Comments on: “Foreclosures add to tight rental market”

By: burbed

burbed — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 05:20:23 +0000

test

By: sonarrat

sonarrat — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 01:22:21 +0000

I will buy when I can get a place I’d like to call home for $1500 a month, after insurance and taxes, with only the FHA minimum 3.5% down (after Jan 1). That’s what I can afford. I don’t see that happening soon, but it’s getting closer. A place that would fit my criteria would be a two-bedroom cottage or condo in SF or the northern peninsula. Even a quiet block of 94124 wouldn’t be too bad, but I drove by 2166 Revere and that was fucking scary. Wrecked and stripped cars double-parked all down the street, trash in every yard, and crackheads wandering aimlessly down the street that runs under the double-decker 280. I couldn’t live in a place like that.

By: Dr. Hiatus

Dr. Hiatus — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 06:27:52 +0000

“I hope that was an attempt at humor since it ought to be quite obvious.”

Btw, let’s at least give the guy some mercy points for trying.

Even if it wasn’t funny or clever and didn’t make sense…

By: Hiaticus Maxximus

Hiaticus Maxximus — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 06:15:47 +0000

No prob.

By the way bob….You’re right that this is not the dot com era. But, there is a huge difference between now and then. Back then real property was an appreciating asset. Now it is a depreciating one. Even NAR is forecasting a 6% drop in properties over the course of the next year. Let’s say they’re correct (I’ll bet you they’re way low). A 6% equity burn on a half million dollar piece of property is $2,500 a month. What is a couple hundred dollars a month more in rent compared to $2,500 a month equity burn? Nothing. Aside from the knife catchers, people are starting to figure this out and less and less people want to buy. For this reason, I believe rent will continue to rise or at least stay the same. It will certainly not drop substantially barring an economic disaster (no – this is not one; its a return of sanity).

Such is my belief.

Now, where’s my kool aid?!

By: nomadic

nomadic — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 05:31:44 +0000

I hope that was an attempt at humor since it ought to be quite obvious.

(Thanks for the clarification, Mr. Hiatus.)

By: RealEstater

RealEstater — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 04:44:48 +0000

Is this the anon that’s on hiatus, or the Mr. Hiatus that is anon?

By: bob

bob — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 23:57:45 +0000

There’s indeed a caveat here, which is that indeed- there might be more competition for rentals, but the rents can only go so high if the economy is bad. Laid-off people can only pay so much. This isn’t anything close to a dot-com economy by a long shot. Keep dreaming landlords…

By: Dr. Hiatus

Dr. Hiatus — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 22:49:30 +0000

Perhaps a new handle is in order.

By: anon

anon — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 22:47:21 +0000

LOL that is a different anon, BTW

By: nomadic

nomadic — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 21:28:45 +0000

Sounds like you really did dring the kool-aid. Congratulations and good luck!

By: anon

anon — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 17:06:40 +0000

Thanks! That helps a lot – totally new to looking in Willow Glen.

By: sonarrat

sonarrat — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 17:04:10 +0000

Not the best, not the worst. Hope you like palm trees. I see two listings, 810 and 1057 Clintonia, both of which seem well priced for the area.

By: WillowGlenner

WillowGlenner — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 17:00:32 +0000

Yes thats a bad area. Anything to the right of bird is bad, which is not to say you shouldn’t buy there just know what you are buying.
The best part of Willow Glen is actually to the left of Lincoln, between Lincoln and Minnesota and Curtner and Cherry, thats where the mini Mansions are. Something on Clintonia there is a borderline area, not bad, just know what you are buying.

By: anon

anon — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 16:46:35 +0000

I have a question for anyone familiar with Willow Glen. There is a listing on Clintonia, looks to be near Biebrach Park. Is this a bad area?

TIA