “sold” signs on Realtor’s office windows.
It’s pointless to repeat the same thing to a person who is so deluded and in denial that he prefers to ignore any data that contradicts his argument. Do you remember your amazing maneuver to quote only 2005 sale record and ignore the 2006 sale record to make your point? That’s a classic example of denial.
Or did you think others are too dumb to notice that data from Redfin listing? If so, that’s sign that you are not a “smart” and bright guy. Dumb people always think he is “smart” and other are dumbs.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Pralay,
As I said last night, RE is not worth it. Why not come over and water some lawns to de-stress?
WG,
thank you very much for the excellent reply to my question. The links were very helpful, I went through both and found a few foreclosures in Redwood City, a bunch in San Jose (mostly East Side, not all). I did find a couple in Sunnyvale but not in 94087. Another site showed a house around the corner from me as going into pre-foreclosure though, plus a couple more in this neighborhood. Let’s see how that develops as more of these interest-only loans start resetting.
I have a post in today’s topic about my discussion with a neighborhood real estate agent and her “professional” take on sales here and elsewhere.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Pralay,
As I said last night, RE is not worth it. Why not come over and water some lawns to de-stress?
———–
Madhaus,
Unfortunately I don’t have my OWN lawn to water. I am “Priced Out Forever” and but I am staying in Holiday Inn Express.
It’s fun to make fun of him, before weekend hits.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:54 pm
>>It’s pointless to repeat the same thing to a person who is so deluded and in denial that he prefers to ignore any data that contradicts his argument.
So far you cannot find even a single data point that justifies your argument. I think Burbed should hold a major celebration once you take that step, as it would be a major personal milestone for you in confronting your self-denial. I promise, I won’t laugh. We’re all here to be your moral support even though we may disagree with you.
>>Do you remember your amazing maneuver to quote only 2005 sale record and ignore the 2006 sale record to make your point?
As I recall, I was trying to save you some embarassment by not quoting you the even higher sales number.
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:24 pm
So far you cannot find even a single data point that justifies your argument. I think Burbed should hold a major celebration once you take that step, as it would be a major personal milestone for you in confronting your self-denial. I promise, I won’t laugh. We’re all here to be your moral support even though we may disagree with you.
———–
I don’t need to find anything. And I would not waste my time on it. Because data/statistics are all over. Unlike you, they don’t lie.
You are on your usual tactics where you ignore all kind of information given to you, cherry pick something here and there and then stick to it as long as it is convenient for you. And that’s why now you kept parroting same line again and again. Unfortunately, it does not make your advance argument.
What happened your SP/LP numbers? No comparison with 2005? 2006? 2007? It seems you totally abandoned that argument to support “market is extremely healthy”.
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:30 pm
As I recall, I was trying to save you some embarassment by not quoting you the even higher sales number.
————–
Damn, that stupid Burbed! He did not keep an option for editing earlier comments. If he did, RealEstater could edit his comment #58 and made it look like what is saying now.
RE,
You skipped 2006 sale record for VERY SIMPLE REASON. You did not want to show that current listed price is LOWER than 2006 sale price.
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:35 pm
As I recall, I was trying to save you some embarassment by not quoting you the even higher sales number.
———–
You don’t have to “recall”, The Make-belief Hitech Guy!
Do you know something called “scrollbar” located at the right hand side of your browser? You just need to scroll up and read post #58.
If you cannot, just ask one of your colleague real estate agents. He/she might be able to show you how to scroll up. It is pretty easy. Nowadays even four year toddler can do it very efficiently.
April 3rd, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Pralay,
burbed has granted many of my wishes! You do not have to scroll to refer to old comments, you can link directly to them! So if you want someone to read comment #58, tell them to read this. The URL for each comment is available on the date/time stamp after the author’s name.
Also, I know you have no lawn to water at Holiday Inn Express, I am giving you the opportunity to water some of the lawns in my newly purchased rental empire in 94087. I know it’s not your very own lawn but I will allow you to pretend.
April 3rd, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Also, I know you have no lawn to water at Holiday Inn Express, I am giving you the opportunity to water some of the lawns in my newly purchased rental empire in 94087. I know it’s not your very own lawn but I will allow you to pretend.
—————
Madhaus,
You sound like an economic terrorist of bay area – just like that stupid seller of Wolfe Road home who is selling in a price lower than the price he bought in 2006 (What is his name? Mr. Rivas or something?).
You are encouraging people to rent and “live cold in winter”! That’s economic terrorism. Renting means no equity (to be precise “instant equity”, which is applicable to all the homes in RBA). No equity means no wealth. You are conspiring to keep people in poverty.
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:25 pm
RE: I told you, he doesn’t HAVE to cite any data, since his position is “the market is terrible no matter what anyone says”. That’s an unfalsifiable statement, which is inherently unjustifiable–and so he’s freed from the burden of attempting to justify it!
Nihilism is understandably attractive; it’s one of the most liberating personal philosophies one can have. If nothing means anything and no true good can ever be done, then why go to any effort to improve life? Just tune in, turn on, drop out.
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:56 pm
I told you, he doesn’t HAVE to cite any data, since his position is “the market is terrible no matter what anyone says”. That’s an unfalsifiable statement, which is inherently unjustifiable–and so he’s freed from the burden of attempting to justify it!
———–
For the sake of argument, let’s assume you are right.
But isn’t it true that the position “market is extremely healthy no matter what anyone says or what data says” – that’s also an unfalsifiable one? And as this is unfalsifiable, you can blame anything that contradicts. For example, “media is spinning all the news and they are to be blamed for all the downturn”. Or you can just omit 2006 sale data and quote only 2005 sale price. Or, you can refuse to compare SP/LP with previous years SP/LP numbers.
Sound familiar?
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Or you can starts throwing tantrum “This is MY topic. You go elsewhere.”
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:06 pm
There’s really two issues, (1) Are prices going down?, and (2) will they go down?
(1) Prices are certainly already going down in the vast majority of cities, the numbers bear this out. The fact that a few houses sell above list doesn’t mean that the entire market is healthy. Prices are down in most areas, inventory is rising, and the number of sales is dropping. While the peninsula hasn’t gotten “it” like the East Bay, declines are moving in. No “special area” will be spared, although some will far better than others, which thus leads to my answer to question 2.
(2) The market will drop, considerably in areas like the East Bay where it already hasn’t. Yes, this includes the “real bay area” Why? Because like the stock market in 1999, houses are vastly overpriced relative to salaries, historical price levels, and rental rates. Without “fake money” like in the past several years, there simply aren’t enough families earning 200k+ to support housing prices with your standard 30 year mortgage. And yes, it takes 200k to buy a 700k house, which is the average price in all but a few cities. Does that average household make 200k? I think not. Thus,Econ 101 says prices must fall. Prices are also vastly overpriced based on historical prices. There is no reason for this, as the population hasn’t grown at any greater rate than in the past nor has supply grown at lower than historical rates. Again, Econ 101, prices will fall back to their trend line. Lastly, houses are overpriced relative to rent, which actually must depict actual supply v. demand because you can’t obtain an interest only mortgage to pay rent. Why pay 5k to own a house that won’t appreciate for 5 years if you can rent for 2k? No reason unless you think the house will appreciate considerable, or place significant importance on being able to claim that you are a homeowner.
And for the record, I happen to be a broker/Realtor, although it’s not how I earn a living.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:36 am
R,
In response to your post, take a look at #27 in this thread:
http://www.burbed.com/2008/04/03/glut-of-unsold-housing-in-fortress-no-no-no/
April 4th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Pralay,
It is obvious to everyone that so far only you have subbornly refused to provide the data requested.
In all other instances, we’ve showed you all kinds of data, justifications, reasoning, even down to individual examples as needed. You may disagree with those, but that’s an entirely different issue.
April 4th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
It is obvious to everyone that so far only you have subbornly refused to provide the data requested.
In all other instances, we’ve showed you all kinds of data, justifications, reasoning, even down to individual examples as needed. You may disagree with those, but that’s an entirely different issue.
———-
RE,
You have not showed any data, except that meaningless SL/LP ratio. If you did, quote those post numbers.
April 4th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Real Estater- Why are homes in 94087 dipping below 900,000 after being in the market for months? Why is there a house on Latham in Mountain View asking for 733,000 when the house right down the street (same size also remodeled) was going for over 900,000 last summer?
April 4th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Real Estater- Why are homes in 94087 dipping below 900,000 after being in the market for months? Why is there a house on Latham in Mountain View asking for 733,000 when the house right down the street (same size also remodeled) was going for over 900,000 last summer?
————–
BTDT,
It would be futile and waste of time to find such a home and ask him such a question. Madhaus already gave examples. I bet he will declare “those are homes with issues” and “these are just random data”.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
been_there_done_that,
These questions have been answered before. As Madhaus acknowledged after checking with his realtor, the homes in his neighborhood are all selling for above $1M, except for those on big streets.
I’ve also explained before that in any market you will find some homes staying on the market due to reasons unrelated to market conditions. For example, the seller may have over-priced the home for his neighborhood, or the home may have significant issues, such as being located near a freeway or power lines.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
been_there_done_that,
Let’s use the house on Latham Street as an example:
http://www.movoto.com/real-estate/homes-for-sale/CA/Mountain-View/1264-Latham-St-100_763732.htm
There are 3 signficant issues that I can immediately spot:
1. Lot size is only 3000. That’s only half of a standard lot size.
2. Next to big street – Shoreline Blvd.
3. Home size is only 728 sq. ft.
Combine that with the $800K asking price, there are better deals out there. The home priced above the market.
Pralay,
You taking notes?
April 4th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Pralay,
You taking notes?
———-
I did, but not for what you thought. I noted that my another guess became true. As usual you said “these home have issues”
Well, in past, in “extremely healthy market”, those “homes with issues” were sold for higher prices than current listed prices. That’s the bottomline.
April 4th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Pralay,
>>Well, in past, in “extremely healthy market”, those “homes with issues” were sold for higher prices than current listed prices.
Perhaps the problem is with your comprehension. I said the RBA market is extremely healthy, but I did not say it is at the peak of a market frenzy.
During the dot-com boom in 2000, homes with issues still sold quickly. However, today’s prices are even higher than those times. Back in 2000, Madhaus’ house would never have sold for over $1M.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
I said the RBA market is extremely healthy, but I did not say it is at the peak of a market frenzy.
———-
No, that’s not my comprehension problem. In past you claimed that todays market is as good as past years. In addition you also oppose the argument that the market is in downturn.
Now you are changing your position and labeling previous years as “peak of the market frenzy”. If previous years were peak of the frenzy, you got to be admitting that the market is declining.
Secondly, you have not shown any proof that “market is extremely healthy”. If you did, quote post number.
So, if there is any problem at all, that’s your vagueness (as mentioned in Madhaus in other thread). May be the meanings of english words in your dictionary are totally different from normal meaning that common people know. But hey, that’s true for any real agent, isn’t it? They are always vague and their meaning of words are totally different from rest of the world.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
During the dot-com boom in 2000, homes with issues still sold quickly. However, today’s prices are even higher than those times.
———–
Forget 2000, you can quote 1950 price or the price when Christ was born. That does not prove that today’s market is “extremely healthy”.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Quote of the day:
“If previous years were peak of the frenzy, you got to be admitting that the market is declining.”
April 4th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Pralay,
Why does it mean so much to you that everyone subscribes to your belief that the market is declining? Why do lose your cool when people don’t buy into your agenda? Please tell us, inquiring minds want to know!
April 4th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
What’s your vested interest, Pralay?
Not talking about you specificially, here’s what I’ve observed. For the past decade particularly, a lot of people have “missed the boat” and are priced out of the market. As the national market started dropping, these people finally found an outlet for their envy and resentment toward those who made the right moves (no pun intended). They started fantasizing that the BA market will collapse like a dam that can no longer hold the water. It it happens, they can take advantage of the situation, and become a homeowner. Why do they so badly want to own? Because they know BA prices will keep on rising in the long run. They all want to be the next Madhaus, not the next Pralay!
Unfortunately, I got bad news. Precisely because there are so many people waiting in the wings to become the next home owners in the BA, every little opportunity in the market will immediately be absorbed by eager buyers. This is why the BA market is so resilient. As I see it, the only ways the BA market can drop significantly are:
1) Global warming causes water to rush inland, and swallows up all land.
2) Pralay’s country launches a nuclear attack on its neighbor.
Perhaps Pralay should focus on these factors instead.
April 4th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Why do lose your cool when people don’t buy into your agenda? Please tell us, inquiring minds want to know!
————–
There are enough number people who disagree with me in many cases. The difference between them and you that you spread propaganda without any basis or data-point.
Again, go back to the initial comments. Burbed wanted to know if “do you agree with Real Estater”. Of course when people started disagreeing with you, you exploded by saying “the info given by the amateur types here are plain wrong”. Post #8. Then post #103, where asked me to “go elsewhere”.
So, tell me Mr. Delusional RealEstater The Fake Hitech Guy, who lost his cool? Me or YOU?
And my “agenda”? Nice try but a dumb one! As you have been accused for same in past, you are trying to recycle the same accusation and put it on others. Try something better.
Wow! “inquiring minds”!!!! Mr. Delusional learning something after living in “management class” neighborhood. Honestly, I think “delusional mind” will be more appropriate for you.
April 4th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
What’s your vested interest, Pralay?
Not talking about you specificially, here’s what ……..
……..
Perhaps Pralay should focus on these factors instead.
—————
RE,
If you keep writing about me, I would not mind. I would enjoy it just like anybody else, provided it is funny.
Oh, btw, you forgot to mention that I am “Priced Out Forever”. Living “cold in winter” and cannot “water my own lawn”.
But I will again peak fight with you if you
1. make sales pitch.
2. spread NAR-like propaganda.
3. label other’s comment as “amateur types”
4. ask me to “go elsewhere”.
Now, it’s your choice what you want to do.
April 4th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
My guess? You will choose to go back to your good old game-playing which Madhaus described in other thread (post #33), This is what you are good at and you are simply not funny.
http://www.burbed.com/2008/04/03/glut-of-unsold-housing-in-fortress-no-no-no/#comment-15311
April 4th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Pralay,
The premise to post #103 is if you don’t have any relevant comments. In that case, I politely suggested you go elsewhere, as this is not Ultimate Fighting Championship. Please focus on rational discussions.
Oh, BTW, if your kid comes home with a 97 score out of 100, please don’t beat him up because his grades are declining. After all, he did score 100 last year.
April 4th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Oh, BTW, if your kid comes home with a 97 score out of 100, please don’t beat him up because his grades are declining. After all, he did score 100 last year.
—————
First of all, I would not “beat him up” for any circumstance – even if he gets a big ZERO. You got be having great culture in your “management class” neighborhood! Or may be this is part of the process of making “smart” people with “brain power“. Otherwise I don’t understand where it is coming from.
I would not worry about my kid getting 97. But declining the score gradually like 100, then 97, then 90, then 80? I would pay attention. This is something you won’t understand because you don’t believe in past data and trend based on it, right?
April 4th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Please focus on rational discussions.
————
Come on RE, I was expecting something more in the line of post #182.
Is rational=game-playing (something that Madhaus described earlier) in your “RealEstater Dictionary”?
April 4th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Of the 188 comments so far in this thread, guess how many are written by Pralay?
86.
Burbed should start paying this guy. He’s working overtime.
Yeah, maybe I have too much time to count, but not as much as Pralay.
April 4th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
islandboy,
If you count up his postings in other threads, it amounts to a full time job!
April 4th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
>>I would not worry about my kid getting 97. But declining the score gradually like 100, then 97, then 90, then 80? I would pay attention. This is something you won’t understand because you don’t believe in past data and trend based on it, right?
The kid so far has gotten one 97 scores out of 6 subjects. The others are all at all 100 plus extra credit. Where does it the extrapolation to 80 come from? Is it your agenda at work again, or just your math skills?
April 6th, 2008 at 6:05 am
[...] Real Bay Area is just one party after another.” Your advice needed [Burbed.com] RealEstater Says: April 3rd, 2008 at 10:08 [...]
April 7th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Burbed should start paying this guy. He’s working overtime.
Yeah, maybe I have too much time to count, but not as much as Pralay.
———-
He he! I would be very happy to get paid. After all, I am “unemployed”, according to RE.
BTW, Thanks for counting. I will give $10 for that, after I get paid.
April 7th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
If you count up his postings in other threads, it amounts to a full time job!
————
Of course it is fulltime job and I should get paid accordingly. And I don’t get commissions for getting spreading NAR-like propaganda either.
April 7th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
The kid so far has gotten one 97 scores out of 6 subjects. The others are all at all 100 plus extra credit. Where does it the extrapolation to 80 come from? Is it your agenda at work again, or just your math skills?
———-
You are in in your usual game play again. Now you are adding your condition “6 subjects” blah blah blah.
And this is a classic example of your comprehension problem. I did not do extrapolation. I described a hypothetical scenario of “declining the score”. You have hard time to understand this simple description.
April 7th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
And just like your kid’s score, do you want to know my analogy.
When the dark cloud is looming over your head on sky, but haven’t started raining yet, don’t tell us “it’s an EXTREMELY GOOD weather”.
Gosh, you are not a weatherman, but a plain simple real estate agent. And nobody has to rely no his market/weather forecast.