What’s $1.2 million dollars and happy to see you?
33 Pointe View Pl, South San Francisco, CA 94080 1101203 MLS# 336836 – Property Details
$1,199,000
* Status: Active
* Bedroom: 3
* Bathroom: 3&1/2
* Year Built: 2004
* Lot Size: N/A
* Square Footage: 2490
* List Date: 2/8/2008* Garage Spaces: 2
Modern sophistication w/unrivaled views! High on San Bruno Mountain, with views from the hills to the sparkling SF Bay, this semi-detached 3 level home has elegant architectural details, lovingly selected color schemes & custom WOW amenities including a world class kitchen. Designed for today’s living, the floor plan offers both the openness for entertaining on the main level & privacy on the lower levels. An ideal home for Buyers who look for easy access to downtown SF & Peninsula.
Thanks to Burbed reader sonarrat for the find… and the joke.
Heh. “Happy to see you.”
I think I’ll just leave it at that.
BTW, gotta love the location! Easy access to freeways indeed!
October 24th, 2008 at 7:12 am
Dear Melody Kearny, learn how to take pictures not the size of a postage stamp and then come back with listings. Do you even review your own listings?
October 24th, 2008 at 7:51 am
test
October 24th, 2008 at 8:19 am
The grey thing on the right of the photo, isn’t this a neighboring house dwarfing this one? If yes, I wonder how they squeezed 2490 sqf behind this garage. If not..
October 24th, 2008 at 8:26 am
I can just imagine the fire department having to come help small children that get stuck trying to crawl between this and the house next door. Secondly… the house id OOOGLY!
October 24th, 2008 at 8:48 am
The house is built on a hill, so there is a lot of space behind the garage.
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&t=h&layer=c&cbll=37.665101,-122.401507&panoid=LBdhfM4R_gs2_8vrnAKBAg&cbp=1,348.0855915686674,,0,-17.82196544593283&ll=37.66537,-122.401597&spn=0.001707,0.002414&z=19
Google Streetview has better photos than the realtor.
October 24th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Looks like these are little more than glorified town houses. That and they’re built on the surface of Mars. Nothing like a yard full of volcanic rocks…
October 24th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Lava rocks, or pixellated dirt? Hard to tell.
For those of you withOUT dirty minds, this house looks like a cyclops.
October 24th, 2008 at 9:48 am
LOL! It does doesn’t it? A big ole’ window staring out front.
October 24th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Look at the interior pictures. I think the dirty-mind angle is completely appropriate here. Austin Powers, anyone?
October 24th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Full credit to burbed for -that- joke by the way.
October 24th, 2008 at 10:25 am
An RBA-related post from Calculatedrisk —
To whomever was arguing that Palo Alto, Los Gatos and other areas are “fortress” and will hold up well:
At the end of September everything was peachy at the biotech startup my wife is at. 3 weeks later an emergency 30% RIF.
In the words of the CFO he’s never seen things get this bad this fast in all his years in the business. And I presume that would include the VC blowup during the 2000/2001 dotcom bust.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Must be hard to take a clear picture when you have a big boner…
October 24th, 2008 at 11:17 am
My company is in the midst for going for a 10% slash and burn by year end with more on the way next year if it doesn’t get better. Yes indeed, methinks job losses are going to start to affect RBA soon…
October 24th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Let’s just say that I’m getting my dental work done, a medical checkup performed, and new glasses soon. I would not want to be saddled with debt right now.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:56 am
Bob,
No long ago you were saying you could retire somewhere right now. You’re telling me you cannot even handle the expense of new glasses?
October 24th, 2008 at 11:56 am
…Not long ago
October 24th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Someone posting inconsistent statements on burbed?
Alert the authorities.
It is a little bit odd to say those things would ’saddle’ one with debt, however…
October 24th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
c’mon, RE – if you were possibly going to lose your health benefits shortly wouldn’t you get everything done while it’ll cost a lot less? If not then you’re a fool.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
True. I just noticed the “debt” part as I hit submit. I think bob jumped the tracks during his post (train of thought derailment).
October 24th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
RE, you’re mis-reading the post. If I can get glasses, dental, and other stuff free, then why not do it now? My company is so far just fine, but in this economy, it pays to be cautious. Yes- I could semi-retire (somewhere else) right now. But health care is serious. All it takes is one car accident to bankrupt the person without health insurance, no matter how rich they are. So if I did move, I’d have to find a job that at least furnished health care. Could be a Joe job, or it could be state-sponsored for the self-employed ( of which my home state does provide). Either way, I’m fine regardless of what happens here and how much longer I milk the system.Its all just extra money to me at this point.
My “saddled with debt” comment pertains to those who bought expensive homes and rely on their current high incomes to pay it off. A recession with a high mortgage is kind of risky if you ask me.Hence the meaning of being liable with debt obligations and deteriorating job prospects.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
OK, let’s read this again, together:
>>I’m getting my dental work done, a medical checkup performed, and new glasses soon. I would not want to be saddled with debt right now.
Where is the mention of auto accidents? Are we talking about real estate anywyere? You were saying getting your dental work done and new glasses will saddle you with debt. It does not exactly sound like someone on the verge of retirement!
October 24th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Lionel I don’t know if you are trying to imply that this overall downturn is as bad as 01 but it is not even close, ask anybody employed in the industry. There have been very few layoffs so far, and not many layoffs planned. Sure whenever there is a downturn some pruning occurs, but this is just routine.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Bob – who knows. Obviously I agree with you that now is a bad time to have a mortgage. Especially one tied to a depreciating asset. But, your post is a bit all over the place and the implication is those things are what may cause you to be ’saddled with debt.’ Anyway…
Irvinehousingblog’s posting today is a good one. Here’s some neat quotes:
“When the market was at its peak, there was a 40% or greater fall in front of it. The first wave of losses and defaults were late buyers using 100% financing. This made the banks the bagholders. This is why the banks have lost so much money so far and why our entire financial system is on the verge of collapse. The banks have generally eaten the first half of the drop, and they have not been anxious to be the bagholder for the other half. So the lenders have been lining up people with good credit and 20% downpayments to take one for the team.”
“Banks don’t loosen credit until well after the crisis is over.”
…
“In the meantime, the banks are lining up bagholders to absorb the remaining market losses.”
– http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/
He couldn’t possibly be more right. There is still no shortage of fools and they will be rewarded accordingly.
To think that we’re out of this disaster after a few months is utterly preposterous.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
“Lionel I don’t know if you are trying to imply that this overall downturn is as bad as 01 but it is not even close, ask anybody employed in the industry. There have been very few layoffs so far, and not many layoffs planned. Sure whenever there is a downturn some pruning occurs, but this is just routine.”
WG, I’m not sure what you’re saying here. For tech, this downturn is not as bad. For the overall economy, it’s far worse.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
RE,
Are you blind or what? Why do I have to over-explain stupidly simple things to you all the time? My mention of health care had nothing to do with my debt statement. The two are un-related.
But I’ll repeat it. Since we’re in a recession with likely job cuts- even in the precious RBA, then it pays to not be racked with loads of debt- aka- mortgages, fancy cars, and so forth. Hence my statement that ” I would not want to be saddled with debt” – or in other words- I’m glad I’m not a schmuck with an overpriced mortgage hanging over my head.
again- if I can get free glasses, etc etc NOW, then why not get it for free? It is good to be prepared for the worst case scenario at all times. It saves you money.
And WG… the term ” so far” is a good statement to make. But I’d put my money on it that we’ve not even started to see the future repercussions of this recession. Not by a long shot. Its in my opinion more likely than not that we will see significant job losses here and elsewhere.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
If you notice a pattern with the current stock market, anytime there’s a drop, it’s followed by a reversal. It happened again today. What does that tell you? It means the buyers are out there, and cash on the side lines will move in to capture any opportunity.
If RBA homes drop in value, the buyers will move in. There are tons of frustrated buyers out there who have been priced out for too long. They are looking to get in just like 99% of the people on this board and every bubble site out there. The underlying fear is not about job losses or recession as Bob is pointint out, but about not being able to buy a house.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
LOL. I am thankful to Madhaus for teaching me the word Monomaniac. Much love.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
RE,
but the problem isn’t necessarily that people can’t “afford” to buy homes in the BA, its that the bar has been raised for the entry. Most people think that having a 10-20% down payment is find and dandy. But in this market, you’re likely going to need more than that, and the simple fact is that most people save very little money period.
Stocks indeed go up and down. But the big picture today is that the slowdown is universal across the board and future trading is down as well- internationally. Not a good sign.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
>>but the problem isn’t necessarily that people can’t “afford” to buy homes in the BA, its that the bar has been raised for the entry.
This is a completely false statement. The bar has been lowered significantly, since the low end has dropped. BA is now more affordable than ever. You can buy homes in San Jose for $400K or lower as we have seen.
October 24th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
“This is a completely false statement. The bar has been lowered significantly, since the low end has dropped. BA is now more affordable than ever. You can buy homes in San Jose for $400K or lower as we have seen.”
So, where is the underlying fear of inability to purchase a home?
October 24th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
“Stocks indeed go up and down. But the big picture today is that the slowdown is universal across the board and future trading is down as well- internationally. Not a good sign.”
bob, the market behavior indicates nothing more than the aggregate behavior of the set of people with a financial stake therein. It does not dictate reality. It is more accurate to say that reality + speculation drives the market. It is not the other way around.
October 24th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Quote of the day: The underlying fear is not about job losses or recession as Bob is pointint out, but about not being able to buy a house.
Gah!
October 24th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
>>So, where is the underlying fear of inability to purchase a home?
The context of that statement was RBA, Mr. Hiatus.
October 24th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Anon,
Big picture means a collection of known contributing factors that result in the definition of a result. In the case of a recession, you need several key occurrences.
The mean definition of a recession is as so:
a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales.” A sustained recession may become a depression.
So far, all of the above are true with the exception that we are not yet in a sustained recession. Additionally, the DOW is down more than 30$ from its peak. On top of that, the cost of real estate has fallen signifigantly.
When the term: ” Broad-based” is included in a financial snap shot, it indicates the majority of all sectors on Wall Street, and in today’s case- the global markets- are down. That was the case today.
So far, all indicators show that we’re in a recession. A broadening recession means all sectors- tech included- will be affected, which likely means job cuts.
Now… perhaps I would be worried? Nah… secretly I’m actually a little giddy because people like me who saved and socked it away will be well-positioned with ample purchasing power. But the rest of the world will likely panic and make the market crash further.
In regards to houses being affordable in the BA… 400k for a starter home in the ‘hood’ is ridiculous. The only people buying stuff like that in the boom were speculators who are now getting burned. Again- a really nice home with land near a major metro such as Nashville, Atlanta, or any number of other cities can be had for half of that cost and it isn’t in the ghetto either. The price of homes in the BA is still signifigantly overpriced, and once the effects of unemployment and the accumulative effect of tight lending standards kick in, those prices will be coming down more.
October 24th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
bob, you seem to think that home prices in the Bay Area should be comparable to Nashville or Atlanta. Historically you won’t find this so why should it happen in the future? The same dynamics aren’t in play.
By “comparable” I mean you get a similar quality home of a similar size on a similar plot of land. The land part goes out the window the fastest given the constraints on space here.
October 24th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Nomadic,
Agreed. Even so, the prices in the BA are still not meeting current economic fundamentals. As I write this, decent homes in Alameda are still hovering around $550,000. That’s still much higher than the area or regional median income supports. The realistic price should be more like 400-450k, with 350k or so being a starter home and 400-450k being a median priced home. In other words- not a super extreme difference from today, but not unthinkable since those same 550k homes today were 600k+ last year. It’ll happen, but it will take probably another year at least. Faster if the jobs start falling faster.
October 24th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Bob,
If you had bought during the last recession, you’d be rich now. Recession is the best time to buy anything, even a car. Boom time is the time to sell anything. If you follow this no-brainer principle, you will win every time, and you wouldn’t need to flee like a rat under any circumstance.
October 24th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Bob says,
>>As I write this, decent homes in Alameda are still hovering around $550,000. That’s still much higher than the area or regional median income supports.
Due to limited supply and high population in the BA, what you really ought to look at are the top 25% of wage earners. The market is sustained by that 25%. The rest of the people are not in the game, so to speak. This is a very different situation than Nashville, where land is plentiful and nobody wants to move there.
October 24th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
“The context of that statement was RBA, Mr. Hiatus.”
Cute. Gosh, RE. The thought of an inability to buy a home where one doesn’t want to live sure seems scary to me.
BTW, I like the name. Just as I am anonymous, I am not here. You may refer to this way from now on.
October 24th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
” In regards to houses being affordable in the BA… 400k for a starter home in the ‘hood’ is ridiculous. ”
Bob, I’m not quite sure why you went into a diatrabe about a recession, but I do agree with the quote above.
Do you remember that home burbed profiled in Oakland? LOL
A question for everyone: Who pays 3/4 of a million dollars for a hundered year old half-finished shit box in the ghetto nearby a car wash? Does anyone think that the person who signed up for that loan that much money for that particular home intended to pay the whole thing (or even a small fraction) off? Fools engaged in bidding wars even in the ghetto.
In a similar fashion, similar fools continue to dump downpayments into the bank – helping them keep afloat. Everyone who has enough money to buy a home should buy one. Wouldn’t you agree, RE?
October 24th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
“Lionel I don’t know if you are trying to imply that this overall downturn is as bad as 01 but it is not even close, ask anybody employed in the industry. There have been very few layoffs so far, and not many layoffs planned. Sure whenever there is a downturn some pruning occurs, but this is just routine.”
The downturn is only just beginning. Let’s talk a year from now. The delusion on this board staggers me. It truly does.
October 24th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Lionel, I’m with you. It’s only the tip of the iceberg of the downturn. I know folks in management positions at Yahoo and HP who say the current (reported) layoffs are just the beginning. And I’d rather not say which company I work for, but we have a rather large “thinning of the herd” planned as well.
October 24th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
VC is only going into startups that look like sure winners, there’s no more make-the-pie-higher-blue-sky dreaming now. I agree layoffs are going to hit harder too, as the recessing elsewhere impacts spending on tech here.
Anyone who insists the economic downturn is over is beyond delusional.
As to today’s house, look at that dormer! It’s pointing straight up, just like the unemployment rate.
October 24th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Geez, this spam thing sucks
October 24th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Lionel,
I trust Michael Arrington @ TechCrunch when he said that he talked to a lot of tech start-up executives who said to him privately that this economic downturn gives them the political cover to lay off unproductive people. No company in the world would lay off their best workers, would they?
October 24th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
I’m open to suggestions for better spam protection!
October 24th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Can you at least check the field’s content using a JavaScript alert if it’s empty, so that some browsers don’t inadvertently lose the content typed in the textbox? I now automatically CTRL A, CTRL C before hitting Submit Comment – it’s become a self-preservation reflex.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Quietly the following news was reported in the back pages of the newspaper:
Sales of preowned homes in West soared in Sept.
********
Heavy discounting on foreclosed homes and low interest rates continued to power a home-buying spree across the West in September, sending sales of existing homes in the region soaring at an annual pace reminiscent of the days of the housing boom, according to two reports Friday.
About 100,000 existing homes and condos were sold last month in the 13-state region. Without adjusting for seasonal factors, sales were up nearly 43 percent from the same month last year
October 24th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
I take it most of you are under 50 years old. Imagine a time when you are over 50 years old, when Social Security is bankrupt, when there is yet another recession, when layoffs are rampant and older workers are the first to let go.
If by then you own a few properties, there is nothing to fear. You will still have rent checks coming in even if you cannot pull in a 6 figure salary. If you picture that day, you should feel the urgency to buy a house now.
If you continue to rent, you will be dead meat when that day arrives.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Did you reading stop once you read the bull-ish comments or do they not register?
From the same article:
“The year-over-year surge in sales might appear like the makings of a turnaround, but housing experts are quick to downplay that scenario.
For one, they note the easy comparison to September 2007’s sales, which were dismal in the wake of the credit crunch that started just months before, drying up lending for all but traditional conforming loans at $417,000 or below.
In California alone, that caused some 30 percent of real estate contracts to fall through, according to the National Association of Realtors.
As the financial crisis has spread and deepened in recent weeks, it has also cast doubt on a budding housing recovery.
“We’re headed toward a very serious recession, maybe one of the worst ones since at least the ’80s, and when people lose their jobs, when there isn’t job growth, people don’t move around, so homes don’t sell as much,” said Patrick Newport economist at IHS Global Insight. “These numbers are for September, so they don’t reflect what happened in October, when the market really started to freeze up.” ”
The banks are actively soliciting bagholders as we speak. Do your part. Donate a down payment to the banks for the good of society.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
RealEstater – In my opinion you’re right that real estate will be a safer bet than social security, and yes it was a good strategy to buy multiple properties in the seventies and eighties. But a lot of us either don’t own any property today or barely make payments on our primary residence. I think your current audience is generally ten years too young or so to follow your advice. I’d take it up in my forties if I can.
Now you’ve been advocating using real estate appreciation to upgrade your primary residence. But in this post, you recommend instead purchasing properties and rent them out. Somewhat incompatible advices don’t you think? If you mean to upgrade while renting out the previous property, I’m afraid it’s typically not financially feasible, even with a six-figure salary.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
The bulls here may want to see this:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122470119981159169.html
October 24th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
Confused – There’s only one real estate bull on this site and everybody calls him a troll. In any case, the article explains that financial exuberance is being replaced with financial conservatism. A good thing, wouldn’t you think? Certainly short-term, some folks might suffer, but mid-term, the local economy becomes yet more competitive and efficient, making the silicon valley even more attractive for investors and job seekers than it is today.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
anon (#40) – how does that kool-aid taste?
SmokedBacon says: No company in the world would lay off their best workers, would they?
You bet they would. Depends on how strapped for cash they are and how good the management is. If there’s no money, drastic measures are taken. If there’s some money and management has enough foresight, they’ll find a way to keep the best.
Sometimes, mgmt panics and over reacts. One former high-flying startup used to have large purges every 18 months or so. Often they would re-hire quite a few of their former employees before their severance even ran out.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
“anon (#40) – how does that kool-aid taste?”
It tastes like it’s big, red and happy to see me.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Here’s a little pep talk for getting through the downturn:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_44/b4106048092128.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5
October 24th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
DreamT says,
>>Now you’ve been advocating using real estate appreciation to upgrade your primary residence. But in this post, you recommend instead purchasing properties and rent them out. Somewhat incompatible advices don’t you think?
Are they mutually exclusive? Can’t you have a primary residence and rental property? Have you not been reading WG’s posts?
October 24th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
LOL, anon, that is SO wrong!
October 25th, 2008 at 12:01 am
Odd. It felt really right when I wrote it. *shrug*
October 25th, 2008 at 12:02 am
>>Certainly short-term, some folks might suffer, but mid-term, the local economy becomes yet more competitive and efficient, making the silicon valley even more attractive for investors and job seekers than it is today.
I totally agree. That’s why I think layoffs are a good thing for the valley. If a company is not competitive, it should be beaten down by the market, and the people who work there should find something else to do.
Look at the places where layoffs are not allowed — union places such as GM. What’s happening to them now? Them cannot renew themselves, and will die like a dinosaur.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:05 am
“Now you’ve been advocating using real estate appreciation to upgrade your primary residence. But in this post, you recommend instead purchasing properties and rent them out. Somewhat incompatible advices don’t you think?”
DreamT, this is no more mutually exclusive than saying “I intend to die in my home.” and “my home pays me.”
October 25th, 2008 at 12:10 am
anon says,
>>DreamT, this is no more mutually exclusive than saying “I intend to die in my home.” and “my home pays me.”
Actually, a better analogy would be “I’m going to take a hiatus” and “I’m here to chat”.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:11 am
Nomadic,
Regarding that article, isn’t that very similar to what I’ve been telling you guys?
October 25th, 2008 at 12:14 am
Yes, except they advocate good choices in the stock market and don’t say a word about buying houses.
I don’t think anyone would disagree that those with cash to invest can take advantage of a downturn.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:24 am
“Are they mutually exclusive? Can’t you have a primary residence and rental property? Have you not been reading WG’s posts?”
Yes they are in the context I mentioned (people in their 20s or early 30s). Yes you can. Yes I have.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:35 am
More plainly, if you use your appreciation to trade up, most people don’t have enough left over for rental property too. If I remember correctly, WG has a fairly modest house in a good part of WG which frees up cash for investment. It’s simply a matter of trading off for a long-term return. Not a bad way to diversify a little if you’re going to sink all of your money into one type of investment.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:49 am
“
anonMr. Hiatus says,>>DreamT, this is no more mutually exclusive than saying “I intend to die in my home.” and “my home pays me.”
Actually, a better analogy would be “I’m going to take a hiatus” and “I’m here to chat”.”
Corrected. Please address me properly.
October 25th, 2008 at 7:57 am
Earlier in the week I brought up 838 7th Ave, San Bruno. It had just gone on the market that day, and it was off the market the next day. It was listed at $249,000. There is a floor, at least for now. All declining markets can have false bottoms.
October 25th, 2008 at 8:01 am
DreamT, I am also a RE bull. I think everybody should try to buy a property now and rent it. The problem is most of you prefer the peninsula and the buy to rent equation doesn’t work there. Also a lot of you are convinced we are doing to see another 30% decline in RE prices on top of the about 50% declines we have seen already, so there is not much of an audience for my strategy- but maybe somebody is listening.
October 25th, 2008 at 8:31 am
nomadic and DreamT, our primary residence was 825K when we bought it on December 30, 2006, so yes it is modest by peninsula standards, but hard to quantify because this is actually a very expensive part of WG off of Newport ave, but this particular house had “issues” empty house next door and old people neighbors who never upgraded, etc. We are empty nesters. When I bought this place 2 years ago 825K did not FEEL like a low end property in WG – it felt more midrange. now it feels low, especially for here, because the low end of the high end property tends to appreciate, if that makes any sense. The real estate market of the past few years reminds me of the stock market in the 90s, where buy high (Palo Alto) and sell higher seemed to work best. But in a traditional real estate market where you are not seeing 20% increases every year, the plan should be to buy LOW and sell high. Thats what I try to do. Remember that even with prop 13 protection if you buy a house for 1.2 million you will pay 20K in property taxes per year. There have been dozens of areas I have witnessed in 20 years of Real Estate investing that went from hoods to high end areas so no reason to jump into Saratoga immediately unless you really feel the need to live there for some reason (schools most likely).
October 25th, 2008 at 8:38 am
nomadic says,
>>If I remember correctly, WG has a fairly modest house in a good part of WG which frees up cash for investment.
Isn’t that the same formula I’ve been talking about? The formula is quite flexible. You have a range of choices from more primary residence and less rental to the other way around. It depends on your situation and how much money you have.
October 25th, 2008 at 8:39 am
BTW, my house is modest too, compared to what I can get in Cupertino.
October 25th, 2008 at 10:05 am
“That’s why I think layoffs are a good thing for the valley. If a company is not competitive, it should be beaten down by the market, and the people who work there should find something else to do.”
Well, RE, if you like layoffs, the next couple of years should be thrilling for you. Imagine the dot com bust, minus Greenspan’s near ZIRP policies.
October 25th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Re #60:
I more or less agree with the first statement; I think the $25B bailout of the Big Three is completely idiotic.
However, the reason General Motors is destined for an ignominious demise (and, in my opinion, a well-deserved one) is not its union labor, but rather its shortsighted stubbornness in continuing to concentrate on building gigantic, wasteful SUVs and pickup trucks in the face of overwhelming evidence that the market was turning toward greater fuel efficiency.
October 25th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Bleen, my understanding is that one of the requirements for GM to get the 25B loan is that they retool their factories to build hybrids and electric. I agree with you and RE, Detroit is whats WRONG with American business.
October 25th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Lionel, do you think you could post something even remotely even handed so that everything you write doesn’t scream ANGRY RENTER?
Well, RE, if you like layoffs, the next couple of years should be thrilling for you. Imagine the dot com bust, minus Greenspan’s near ZIRP policies.
October 25th, 2008 at 11:10 am
WG,
Christmas time is a nice time in Willow Glen. Halloween is too. I have 2 questions for you:
1) Have you ever been to the progressive party in your area?
2) What do you make of 1143 Nevada Ave? Here’s a link: http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/1143-NEVADA-Ave-95125/home/1403232
I don’t know how long you’ve lived in the area, but this house certainly fits my ‘owner won’t reduce their wishing price’ criteria. It has been on the market for literally 3 years.
October 25th, 2008 at 11:11 am
One more thing. Instead of I don’t know how long you’ve lived in the area, I should say I don’t know how long you’ve watched the area because that home has been on the market since before 2006.
October 25th, 2008 at 11:31 am
>>What do you make of 1143 Nevada Ave?
This is a very beautiful home, but it’s too expensive for a San Jose address. At this price you can get a nice home in Saratoga.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Not only is Nevada too expensive, the lot is too small. If you look on the Google street view at the redfin listing, it says you are on the incorrect location, but you can actually see the BACK of this house, from the side, on the street view. You are smack up against your back neighbors in that house. In Palo Alto this works just because people are so antsy to live in Palo Alto. Not here. if you are going to build a 5K sq ft house it has to be on a 1/4 acre lot- COME ON! The size of this lot is actually smaller, yes smaller than the house I just bought in the low 400Ks in the north part of WG (closer to that Clintonia area somebody posted about- definitely not the same desirability of area). This Nevada house which everybody refers to as the faux castle is a nice place and I’m sure it would be fun to live in but it is way overbuilt for the area and needs to sell at about 2 million. Be aware though, that in the past 3 years since this was built, it is looking LESS and LESS out of place for the area and that is why WG is probably a good investment. Take a look at 2166 Newport Ave and his neighbor, 2172 Newport ave (the faux “Tuscan Villa”). These were built after I moved here and going up all over. At some point the faux castle will fit right in. Still too expensive though and on too small lot.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Uhm, yeah.
I would submit that this home is listed for nearly a million dollars higher than the market warrants.
During the bubble days, I would drive by and just laaaaaaaaugh. If only they had reasonable expectations. Looks like they don’t mind spending the money to keep it on market.
What I don’t understand is the fact that it says the home was ‘built’ in 2007.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
If the owner is a builder and didn’t take out a loan he will sit on it until it sells. Theres one on Franquette like that too, a nice new craftsman and they finally decided to rent it out until the market recovers rather than take a low price. Thats one refreshing thing about the banks and these low end REOs, they literally have to lower the prices. Everywhere in San Jose used to be cheaper than any other city and that is changing now that San Jose has improved so much. Most of the people who live in WG don’t want to move up other than a larger place here.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
There’s no real reason to. There is a strong sense of community and the people who live there don’t tend to view themselves as part of San Jose. Plus, you don’t have the nearly pettiness or rampant materialism that you have in PA, MP or LG.
You didn’t respond to question 1, btw
October 25th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Prof. Bleen,
There’s no single reason as why to Detroit fails. Labor unions aka legacy cost certainly put the choke hold on Detroit Big 3 at the time when they need to cut cost to be competitive with Japan giants. So they have to keep pumping out SUV since the profit margins of SUVs are very healthy comparing to smaller cars and they keep pushing that shiet down our throat until the run-up in gas price broke the camel’s back. So now they’re going back to Washington asking for more handouts to keep them in the game.
October 25th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
anon says,
>>You didn’t respond to question 1, btw
Practically everyone in PA supports Democrats. Republicans have very little appeal to smart people these days.
Oops, sorry, gotta take a hiatus to look at some open houses!
October 25th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
LOL @ RE:
I’m going to give you a big fat fail for 2 reasons.
1) You didn’t see that the question was directed at WG.
2) You misinterpreted the question. WG likely knows what I am referring to.
Suffice it to say that your political views – no, make that all your thoughts – are about as valuable as the turd I dropped off today after my morning cup of coffee.
October 25th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
“Lionel, do you think you could post something even remotely even handed so that everything you write doesn’t scream ANGRY RENTER?”
Not angry at all WG, well, except at Wall Street and the federal government, which, combined, have turned our economy into a swilling cesspool. I’m actually very, very content. Love where I live, beautiful house, awesome neighborhood, within walking distance of the university I’m at, walk my daughter to school, family is happy, healthy, wife and I both working in fields we love, have excess cash to make it through the downturn. The fact that you view my posts as angry tells as much about your state of mind as mine. If you think the economy is going to magically recover from this recent and persistent financial beating, wow, again, I am amazed at the level of delusion I still see out there. This is just the beginning. The market might shoot up (irrationally), but we still have a long way down to go. Tech is going to get creamed over the next couple years. If that sounds angry, well, that’s your opinion. I’m actually quite neutral about it. I don’t wish tech misfortune, I just think ultimately this unwind is inexorable. I wish this were not the case.
October 25th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
anon,
Would you stop bad mouthing me while I’m on my hiatus?
October 25th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
No, I’d rather not. Thank you for asking.
October 25th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Man, I read that post by RE and thought it was the ultimate non-sequitur. At least Mr. Hiatus’ response put it in some sort of context.
We keep talking about having a progressive for the holidays in my neighborhood. Maybe we’ll actually do it this year. Check this out, RE:
http://shindigzparty.wordpress.com/category/progressive-party/
October 26th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
“The market is sustained by that 25%. The rest of the people are not in the game, so to speak.”
A rare truth proffered by RE
what does this tell you or me?
It does not take a majority
of people behaving irrationally
to drive up home prices unsustainably