Belmont house – new from the foundation up – $709 per square foot
This week, we celebrate the 5 Bay Area cities featured in Forbes’ “Top 25 Towns To Live Well (and have good access to Venture Capital)”. Coming in at #11:
2524 DEKOVEN Ave, Belmont, CA 94002 | MLS# 80804798
2524 DEKOVEN Ave Belmont, CA 94002
Price: $1,049,000
Beds: 3
Baths: 2
Sq. Ft.: 1,480
$/Sq. Ft.: $709
Lot Size: 7,900 Sq. Ft.
Property Type: Detached Single Family
Style: Ranch
Stories: 1
View: Bay, Neighborhood, City Lights
Year Built: 1949
Community: Haskins Estates
County: San Mateo
MLS#: 80804798
Source: MLSListings
Status: Active
On Redfin: 389 days
New from the foundation up. Staged, gorgeous Hi ceilings, sky lights, chefs kit, sub zero, Wolf etc. .Ideal park like setting for bar-b-q, rv, boat playground, dog run etc. .SF views slate walks, drive, and patio area, ready to move in. ..
New from the foundation up. But most importantly, it’s staged. Do you know how few houses are actually staged these days? It’s defnitely a value add and something you’ll always remember.
In fact, it’s so gorgeous that it has been on the market for 389 days. Do you know what happens? Basically people go, visit the house, and amazed at how beautiful the staging is (and the views too) and then leave, realizing that they are not worthy.
Again, this is a great example of a house where you can buy it, and turn it into a tourist attraction, charging for the views. Win win! It’ll help pay the mortgage!
Go ahead and visit, I bet you will find that you can’t buy it either. You’re not worthy.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:40 am
Look at the bird’s eye view. What happens if war or something breaks out? You’ll be sitting pretty right next to 2520-2522, the only fresh water for miles…and if you’re a ham radio buff, sneaking a radio up on the water tanks next to the cell towers has got to provide near-ideal conditions for messing around with radios. Important not to sell this one short.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:32 am
Bought in September 2006 for $750K and they’re trying to sell it for $1,049,000… On the market for more than a year… In the Nile.
And why does the realtard even mention that the house is staged?
May 26th, 2009 at 7:38 am
More good news!
May 26th, 2009 at 9:17 am
I think this is the lovely view caterpillar was referring to in #1:
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=q7m0g54t6zxr&style=b&lvl=2&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=13490535&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1
Those are TALL water towers. And you get to see the house at the framing stage! I wonder if an earthquake ruptured one of those tanks if it could completely wash the house away? Then again, it’s already underwater…
May 26th, 2009 at 9:20 am
tanks, I mean. (not towers) but they are kind of towering over the ‘hood.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:56 am
a nice summary of the housing market from the Chron:
Signs of more trouble ahead for housing market
May 26th, 2009 at 10:25 am
Don’t believe the media. Houses are cheap if you don’t care about school district or quality of the neighborhood. In good areas homes are going quickly. A lot of home sales are going through this month.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:35 am
In good areas homes are going quickly.
—–
You mean “Average Day On Market” in Palo Alto from 42 (last year same time) to 85 is “going quickly”?
May 26th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Don’t believe the media.
—–
Observer, please tell us whom/what should we believe.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:39 am
I find #7 is quite believable.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Another great report from Calculated Risk:
House Prices, Real Prices, Price-to-Rent ratio
In the ‘good’ East Bay cities I’m looking at, listing price/sfqt is indeed holding firm at ’08 levels for the very best places.
But the definition of ‘very best places’ continues to shrink. And the number of sales that closed in March-April was stunningly low.
I predict inventory bloatage, putting very much pressure on those ‘best homes’.
Sure, the best home on the best block can command a premium – even the most cynical housing bears on this blog have to face the fact that people like really nice homes and are inclined to pay more for them.
But how much premium? When a totally decent home that needs a little landscaping and a kitchen remodel costs a lot less than the cost of a little landscaping and kitchen remodel…
I see big discounts on smaller, older homes, and the larger, newer ones sitting on the market waiting for the shrinking pool of rich buyers to reward them.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:48 am
Right on, Observer. Your observations are quite accurate. I take it you have been looking at houses?
May 26th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Your observations are quite accurate.
—–
Yes, when operative words are some vague terminology like sold quickly” or “a lot of home sales“, anything could be “accurate”.
May 26th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
How can someone who is “not even looking” be able to tell if something is accurate or not?
May 26th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Another logical flaw in RealExcreter’s statement. It’s RealExcreter who claimed accuracy some value statements. Not me.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Correction in #15: accuracy of some vague statements.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
If we parse #7, we could say this is accurate:
Houses are cheap if you don’t care about school district or quality of the neighborhood.
We’ve all seen the $1 houses in Detroit.
The rest is nothing but opinion without data.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
How can someone who is “not even looking” be able to tell if something is accurate or not?
———–
Second logical flaw: A person’s “not even looking” status has nothing to do with understanding housing market.
We all know how much RelExcreter, who is looking for property for more than one year, understands market. He uses the word “selling briskly” for 200 DOM property. I think that’s what he referred as “having a firm grip on the pulse of the market” in March 2008.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
The rest is nothing but opinion without data.
——
What I find amazing is that he starts his comment with statement “don’t believe the media“, then he offers none to believe him.
May 26th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
nomadic,
Have you seen any data from Pralay? He doesn’t even have any information regarding his own neighborhood!
May 26th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
How about RealExcreter answers #8? That indeed have some data.
But he won’t answer it, because whenever he tries to sell his data (actually lie) as “selling briskly”, he is proven wrong.
May 26th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
He doesn’t even have any information regarding his own neighborhood!
——
Above statement is another lie from a proven liar.
May 26th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Pralay’s waffling positions are fully backed by his proven data!
May 26th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
And liar’s words should not be trusted.
May 26th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Ha – bay area houses with bad location and bad school districts have come WAY down from their bubble heights – but they’re not cheap by national standards!
They’ve merely dropped to somewhere near building costs, which is NOT cheap. In bad areas of the rest of the country, bad housing drops way below building costs. There’s not many such areas around here. The average US home is somewhere in the what, $150k range? Find me some 3BD SFH for $150k in the Bay Area – it’s not going to be pretty.
It’s not going to be ‘just OK’ houses, in ‘OK’ neighborhoods that merely have bad schools. It’s going to be BAD locations, high crime, and bad schools. And probably run-down, to boot.
I don’t think Observers statements are either valid or helpful.
Just because houses in Richmond have dropped from $400k to $200k doesn’t make them cheap.
Observer just still believes in the bubble pricing.
This is common from people who weren’t interested in real estate prior to 2002 – they have no context for judging prices beyond the bubble, so they’re AMAZED when things drop down by 25% or even 50%. But what if they were inflated by 400%? It doesn’t make them cheap.
May 26th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
#20 – he hasn’t made any specific claims regarding real estate either. In case you haven’t noticed he only makes fun of you with your own words.
May 26th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
#26 – Do Not Feed The Trolls. We lose more threads this way…
May 26th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
just using my alternate moniker today
May 26th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
nomadic,
In case you haven’t noticed, you have a habit of feeding Pralay’s troll posts. If he hasn’t made any claim, what the hell are you supporting him for? Try to be honest with yourself for once: Do you really take this clown seriously?
May 26th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
A. Lewis says,
>>bay area houses with bad location and bad school districts have come WAY down from their bubble heights – but they’re not cheap by national standards!
Do you really think it’s legitimate to compare Bay Area with other parts of the nation that don’t have our weather, employment, income, and entrepreneurship environment? If you really think the other places are equivalent, then why don’t you just move there? Unless you ask yourself these basic questions, you’ll always be wondering why Bay Area costs more.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
A proven liar’s word should not be trusted.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
#4, the birds eye view is also a time machine. If you spin counterclockwise you can see the pre-remodel house. I guess the passes in one direction were taken at a different time than passes in another direction.
Check out the google street view too. That’s nutty. Bright side though, a quiet neighbor.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
“Do you really take this clown seriously?”
Yeah, Nomadick! Evidently you missed the memo that the only serious clown around here is real estater.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Liar, liar, pants on fire! Can anyone help Pralay register for elementary school? Please find one with API score above 700.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Do you really think it’s legitimate to compare Bay Area with other parts of the nation that don’t have our weather, employment, income, and entrepreneurship environment?
——
Do you really think that he is comparing with the criteria (“weather, employment, income, and entrepreneurship environment”) conveniently set by you? Or is he making argument against Observer’s argument of the cheapness of BA homes?
May 26th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
where can I book RealEstater for my next party?
May 26th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Evidently you missed the memo that the only serious clown around here is real estater.
—-
Don’t forget the “pro” part. A serious PRO clown with “having a firm grip on the pulse of the market”.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
DreamT,
I’d gladly help out at your going-away party if you get canned again.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Pralay,
And don’t forget, never believe a clown who is a proven pathological psychological liar who cannot be trusted!
May 26th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
where can I book RealEstater for my next party?
——-
Well, considering the fact that Real Gray Area is “too fraught with dangers”, he won’t be joining your party after dark.
But again, RealExcreter is a proven liar. It’s possible that he does not live in “Green Zone”.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Pralay,
And don’t forget, never believe a clown who is a proven pathological psychological liar who cannot be trusted!
—–
Thanks for providing the link. It will be great if you provide the same link at the bottom of your every comment (e.g comment #12) – something like a signature.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Doesn’t “getting canned” mean getting fired? They make parties for that?
May 26th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Come on people, where is the love?
May 26th, 2009 at 9:17 pm
#29 – I sure as hell don’t take you seriously. You have proven you aren’t capable of an intelligent fact-based discussion.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
Don’t worry, excreter!
I know you’re a serious clown…
May 27th, 2009 at 7:05 am
nomadic,
I applaud you for your capability to have an intelligent discussion with Pralay even though he does not have any specific point!
May 27th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Except some excretions from real estate industry (e.g. “no downturn here” and “Sunnyvale homes are selling like hot cakes”), what “specific point” do YOU have RealExcreter?
May 27th, 2009 at 9:00 am
The data is finally here! April existing home sales rose by 2.9 percent. All those posts by those who keeps denying are proven wrong. Yes, all those pending sale signs do make it into the records!
May 27th, 2009 at 9:01 am
Useless aggregate data.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:22 am
In April, the inventory of existing homes for sale rose 8.8 percent to 3.97 million. The median national home price fell 15.4 percent to $170,200, compared to the same period a year-ago. That was the second biggest percentage decline on record.
A separate report from the Federal Housing Finance Agency showed prices for U.S. single-family homes fell 7.3 percent over the 12 months ended in March. On Tuesday, the Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller survey showed prices off 18.7 percent in March compared to the same period last year.
http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN2754905920090527
This news sure makes me thrilled to be a homeowner. Inventory is growing faster than sales are accelerating…
May 27th, 2009 at 9:56 am
And don’t forget that the NAR data is comparison between March to April (not year-to-year).
Yahoo News:
May 27th, 2009 at 9:58 am
In April, the inventory of existing homes for sale rose 8.8 percent to 3.97 million.
———–
We should be talking about “velocity of buyable inventory”, nomadic.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:01 am
More than 90 percent of economists predict the U.S. recession will end this year
Of course, they are all wrong, just as Ben Bernanke is wrong. Only Pralay knows best!
May 27th, 2009 at 10:10 am
What recession? There is no recession. Declaration by NBER was arbitrary.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:19 am
More than 90 percent of economists predict the U.S. recession will end this year
——–
Guys,
Let’s look at the facts, not the predictions.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:21 am
In lieu of reading the rest of my post, just check out the best source for the housing sales analysis, CalculatedRisk:
Existing Homes Sales & Inventory
Now, for my usual long-windedness:
RealEstater is a liar and should not be trusted at all – almost everything he says is an outright lie or a distortion intended to give the impression that home prices are going up.
I’m really tired of his bullsh*t. Congratulations, RE, you made me annoyed today if that is your goal.
But moving on to other matters for anyone interested in facts and useful information instead of a flame-war.
Existing home sales:
First of all, the NAR report is a National Report, which is only partially related with the details in your local neighborhood, as many here like to point out. Isn’t it amazing how people will criticize others for talking about national trends or data, then cite other national trends when they think it bolsters their opposing view?
I personally think all housing markets are interconnected, so we should watch the national trends, and keep them in mind when considering local and regional sales and inventory. But we should not forget that you could have a huge over-supply of housing somewhere else, and a dearth of supply here, which won’t be reflected in the average.
Nationally, existing home sales rose from March to April 2009 by 2.9 percent. This is a small increase. It would have been worse news if it dropped, but this was not strikingly good news. Sales in May almost always exceed sales in April. But to be fair, it could have been worse.
Compared to 2008, May sales were DOWN. Repeat, May sales were down from last year. This is not good news. The NAR could have emphasized this point, but they chose not to, instead making a point of the Month-Month increase, though that’s not news. Ponder that for yourself.
In fact, May sales have been continuously dropping since 2005. A 5 year downward trend – is that encouraging news? No, it’s not. That’s bad news.
The silver lining to these dark clouds is that we’re probably closer to the bottom than the top, because the rate of decrease YoY is slower, and we’ve come a long way down since 2005.
Read CR’s analysis on inventory, I won’t re-iterate it here b/c I’ve gone on long enough.
Bottom line: the national housing report points to lower national housing prices. Your mileage may vary.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:35 am
A., this is GREAT:
In fact, May sales have been continuously dropping since 2005. A 5 year downward trend – is that encouraging news? No, it’s not. That’s bad news.
downward trend for five years? That just means we must be at bottom now and things can only get better!
May 27th, 2009 at 10:47 am
Isn’t it amazing how people will criticize others for talking about national trends or data, then cite other national trends when they think it bolsters their opposing view?
—–
Especially when it happens in very same thread (e.g post #30).
May 27th, 2009 at 10:47 am
A,
I’m giving you a fact based discussion by providing a link to data announced today. True, this data is for the national market, so it is only the baseline. The Bay Area market is known to be better than the national market. I’ve been saying for a month now sales are up in the Bay Area, and it is also coming out in our local reports. These are facts, not lies. You heard it from me before it made it to the news, and I’m certain you will surely hear similar news in the coming weeks…and be more annoyed by the reality than ever.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:55 am
There’s actually an interesting theme here – how does the Real Bay Area real estate market diverge from the greater California, and National market.
I’m not sure how one would quantify or evaluate that delta.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:56 am
#59, I stand behind everything in my last.
If anyone wants to understand the general annual pattern of home sales, look at the first chart in the CR post I linked to. Sales are lowest in winter, and higher in summer. Nationally, sales tend to increase every year from January through June.
Again, 2009 is the worst Jan-April for the last 5 years. That is a sign of lower housing prices.
RealEstater, you again prove yourself entirely useless, look at what you wrote: “The Bay Area market is known to be better than the national market.” That’s so vague it’s useless. Better in what way?
If you mean higher prices than the national average, that’s true. I’ve always said it’s true. I’ve always said the BA deserves a premium over the national average, and will continue to do so. And the RBA over the MRBA over the BA. Location matters.
But the national prices are dropping, the sales are the worst in 5 years, and that’s going to bring BA prices down, not up.
You heard it from me before it made the news!
Let me be clear – I’m annoyed by you – I’m smug and self-satisfied when I read these dismal housing reports that tell me how smart I was to continue renting on not buy over-priced housing in a feverish bubble.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:57 am
RealEstater is a liar and should not be trusted at all – almost everything he says is an outright lie or a distortion intended to give the impression that home prices are going up.
——
And when he posted #48, he did not bother to provide the source (NAR).
It reminds me his six months old post where he cherry picks some comments from real estate page and labels them as “notable quotes“. It turned out that most of the comments he quoted (“notable quotes”) are from Realtards.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:59 am
I’ve been saying for a month now sales are up in the Bay Area, and it is also coming out in our local reports.
—–
“Up” compare to what, RealExcreter?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Spring bounce should be expected every year – otherwise hell has frozen over. But starting from the lowest December in five years, and ending with the lowest April in 5 years, is bad news, not good news.
Liars with vested interests and Real Estate Brokers are the only ones pretending it’s good news.
If I say, “California woke today without an 8.5 earthquake destroying billions of property!”, is that good news that should cause housing prices to rise?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:00 am
Quick real estate 101 question – what are the components that go into real estate appreciation? That is, explain why home prices rise (when they are rising).
May 27th, 2009 at 11:02 am
A.,
>>Better in what way?
When I said better, I meant stronger. The market we have today in the Bay Area would be considered a good market in most parts of this country.
>>Again, 2009 is the worst Jan-April for the last 5 years. That is a sign of lower housing prices.
As I said before Q1 2009 was the bottom, and we are in recovery mode now.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:14 am
>>Spring bounce should be expected every year
I agree that Spring bounce happened in the Bay Area this year, as with every year. In other words, it’s business as usual. No downturn here.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:17 am
I agree that Spring bounce happened in the Bay Area this year, as with every year. In other words, it’s business as usual. No downturn here.
——
What about #57?
Business as usual indeed!
May 27th, 2009 at 11:19 am
>>Quick real estate 101 question – what are the components that go into real estate appreciation? That is, explain why home prices rise (when they are rising).
For starters:
1. Demographic changes – Increase in population over time due to migration or immigration.
2. Economic developments – Entrepreneurship activity, industry growth, employment opportunities.
3. Limited supply of land.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:22 am
As I said before Q1 2009 was the bottom, and we are in recovery mode now.
—–
The person who confuses between seasonal change and recovery, INTENTIONALLY, is a liar.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:22 am
#66: hahahahah.
When I said better, I meant stronger. The market we have today in the Bay Area would be considered a good market in most parts of this country.
So what does ‘stronger’ mean? What does ‘good’ mean? Do you want to take SP/LP? DOM? Months of inventory? Be specific if you want to participate.
But you’re just trying to distract from all the solid, data-backed points I made. With none of your own.
The evidence is that 2009 is a year of low prices and low sales Nationally. That is the only sane interpretation of the data. Anyone saying different is lying and probably trying to make money off their lies.
And let’s be clear on another point. Buying in the bay area during the last 5 years was one of the worst possible real estate investments in the country. We had some of the biggest bubble-fever-induced price increases, unrelated to fundamental value, of anywhere in the country.
Compare the Case-Shiller data for the other 20 cities, and you see that only a few did worse than us (Miami, Phoenix, Vegas) – the rest suffered from this bubble, but not so badly.
So it would be more accurate to say “the bay area has been one of the worst, weakest, housing markets in the country in the last 2-3 years”.
And I’ll be specific, I mean in terms of price declines. The Bay Area suffered some of the steepest price declines in the country. That’s a fact.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:25 am
3. Limited supply of land.
—–
LOL! RealExcreter third choice is a gem – coming right from NAR.
I thought RealExcreter would be talking about “velocity of buyable inventory”.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:26 am
For a visual of the 20-city data, look at the nifty NY Times graphic, which I base my last point off of.
NYT Housing Graphic
May 27th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Anyone saying different is lying and probably trying to make money off their lies.
—-
Is it true, RealExcreter?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:36 am
A. Lewis,
The graph is flawed because it’s based on useless aggregate data. When they refer to “San Francisco”, they’re including all the outlying areas that have been devasted by the crisis. Such data is totally irrelevant, unless you want to move out there.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:36 am
2. Economic developments – Entrepreneurship activity, industry growth, employment opportunities.
—–
Tell about industry growth and employment opportunities in Q1 that resulted “recovery” (according to you), RealExcreter.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Pralay,
Have you found a suitable elementary school yet?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Care to take your own advice from post #27, A.?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:41 am
The graph is flawed because it’s based on useless aggregate data.
—
Do you have alternate no-flaw graph for SF, RealExcreter?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:44 am
From A.’s Calculated Risk post, there is one positive graph (from a “where’s the bottom?” perspective):
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_pMscxxELHEg/Sh1l3r60TNI/AAAAAAAAFYY/rFqmFn6cztA/s1600-h/EHSYoYInventoryApr2009.jpg
CR’s comment on it:
If the trend of declining year-over-year inventory levels continues in 2009 that will be a positive for the housing market. Prices will probably continue to fall until the months of supply reaches more normal levels (in the 6 to 8 month range compared to the current 10.2 months), and that will take some time.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Have you found a suitable elementary school yet?
—-
I figured that I don’t need to, because I can spell Manhatten.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:50 am
When they refer to “San Francisco”,
—-
Some news from city.
May 27th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Pralay says,
>>Do you have alternate no-flaw graph for SF, RealExcreter?
The best alternative is to simply listen to you. After all, we cannot trust the Fed Chairman or 90% of the economists out there. You are the single source of truth, and well supported by the likes of nomadic.
May 27th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Pralay says,
>>Some news from city.
I think the Chronicle hired the guy from patrick.net. This is why they published this headline article. Look at the readers’ comments, and you’ll see why many people do not agree.
May 27th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Do not confuse “do not agree” with “are stupid and desperate to believe a lie.”
May 27th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
As usual you are avoid answering it, RealExcreter. Let’s sum up the points:
1. In #66 you said Bay Area market is “stronger”. Keep in mind that you used the word “Bay Area”, not SF. You provided NOTHING to support your statement.
2. In #71 and #73 Lewis showed with sufficient information why Bay Area (not SF) market is not stronger.
3. Then comes your decorated reply #75 – switching the gear from “Bay Area” to “San Francisco”. But again you provided no substance to show why Bay Area (or San Francisco) market is stronger.
So where is your no-flaw graph to prove Bay Area/San Francisco market “STRONGER”, RealExcreter?
May 27th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
I think the Chronicle hired the guy from patrick.net.
——
Well, if that is the case, there is another guy who posted comment #48 here. Who hired him?
May 27th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Pralay,
Unless you explain what are your positions toward each of the items in #86, I have no response for you, as I do not know what I am responding to.
Let me be clear:
Are you saying the Bay Area market is weaker than the national market? If so, what is your basis for such a position?
May 27th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Unless you explain what are your positions toward each of the items in #86, I have no response for you, as I do not know what I am responding to.
——-
LOL!
May 27th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Are you saying the Bay Area market is weaker than the national market? If so, what is your basis for such a position?
—-
Read #71 and #73. Don’t whine “San Francisco” this time.
May 27th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Pralay,
I’m waiting for you to clearly state your own position, without waffling and without referring to other people’s posts. If you are unable or unwilling to do so, then there’s really no way for me to respond to you.
May 27th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
#86 – Great post Pralay, thanks. Don’t bother responding to #91.
Real Estater leaves an ever-lengthening trail of unanswered direct questions in his wake. His main strategy? Ask a new question of his questioners, and bog them down in silly arguments.
Anyone reading the thread later will see how we made solid points, and he was trounced. It’s sad, really.
#78 – OK, I blew off some steam. I hearby promise not to post further in this thread. See you in another thread.
May 27th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
RealExcreter, my position is you are wrong and a proven liar. Based on your lack of credibility and habit of lying, your words should not be trusted in face value. Now, show us why we should trust your “Bay area market is stronger” statement when you provided nothing to support your statement.
May 27th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
Yeah, excreter! Cover your bullshit with more bullshit! go go go!
May 27th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Pralay,
One more time: What is your position regarding the Bay Area housing market vs. the national market.
A. Lewis,
As anyone can see, Pralay gets bogged down anytime you ask him what is his position. He is the only one who refuses to answer questions or provide a report about his own neighborhood. The only reason you are supporting him is to blow off some steam. Unfortunately, you have no idea what you are supporting, because he never explained his position on anything.
May 27th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Unfortunately, you have no idea what you are supporting, because he never explained his position on anything.
—–
My position is that RealExcreter is a proven liar who lies about for his profession too. He excretes as usual craps from real estate industry and keeps parroting “right time to buy” all the time (e.g. documented here, here and here).
May 27th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
In summary, Pralay’s position is one of personal attack, baiting, and lacking in Bay Area spirit!
May 27th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
My position described in #96 is based on facts.
Personal attack would be calling someone serious pro clown.
May 27th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
I like the “or anything” at the end of 95. LOL.
May 27th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Real Estater: the clown who takes himself seriously.
May 27th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
I like the “or anything” at the end of 95. LOL.
—-
Because RealExcreter is not anything. He is nothing.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Classic. A zero value guy with no valid point, no position, no data, and no report accuses someone else of being nothing.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
is he wrong?
May 27th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
anon,
Ask him to clarify his position first before asking this question.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
A. Lewis says,
>>Again, 2009 is the worst Jan-April for the last 5 years. That is a sign of lower housing prices.
This is an extremely naive statement. I would encourage you to avoid drawing conclusions from aggregate statistics. There’s the old saying: Lies, damn lies, and statistics. The worst kind of liars here are those who rely on statistics. It is much more useful to understand the market conditions on the ground in each neighborhood, or even each street within a neighborhood. Since last year, there has been a split market and flight to quality. A house with undesirable attributes may sit on the market for a long period with multiple price reductions, while another property nearby with the right attributes may sell quickly. Overall, this is how a “normal” real estate market behaves. By historical standards, the Bay Area housing market is behaving normally, with the typical “Spring Bounce” as you noted. There was a slow period during Q1 2009 which formed the bottom as we look back. All indications are the market is on the rebound, and consistent with the wide consensus regarding economic recovery.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
I’d like to qualify my comments with an assumption. The assumption is that there would be no dramatic geo-political event that shocks the U.S. economy. Specifically, I’m referring to events such as North Korea launching a war against U.S. forces in South Korea, Isreal launching an attack against Iran and dragging U.S. into it, or a major earthquake hitting our area. The possibilities of such events happening is not zero, so I don’t want to be accused of making statements about the market without stating the risks.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Classic. A zero value guy with no valid point, no position, no data, and no report accuses someone else of being nothing.
—-
Ok, you are
nothingliar. Happy?May 27th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Overall, this is how a “normal” real estate market behaves. By historical standards, the Bay Area housing market is behaving normally, with the typical “Spring Bounce” as you noted.
—–
What is the definition of “normal”, RealExcreter? If 200 DOM becomes “selling briskly” in Realtard’s dictionary, then “normal” got to be something catastrophic.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
I would encourage you to avoid drawing conclusions from aggregate statistics.
——
LOL! It is coming from a guy who provided only one data point in this thread so far – uselsss aggregate data in #20.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
There’s the old saying: Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
——
And a proven pathological liar lies with statistics. The statement “April existing home sales rose by 2.9 percent” in post #48 is a perfect example.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
“The possibilities of such events happening is not zero, so I don’t want to be accused of making statements about the market without stating the risks.”
Looks like excreter’s thought of everything!
May 27th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
All indications are the market is on the rebound, and consistent with the wide consensus regarding economic recovery.
—–
Useless aggregated data. The funny thing about #105 is that it starts with advice that one should avoid drawing conclusions from aggregate statistics, then the post ends with very thing it advised to avoid.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
The possibilities of such events happening is not zero, so I don’t want to be accused of making statements about the market without stating the risks.
—-
Looks like North Korea is the only risk for future US economy.
What about Martians? Can they land on planet Earth and affect US economy, RealExcreter?
May 27th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Looks like excreter’s thought of everything!
—-
He is just a well rounded guy.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
“I don’t want to be accused of making statements about the market without stating the risks.”
How about making statements about the market while stating all the facts, and only the facts, RealExecerpter?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
A house with undesirable attributes may sit on the market for a long period with multiple price reductions, while another property nearby with the right attributes may sell quickly. Overall, this is how a “normal” real estate market behaves.
——
Ok, now we get it. When RealExcreter mentions something as “normal”, he is actually talking about declining market.
Realtard’s dictionary is so “normal”.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Lower case steve, here are some houses for you
May 27th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Pralay says,
>>He is just a well rounded guy.
Unfortunately that’s not what I can say about you. What the hell were you doing on Burbed when the NBA Western Conference Finals was going on?
May 27th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Pralay says,
>>And a proven pathological liar lies with statistics. The statement “April existing home sales rose by 2.9 percent” in post #48 is a perfect example.
Here’s what I actually said:
“The worst kind of liars here are those who rely on statistics.” Note the keyword in bold. I don’t solely rely on statistics; I also talk about the circumstances around the statistics.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
FYI lower case steve, the cubical house on 848 Southampton Dr will be open this Sunday.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
DreamT says,
>>How about making statements about the market while stating all the facts, and only the facts
That’s exactly what I provide. The reason some dispute with the “facts” is because they never go look at houses and don’t stay on top of the market. Others confuse data with facts. Crap-Shitter Index is one example. You might consider those data as facts, but they are utterly useless facts, especially for anyone shopping RBA.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
“What the hell were you doing on Burbed when the NBA Western Conference Finals was going on?”
Lol – real estater thinks he’s well rounded because he watches sports.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
>>FYI lower case steve, the cubical house on 848 Southampton Dr will be open this Sunday.
You might consider showing him something that’s 1/3 the price.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
Does anyone know of a Firefox plug-in to remove/hide Real Estater’s comments?
May 27th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
herve,
My recommendation would be that you take a hiatus from Burbed and buy a box of yogurt
May 27th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Who cares about the NBA when the Detroit Red Wings are going to the Stanley Cup Playoffs AGAIN?
May 27th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Unfortunately that’s not what I can say about you.
RealExcreter just proved himself not a well rounded guy by not understanding the sarcasm about him being well rounded.
——–
May 27th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
nomadic,
You’re rooting for a city where houses are worth $1 and the major employer is going bankrupt?
May 27th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Here’s what I actually said:
“The worst kind of liars here are those who rely on statistics.” Note the keyword in bold. I don’t solely rely on statistics; I also talk about the circumstances around the statistics.
——–
Let me put this way: Your substance in this thread is ZERO.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
That’s exactly what I provide.
—–
One more lie from proven pathological liar.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
Pralay says,
>>RealExcreter just proved himself not a well rounded guy
And don’t forget, he is a proven psycho-pathological liar who cannot be trusted!
May 27th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Pralay says,
>>Let me put this way: Your substance in this thread is ZERO.
Now come to think of it, you need to find an elementary school with API score not to exceed 700!
May 27th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
RealExcreter,
Thanks again. How about you making that link as your signature?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
Pralay says,
>>Thanks again. How about you making that link as your signature?
Actually, I suggest you make it in your signature, so that you don’t need to type it so often.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
Now come to think of it, you need to find an elementary school with API score not to exceed 700!
——–
Missed #81?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Actually, I suggest you make it in your signature, so that you don’t need to type it so often.
——
It IS my signature.
And RealExcreter cannot dispute that he is not a liar.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
Pralay,
We also know you can spell Cupertino, but can you afford it?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
#128 – abso-f*cking-lutely
The team rocks and the city needs it more than any other. Not that it’ll do much for it economically.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Pralay says,
>>And RealExcreter cannot dispute that he is not a liar.
Please don’t forget to tell your elementary school teacher.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
nomadic,
Instead of going to a Detroit Red Wings game, you can buy like 100 f*cking houses in that city. Tough choice.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
We also know you can spell Cupertino, but can you afford it?
———
You mean that Cupertino which used to have 106% SP/LP, RealExcreter used to brag about it and then he stopped talking about its SP/LP?
Do Cupertino elementary schools teach how to spell Manhatten, Star Bucks, Face Book and sky scrapers? If so, I can think about it.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
madhaus,
We need a song: “Proven Pathological Liar”. Sounds catchy, doesn’t it? You can split the royalty with Pralay to pay for his education.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Pralay,
>>You mean that Cupertino which used to have 106% SP/LP, RealExcreter used to brag about it and then he stopped talking about its SP/LP?
Don’t tell me you still can’t afford Cupertino. What’s your excuse now?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Excreter and pathological liar doesn’t deserve a song, RealExcreter.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Don’t tell me you still can’t afford Cupertino. What’s your excuse now?
———
Don’t you know that Cupertino market has long way to go – downward?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Pralay says,
>>Don’t you know that Cupertino market has long way to go – downward?
Wow, is that a position? I suggest a headline feature Burbed!
May 27th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
Want to contradict? Just 12 days back you proved you know nothing about Cupertino.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
The reason some dispute with the “facts” is because they never go look at houses and don’t stay on top of the market.
——
Can proven liar show a single fact he provided in THIS thread? Just one.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Pralay says,
>>Just 12 days back you proved you know nothing about Cupertino.
I’m sure you know how to Google up all the stats on Cupertino. The only question left is: Can you afford it?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
The reason some dispute with the “facts” is because they never go look at houses and don’t stay on top of the market.
——
It seems RealExcreter cannot stay on the top of the market even going to open houses and collecting truthful information from fellow Realtards.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
Pralay says,
>>Can proven liar show a single fact he provided in THIS thread?
A proven pathological psycho-analytical liar cannot be trusted!
May 27th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
I’m sure you know how to Google up all the stats on Cupertino. The only question left is: Can you afford it?
—–
Not a relevant question. Therefore ignored.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Pralay says,
>>It seems RealExcreter cannot stay on the top of the market even going to open houses and collecting truthful information from fellow Realtards.
A proven pathological biological liar cannot be trusted!
May 27th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
One more time.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Put it in your sig! I want to be able to click on “Pralay” and be taken to that page immediately.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
I never knew that you have so much love for the proofs of your lies.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
Pralay says,
>>I never knew that you have so much love for the proofs of your lies.
Just helping to reduce the number of junk posts by you.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Oh, leave it to Burbed. He is doing a pretty good job. For example, this one.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Actually, if Burbed were really smart, he should just remove the source of all junk posts.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
Junk post? Those two posts just quotes YOU and prove you as liar. How could they be junk?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
RE – You’re probably not qualified to gauge how smart Burbed is. After all, he called Bait on you, yet you didn’t change your ways. How smart does that make you?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:35 pm
Pralay,
I’m sorry to point out the truth, but you are the troll of the forum and all of your posts are junk posts. This would be a better place without you. Will you please take a hiatus with Herve? I’m sure he would be happy to share some yogurt. Good night!
May 27th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
DreamT says,
>>After all, he called Bait on you, yet you didn’t change your ways.
I have done nothing wrong. The trolls are fully responsible for the consequences.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:39 pm
Indeed, it doesn’t surprise anybody here that you fail to acknowledge responsibility for what you write.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:39 pm
This would be a better place without you.
—–
I bet it would be, at least for YOU.
It must be an humiliating experience for you to be proven liar when all you wanted is to build a fictitious persona living in prestigious zipcode (with exotic plants.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
Indeed, it doesn’t surprise anybody here that you fail to acknowledge responsibility for what you write.
—-
It’s all others’ fault.
Others make RealExcreter excreting. I think it is better known as urinating in pant.:)
May 27th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
After today’s housing data, even ABC News is asking if we have hit bottom! According to the article:
>>Experts say the stars are aligned for people to begin creeping back into the housing market.
Don’t forget, RE’s track record shows he never lies about anything; he’s just ahead of the curve! If you don’t believe him today, you will believe him later. It’s about as guaranteed as Pralay’s zero value status.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:50 pm
DreamT says,
>>Indeed, it doesn’t surprise anybody here that you fail to acknowledge responsibility for what you write.
It sounds like you are blaming me for what was written. Please at least have the courtesy to share with me, exactly was written that you believe was my fault?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:56 pm
Blaming you for what you wrote!?
How dare he!
May 27th, 2009 at 11:57 pm
Whatever you wrote was removed by Burbed. How would I know what was written? What kind of question is that?
It’s certainly not Pralay who had posted on your behalf, unless you two are roommates who have been feuding since kindergarten and only address each other on this site.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Upper case Herve may be already taking a hiatus (international vacations, who knows?) but his lower case alter ego is here to stay.
If you are using Firefox, you can install the RIP extension and add the following XPath to hide Real Estater’s nonsense:
//li[cite='Real Estater']/p | //li[a='Real Estater']
Yogurt anyone?
May 28th, 2009 at 12:00 am
or ex-lovers who are still stuck on the lease.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:01 am
If you don’t believe him today, you will believe him later.
—–
One year back:
Does anybody believe this guy after one year? Raise your hand.
Six months back:
Does anybody agree this guy’s absurd prediction after six months?
And of course he has “right time to buy” ALL THE TIME (as posted in #96).
May 28th, 2009 at 12:01 am
DreamT says,
>>Whatever you wrote was removed by Burbed. How would I know what was written?
If you don’t know what was written, WTF is your basis for blaming me? Is this just a blind accusation?
May 28th, 2009 at 12:03 am
If you don’t know what was written, WTF is your basis for blaming me? Is this just a blind accusation?
——
Emperor Burbed declared that it was a bait post. And we believe Emperor Burbed.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:03 am
You know RE, accepting responsibility and accepting blame are two slightly different concepts. Your dad hasn’t taught you that?
May 28th, 2009 at 12:04 am
Pralay,
Don’t waste your time copying an old post that has already been responded to. I won’t feed the troll. Sorry, try something more creative next time.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:06 am
DreamT,
Hasn’t your dad taught you not to point the finger before you know the facts? You’re asking me to accept responsibility for something which you don’t even know what it is? Don’t you find this completely laughable?
May 28th, 2009 at 12:07 am
Don’t forget, RE’s track record shows he never lies about anything; he’s just ahead of the curve!
——-
Example of “ahead of the curve” – eight months back:
Looks like used car salesman is trying hard to sell his car with “track record”.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:11 am
Don’t waste your time copying an old post that has already been responded to.
—-
RealExcreter as usual: I explained everything in past (when in past he did the very same thing he is doing in this thread).
May 28th, 2009 at 12:14 am
You’re asking me to accept responsibility for something which you don’t even know what it is?
—–
In one side Burbed. In another side RealExcreter the proven liar. Burbed is believable. RealExcreter is NOT.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:15 am
RE – I’m not asking you to do anything. I’m observing that you “fail to acknowledge responsibility for what you write.” This is factual, regardless of your post’s content.
So, going back to your dad…?
May 28th, 2009 at 12:31 am
DreamT,
Did your mother bring you up to be a hypocrite, or was it due to the environment in your motherland?
You know full well Pralay is a worthless troll, yet that never seems to bother you. Why don’t you ask him to accept responsibility for his false accusations and personal attacks? Even madhaus has on one occasion expressed disapproval of his behavior, yet you have kept quiet. It seems like you’re the type that would watch someone get robbed on the subway and then tell the police you never saw the crime. I think it’s time for you to come to terms with your own bias, and accept responsibility for that.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:43 am
Even madhaus has on one occasion expressed disapproval of his behavior, yet you have kept quiet.
—–
What about you, RealExcreter? Madhaus must be having great impression about you.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:43 am
wow that was heavy. Maybe you should just go to bed and forget about these dad issues
May 28th, 2009 at 1:22 am
DreamT,
The question is not whether I should go to bed, but whether you will stay up to accept responsibility.
Pralay,
Keep on trolling!
May 28th, 2009 at 1:48 am
No Sir, I will not take responsibility for the crap you post, especially when it gets moderated by Burbed!
Instead of whining and pleading for some fairness on my part, while (counterproductively) eructing whatever insults come to your mind… grow up!
May 28th, 2009 at 7:29 am
DreamT,
You and Pralay are quite a pair. One of you will not take responsibility, while the other will not provide a report!
May 28th, 2009 at 8:10 am
And to top it all off, re is trash
May 28th, 2009 at 9:10 am
My, weren’t you all productive last night?
Well, that huge pent-up demand has been released, rushing us to new records! Too bad it’s banks’ pent-up foreclosures:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/foreclosures-break-another-record-in-first-quarter
A highlight:
“MBA’s forecast, a view now shared by the Federal Reserve and others, is that the unemployment rate will not hit its peak until mid-2010. Since changes in mortgage performance lag changes in the level of employment, it is unlikely we will see much of an improvement until after that,” he said.
Good thing last quarter was just the final big rush to bottom, eh? Hmm, but unemployment has only improved in the last two week-to-week reports (well into Q2 and not expected to last).
May 28th, 2009 at 9:20 am
nomadic,
This is Q1 data. As I already noted, Q1 this year was the bottom. The results should be expected.
As for unemployment, if you’re still employed, your job is safer now than it was a year ago. Companies have already cut to the bones, and there is little room to cut back further.
May 28th, 2009 at 9:25 am
My point exactly – we should see Q2 data with fewer foreclosures per your prediction, yes?
And hell, what’s delinquency of just 9.12%? Almost 91% of people are paying their mortgage on time! woohoo.
May 28th, 2009 at 10:08 am
I want to join the proven liar’s club, so I’m posting in this thread again. Nyah nyah!
I just wanted to raise the level of discourse.
RBA home prices will fall fast and hard. Sell now! Don’t buy!!
May 28th, 2009 at 10:16 am
A. Lewis,
Your desparation for a market fall is almost comical. I was just going to say I saw 2 more Sold signs on my route to the fwy.
May 28th, 2009 at 10:37 am
nomadic says,
>>we should see Q2 data with fewer foreclosures per your prediction, yes?
Foreclosure areas are usually the first to fall and last to recover; therefore I would not expect to see dramatic changes in one quarter. What I would expect to see, however, is brisk sales of foreclosure properties (which is already happening), leading to a drop in foreclosures as economic recovery kicks in in the latter part of this year.
May 28th, 2009 at 10:43 am
The tally of newly laid-off people requesting jobless benefits fell last week, the government said Thursday, a sign that companies are cutting fewer workers.
May 28th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Ha! Now I’ve got you reacting to me!
94301 is one of the most vulnerable zipcodes in the USA! It is the WORST place to buy in the SF Bay Area right now. Expect 30% drops in the next 6 months.
Sell now or be a debt-slave forever!
May 28th, 2009 at 10:51 am
“desparation” IS comical. And so am I.
May 28th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
A. Lewis,
I look forward to seeing you move in to my zip soon!
May 28th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
And I look forward to you losing your job, foreclosing on your house, and me buying it for 1/3 of what you paid! And you finally stopping posting here!
May 28th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
get a room you two.
May 28th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
nomadic says,
>>get a room you two.
I welcomed him to my neighborhood with open arms, and look at the ill-wishes I got! Mr. Lewis needs to go find a restroom, so that he doesn’t sh** in this forum.
May 28th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Like you, I now feel free to say whatever I want. Burbed can moderate me if necessary. Caveat Emptor!
May 28th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Wow. This has really spiraled out of control.
Let’s talk about something more straight forward – for example, why are rent prices seemingly dropping in Mountain View and Sunnyvale?
May 28th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Why, lower-case burbed! I’m glad you asked.
Rents are apparently dropping because people are losing their jobs and leaving the area. This is leading to less demand for rent!
May 28th, 2009 at 9:17 pm
The “Hiatus from Real Estater” extension works quite well by the way. Very refreshing.
May 28th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
anon,
Are you saying that after people leave the area, they don’t need a place to live?
May 28th, 2009 at 10:04 pm
No. I am saying that they are absorbed in the ample supply of housing elsewhere.
That’s your lesson. Now go to bed.
May 28th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
anon,
Are you saying they are leaving the area because there are more jobs elsewhere?
May 29th, 2009 at 3:20 am
anon,
Have you thought through the statement you made yet?