April 20, 2010

Living room with easy access to fridge

$1,530,000

image

Beds: 3
Baths: 2
Sq. Ft.: 1,800
$/Sq. Ft.: $850
Lot Size: 8,350 Sq. Ft.
Property Type: Detached Single Family
Style: Ranch
Stories: 1
View: Neighborhood
Year Built: 1948
Community: County/Alameda Area
County: San Mateo
MLS#: 81003410
Source: MLSListings
Status: Active This listing is for sale and the sellers are accepting offers.
On Redfin: 73 days
Charming rancher in Las Lomitas School district * * * Extra large lot in a highly desirable location. Hardwood floors, large eat in kitchen with family room, extra large living/dining, wonderful home. Many updates!
Thanks to Burbed reader Nate for this find. This is what Nate had to say:

Not sure if this will make the cut since the house actually looks pretty nice and is a nice ‘hood – but I couldn’t resist because the location of the refrigerator is so epically awful.  If you look at the pics closely, you can see that the refrigerator is outside of the kitchen, with the door just down from the tv in the family room.  The best part is that the kitchen actually looks updated – and the refrigerator in question is of course stainless. 

This place has been on the market for 2.5mos and has had multiple price reductions.  At this point the asking is $155k below what the seller paid at the end of 2007 (he probably thought he was buying the dip).

Let’s take a look in the kitchen first:

image

Indeed. No fridge there. Let’s take a look at the “extra large living/dining”:

image

Sharp eyes Nate! That would’ve been an easy miss right there.

Frankly, this is perfect for 4/20 day. Got the munchies while watching The Matrix for the 2410th time? No problemo! The fridge is right there!

Comments (182) -- Posted by: burbed @ 5:55 am

182 Responses to “Living room with easy access to fridge”

  1. SEA Says:

    At only $1,530,000, I wouldn’t be surprised if we hear someone suggest that it’s cheap enough that one should consider buying two of these. The listing even suggests that it’s in a “highly desirable location.” What I don’t understand is why reduce the price?

    Redfin suggests, “Oct 22, 2004 Sold (Public Records) $1,357,000″

    Any guesses as to the chances that this place actually sells below the October 2004 selling price? When thinking about all the profit, should we forget about those “many updates?”

    Looks like the RBA continues to lose area. Oh well, it’s actually an enjoyable way to lose money, right?

  2. nomadic Says:

    I’m not sure this house could ever be in the RBA, given the skull with horns on the wall near the fridge. Rather un-PC for around here, isn’t it?

    Maybe the house would fetch a higher price it was around the block on Palo Alto Way or Stanford Ave!

  3. sonarrat Says:

    Perfect for hosting stranded Europeans who can’t get home because of Eyjafyallajökullanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwyll-llantysiliogogogoch. They will surely be impressed by our demonstration of American priorities.

  4. Petsmart groomer Says:

    > Let’s take a look at the “extra large living/dining”

    To be fair, you are showing a picture of the family room, not the living room.

    I was thinking the same thing about the skull. Who thought it was a good idea to leave it there?

  5. nomadic Says:

    I was thinking the same thing about the skull. Who thought it was a good idea to leave it there?

    Maybe the person who decorated my office? I have horns on one wall and a cow pelt (complete with tail) on another.

  6. Gallileo Says:

    I’ve been in this house, and it is way worse than just a refrigerator in your family room.

    Hillbillies call this sort of house a “shotgun shack”, because you can fire a shotgun through the front door and the pellets won’t hit anything before they exit out the back door.

    Now, this house has much better wood floors, so it is more of a “lane of a bowling alley” house–nothing on the inside breaks it up front to back except a kitchen counter or two. It’s narrow and long, and you really can see the fridge from the front room. Just a horrible, horrible layout. What were they thinking?

    Oh, I know, they were thinking that massively expensive granite counters, wood floors, paint and appliances can make a bowling lane into a home. Plus think of the parties you can have with a bowling alley in your house!

    The kitchen counters will prevent you from throwing gutter balls!

  7. SEA Says:

    Gallileo- “What were they thinking?”

    Living in the RBA is a no-brainer?

  8. Gallileo Says:

    Another thing about this house: check the location, location, location. Across and next to apartment buildings–and with about a five-foot lot line, you get to have an entire audience watch you boal.

    But that’s not the best of it, the best is that you get to be within one house of the most expensive steak-restaurant in Palo Alto–why would you ever muss that beautiful kitchen putting on a show for everyone in the front room (and back room too–everyone can see everyone else!) when you can take ten steps and eat overpriced but very tender beef?

  9. Tuno Says:

    Mr. Fridge was simply bored in the kitchen, because the owners have too many meals at the Steakhouse. so he wandered into the family room to watch T.V..

    this article posted at Patrick.net ties things together nicely: http://rismedia.com/2010-04-19/sec-charges-against-goldman-sachs-send-shivers-through-wall-street/?source=patrick.net

  10. Tuno Says:

    I couldn’t find the apartment buildings on street view; it looks like it has houses around it???

  11. Nate Says:

    Ahhh … there’s some confusion about which Leland house this is. The apartment, steakhouse and “shotgun” floor plan references are all about this house:

    http://www.redfin.com/CA/Palo-Alto/419-Leland-Ave-94306/home/1540974

    Why the agent didn’t describe it as “steakhouse adjacent” is a mystery – who wouldn’t want to smell the aroma of prime aged beef wafting across their entirely paved “yard” as they listen to the soothing sound of El Camino Real traffic?

  12. madhaus Says:

    Aw, Nate, why did you have to spoil our fun? The bowling alley isn’t next to the steak house? Someone on that zoning commission needs to pay better attention.

    Bowling lane is a great name for this property. Check out all the pictures including the foyer (bowling lane), the bathroom granite slab (raised bowling lane) and the lot layout (8350 sf bowling lane).

    As to this house’s price reductions, well, an Escalade a month, that’s all I can ask. Can anyone say 1997?

    Date Event Price Appreciation Source
    Apr 07, 2010 Price Changed $1,530,000 — MLSListings #81003410
    Mar 11, 2010 Price Changed $1,580,000 — MLSListings #81003410
    Jan 25, 2010 Listed $1,630,000 — MLSListings #81003410
    Oct 22, 2007 Sold (MLS) $1,685,000 — Inactive MLSListings #80752141
    Oct 17, 2007 Sold (Public Records) $1,685,000 7.5%/yr Public Records
    Oct 02, 2007 Delisted — — Inactive MLSListings #80752141
    Sep 17, 2007 Listed $1,685,000 — Inactive MLSListings #80752141
    Oct 22, 2004 Sold (Public Records) $1,357,000 10.9%/yr Public Records
    Oct 22, 2004 Sold (MLS) $1,357,000 — Inactive MLSListings #80422412
    Sep 22, 2004 Delisted — — Inactive MLSListings #80422412
    Sep 09, 2004 Listed $1,299,000 — Inactive MLSListings #80422412
    Jan 08, 1997 Sold (Public Records) $605,000 — Public Records

  13. SEA Says:

    Monday, September 17, 2007 – Listed at $1,685,000
    15 days later
    Tuesday, October 2, 2007 – Delisted
    15 days later
    Wednesday, October 17, 2007 – SOLD Full Asking Price

    Is it close enough that I can suggest that this place has been on the market for three months?

    So the asking price is about 150k less than purchase price about 2.5 years ago, and then there are those “Many updates!”

    Ignoring taxes, updates, maintenance, and so on, let’s figure the cost per month:

    $1,685,000 at 5% (net) = $7,000 per month, cost of capital.
    $150,000 over 30 months = $5,000 per month, loss on sale.

    That’s “only” $12k per month. The RBA is worth twice that!

    Hopefully the owners either don’t have any children, or they sent the kids to public skoolz knowing that they really should have been classified as renters.

    When some transient buys and then immediately sells, can they really be considered a resident of the RBA?

  14. DreamT Says:

    “When some transient buys and then immediately sells, can they really be considered a resident of the RBA?”

    Time to import the Real Resident™ concept from San Francisco, where you’re only considered a native if you’ve been living there for at least three generations.

    Sorry Real Estater, maybe your grandchildren will belong to the club.

  15. Alex Says:

    SEA, not sure if your cost of capital is valid. What’s the cost to the owner if they financed 100%? Sure, the interest is their cost but they also get to deduct portions of that and they get to live in the house as well.

  16. SEA Says:

    Alex- As stated, it’s 5% net. Who knows the individual tax situation of the owner. He had to give up the standard deduction to claim the mortgage interest, and so on. So I estimated the cost of capital is 5% net.

    “What’s the cost to the owner if they financed 100%?”

    I hope you are not suggesting if the owner paid cash then the capital is free.

    Thus we have a cost of $12k per month “to live in the house.” What’s the rental cost of a similar home?

  17. sonarrat Says:

    100% financing is the opposite. That means no money down. Let’s leave out the little detail that such a thing doesn’t exist anymore.

  18. SEA Says:

    The capital comes from somewhere.

    Tell me, what percentage financing produces the lowest cost of capital, and what is the net cost, in percentage terms?

  19. DreamT Says:

    I don’t fully understand that area of Menlo Park. When we were shopping a few years ago, we visited a tiny doll house with a gigantic kitchen. The kitchen was literally half of the square footage, with all the modern amenities and a party layout. The rest of the house looked a century old, 2 bedrooms only and they were minute, not to mention the antiquated mini-fireplace near the entrance. The backyard was a trip too. I presumed after the visit that the seller must not be completely sane.

  20. Alex Says:

    So let’s be conservative and use your cost of capital $7000.

    But the rental cost of this type of property will run you $4,000-5,000.

    So the incremental cost of owning this property is $2,000-3,000 per month without considering taxes, insurance, etc.

  21. SEA Says:

    Alex- You’ve left out the $150,000 in loss at the point of sale. (Purchase Price 1,685,000 – 1,530,000 (Assumed selling price) = ~$150,000)

    Ignoring taxes, insurance, many updates, sales commissions, and so on.

    Cost of Capital: $7k
    Cost of Loss on Sale: $5k (average per month)
    $12k total monthly cost

    Assuming the rent is $4,000 – $5,000, I hope it’s clear that with this home, it would have been $7,000 – $8,000 less expensive to rent, not including the added ownership expenses.

  22. Real Estater Says:

    Alex,

    It’s not about the purchase price. If something appreciates in value, then what matters is the delta of the future value vs. the purchase price. In virtually all cases a house in Menlo Park is worth more than it did 10 years ago. Thus, these houses are essentially free. The price tag is just a measurement of your qualification.

  23. anon Says:

    This is bubblespeak. And it is not true.

  24. DreamT Says:

    RealEstater, RBA houses are not flipped – because if they are, they’re not part of the RBA. Indeed, a telling sign that we’re dealing with an RBA house is that the owner has or will die in it. No better place to upgrade to. No incentive to sell.

    Also RBA houses are generally bought cash, which you can hardly call “essentially free”.

  25. SEA Says:

    Real Estater- Didn’t I cover that “delta of the future value vs. the purchase price” here?

    But as DreamT correctly points out, aren’t we dealing with Proposition 13 in the RBA?

  26. nomadic Says:

    Wow, these houses are virtually free and yet our “investor” still won’t buy one after two years.

  27. Real Estater Says:

    Nomadic recooks the same question that he had both asked and gotten the answers for before. Trolling behavior by definition.

  28. Real Estater Says:

    What is far more baffling is why the likes of Nomadic and Madhaus speak of the evils of homeownership, yet they themselves own a home. That question we never got an answer for. The only logical explanation would be:
    “Homeownership is bad for you all, but I do want to own a home for myself”. If you buy that, you are dumber than an anon.

  29. SEA Says:

    I’ll take a given home, let’s say this one: “234 LELAND Ave Menlo Park, CA 94025″ featured above, and raise the price to the point where everyone* suggests it’s a bad idea to buy. Do that en masse, and it will be better to rent.

    *Of course there will be a few who suggest that paying a higher price is better, as it suggests more money will be made when the home is sold.

  30. nomadic Says:

    Nomadic recooks the same question that he had both asked and gotten the answers for before.

    I asked a question? Where?

  31. Petsmart groomer Says:

    > I asked a question? Where?

    Right there. Twice.

  32. McFly Says:

    Yay, essentially free houses for everyone. Where do I sign up?

  33. nomadic Says:

    Really?

  34. madEstater Says:

    Can I believe my eyes? I thought we had established beyond a doubt that RBA houses double every ten years. But look what I found in #22:

    In virtually all cases a house in Menlo Park is worth more than it did 10 years ago. Thus, these houses are essentially free.

    Really? Now they only have to be worth more than they were ten years ago? With such minimal criteria for admission, even Tennessee could be in the RBA.

  35. anon Says:

    And after all, “worth” conveniently doesn’t take into consideration 10 years worth of property taxes or deterioration of the structure. But please – pay no attention to the actual costs of ownership. Just buy an generate me a comission, says real estater.

  36. DreamT Says:

    madEstater – Who ever said the entirety of Menlo Park is RBA material?

  37. bob Says:

    I used to work somewhat close to this area. Its definitely hoity-toity land. Downtown Menlo Park is similar to a lot of overly gentrified neighborhoods in the Bay Area: boring, bland, and void of any character save for the scads of stay-at-home silicon valley moms pushing their strollers around at 10:00 AM.

    As cliche’ as this statement is, to me the glaring ridiculousness of the place isn’t the fridge poking into the living room but rather that this is a smaller house with a $1,530,000 price tag. Like Holy Sh!t. It just never seems to amaze me that there are people out there dumb enough to pay anything remotely close to something like that for this house.

  38. SEA Says:

    bob- “It just never seems to amaze me that there are people out there dumb enough to pay anything remotely close to something like that for this house.”

    I know–those poor suckers that buy these cheap, crappy homes don’t have the big bucks like those who buy Real $3.0M homes. Why buy this POS and only make $1.5M in 10 years, when you can buy a Real RBA home for $3.0+M and make twice as much?

    If the seller of this place was really smart, they’d increase the asking price to over $2.0M. That would weed out the buyers who really cannot afford to live in this fine neighborhood. I am surprised that the neighbors have not snapped this place up before it falls into the hands of another transient. Just how friendly are the people of Menlo Park?

    Computation of proper minimum selling price:

    Oct 22, 2007 Sold (MLS) $1,685,000

    For simplicity, I will assume 2.5 years, and a price double every 10 years, the rate of price increase will be 7.2% per year.

    Thus, (1.072)^2.5*$1,685,000 = $2.0M

    Any selling price less than $2.0M shall be called INSTANT EQUITY.

    Why is this place taking so long to sell? Probably because $500k in instant equity is not a lot of money.

    I hope Real Estater can clear up the confusion.

  39. anon Says:

    “I used to work somewhat close to this area. Its definitely hoity-toity land.”

    lol – nice one bob.

  40. nomadic Says:

    It just never seems to amaze me that there are people out there dumb enough to pay anything remotely close to something like that for this house.

    anon, I thought this part would crack you up. Of course it amazes bob. I think he meant “it never ceases to amaze me…” :-P

  41. Petsmart groomer Says:

    I think bob finds grammar, vocabulary and spelling so tantalizing.

  42. madhaus Says:

    Great catch, nomadic! I missed it too, but I can plead reading the site from the mobile device again.

    groomer, didn’t you mean tyrannizing?

    SEA, I’ll say it again: Math class is tough.

  43. Real Estater Says:

    After a whole day with lots of zero value posts written, there’s still no answer as to why certain hypocrites here would be preaching against home ownership while they own a home themselves.

    What’s even more amazing is that the rentards here actually think these folks are speaking with their interest in mind.

  44. Real Estater Says:

    Bob says,
    >>It just never seems to amaze me that there are people out there dumb enough to pay anything remotely close to something like that for this house.

    Your perspective is based on your personal level of poverty. To a farm boy everything seems amazing. Do you recall your first experience riding an elevator? It’s all relative. A similar looking house would cost even more in Palo Alto, and yes there’s a buyer for it.

  45. DreamT Says:

    why the pent-up anger in #42, Real Estater? It doesn’t suit you. Leave it to anon…

  46. Real Estater Says:

    First hypocrite responds, but still no answer…

  47. DreamT Says:

    loll why the personal attack Real Estater? Did I advocate anywhere against home ownership? Do you need bifocals?

  48. Real Estater Says:

    Well, are you for home ownership? Are you on the side of those who are without homes?

  49. DreamT Says:

    I told you many times, home ownership is a personal decision based on individual circumstances and it is preposterous to advocate knowing better without knowing said personal circumstances. In other words, there are no sides to take as far as I’m concerned, except if you’re talking about a specific house in the absolute.
    As for myself, yes absolutely I am for the ownership of my own very special corner of Prune Valley. Wouldn’t dream of going back to renting or living in a condo.

  50. Village Idiot Says:

    “After a whole day with lots of zero value posts written, there’s still no answer as to why certain hypocrites here would be preaching against home ownership while they own a home themselves.”

    Because buying a home at current prices is moronic for the reasons explained countless times but was likely not moronic when said individuals purchased. In 1999, a mortgage cost less than monthly rent. Now, it cost between 50-100% more.

    Incidentally, the realtor I spoke with a few days ago actually has been advising clients to wait until the end of the year before thinking about buying. Guess what, they have been picking up clients. You might take the cue. Most people in Silicon Valley understand basic math and econ and quickly dismiss snake oils salesmen.

  51. nomadic Says:

    Don’t bother, DreamT. RE only interprets comments the way he wants to. I’ve never said home ownership is bad. Like you said, it depends on many factors. RE only sees “it’s a good time to buy” in every circumstance – except buying his own investment property. Talk about hypocrite…

  52. Real Estater Says:

    nomadic cooks the same crap one more time…

  53. madEstater Says:

    nomadic, I could have sworn you said homeownership was bad, or maybe that was Buyers_Are_Idiots. Your writing styles are so similar I can’t tell the two of you apart. Same problem with you, DreamT, you remind me of ex-sunnyvale-renter. So how could you blame RealEstater for thinking you said such a thing? Honest, it’s a mistake any average tech guy could make.*

    * Provided he doesn’t understand context, syntax, usage, definitions, mood, intent, or results.

  54. DreamT Says:

    I don’t blame him, I pity him

  55. Real Estater Says:

    >>Because buying a home at current prices is moronic for the reasons explained countless times but was likely not moronic when said individuals purchased.

    Now that all the hypocrites are here, let me respond to your mis-notion. When these guys bought their houses, interest rates were way higher, prices seemed high for the time, rent vs. buy comparison didn’t work, etc. It’s always been that way. The reason they no longer have such concerns is because as time goes by, the owner reaps the reward of his investment. They always win. It has been the case for the past 50 years, and will be the case for the next 50.

    DreamT’s argument that “it depends on the person” is a bogus argument. Give me a break. Achieving the American dream is good for him, but not good for others?

  56. SEA Says:

    “The reason they no longer have such concerns is because as time goes by, the owner reaps the reward of his investment. They always win. It has been the case for the past 50 years, and will be the case for the next 50.”

    Does it take 50 years to win?

  57. madhaus Says:

    Yeah, take a look at that piece I wrote that ran on April 8th. Boy did they achieve the American Dream all right. I bet they wish they were some of the lucky ones who got foreclosed on.

  58. madEstater Says:

    Does it take 50 years to win?

    If you rent to me and I rent to you, it’s win now, win later, and win in 50 years! Although I think we have to sell and buy something else when the depreciation runs out, which is less than 50 years. However! I bet the IRS will extend that too, so we can win in 50 years as well!

  59. SEA Says:

    madEstater- When the depreciation schedule runs out, I am not sure what we are going to do. I think we’ll have to switch and live in our own homes, and hopefully the tax rules of the time will let us sell them tax free. We then sell each other our residences, and start the game all over.

    Think of all the rental income we will make over all the years PLUS all the gain on the sale.

  60. DreamT Says:

    Lol none of what #55 wrote above applies to my situation. Higher interest rates (remember 4.5% in 2002?), prices high (vs rent), no longer having the concerns I had 5 years ago whatever these were, or ‘achieving the American dream’. I certainly never strove to be a homeowner, it happened simply because it was the sensible thing to do at the time.

    Most of all, I would never equate owning a tract lot with having achieved a dream! Only a retarded person like RE would – or possibly someone who could not ever achieve this with hard work in their own country.

    RE, Do you realize how dumb you sound, talking about an “American dream” of homeownership to Silicon Valley residents?! :) when homeownership can be realized more easily in pretty much any other place in the USA! i.e. homeownership is generally not a primary consideration in their life or they’d be elsewhere.

  61. SEA Says:

    madhaus- That fine piece wasn’t about the RBA. The American dream is always accomplished in the Real homes of the RBA.

  62. Real Estater Says:

    SEA,

    Think of it this way: it took you less than 10 years to lose.

  63. SEA Says:

    DreamT- You know if interest rates rise, then homes values will go up too. Everyone will have to pay more for the home so they can pay added additional interest.

    It’s another win-win. Increasing interest rates only increases the value of the homes.

  64. SEA Says:

    I guess I only have 40 years left.

  65. DreamT Says:

    SEA – Yes I absolutely know that. Within two years, interest rates had shot up 2% and my condo value had shot up 30%. There was an obvious correlation there!

  66. madhaus Says:

    When RealEstater calls you a loser, you are not only a Real Winner, you’re also a Real Regular on burbed. Congrats, SEA, for having achieved the Silicon Valley dream!

  67. Real Estater Says:

    >>. Higher interest rates (remember 4.5% in 2002?)

    >>it happened simply because it was the sensible thing to do at the time.

    Are you saying you bought in 2002 with a 4.5% rate? Please don’t try to cover up your hypocrisy with b.s..

  68. madhaus Says:

    Congrats to DreamT as well! Not all of you realize this, but some of the regulars have been playing The Burbed Drinking Game. I’m not going to give all the rules out right away, because I’m too drunk to type that much at once.

    But one of the rules is: Every time RE starts spluttering, steaming, insulting someone when at a loss for words or thoughts, or otherwise acts even more irrationally than usual, everyone but the instigator must take a shot.

  69. Real Estater Says:

    DreamT,

    And you bought a condo?

  70. SEA Says:

    Real Estater- How low does the interest rate need to be when home values are decreasing, such as the fine home featured above at lost at least $150,000?

  71. madEstater Says:

    That’s not loss, SEA. That’s instant equity.

  72. nomadic Says:

    #61, SEA, how do we explain this one?
    http://www.burbed.com/2010/04/16/saratoga-house-waiting-for-ipos-to-flow/
    A wrinkle in the price gradient?

    .
    RE’s post had nothing to do with me either. I had 5.625% interest on the latest house, and it was just an impulse buy. Whatever.

  73. SEA Says:

    But $500k isn’t a lot of money.

  74. madhaus Says:

    #69, damn it! Everyone drinks twice except DreamT. Hic!

  75. SEA Says:

    nomadic- That’s DEEP, DEEP BLUE. No red there!

    Uh, or is it called instant equity?

  76. Real Estater Says:

    SEA,

    Why don’t you hold off for a few minutes. I’d like to see how DreamT finishes off his story.

  77. SEA Says:

    “#69, damn it! Everyone drinks twice except DreamT. Hic!”

    The party doesn’t begin until Real Estater arrives!

  78. SEA Says:

    “Why don’t you hold off for a few minutes. I’d like to see how DreamT finishes off his story.”

    How about you hold off for a day?

  79. madhaus Says:

    RE’s post had nothing to do with me either. I had 5.625% interest on the latest house, and it was just an impulse buy. Whatever.

    You mean you’re not drinking? That’s cheating.

    Seriously, I just picked up my shack on a variable back in 1922 or whatever. We repropertied the finance a tew fimes and got the date rown to five something, or maybe something five. dromadic, why weren’t you ninking?

  80. nomadic Says:

    Sorry, madhaus. I’ll do a few shots to catch up!

    Not sure why RE has a problem with DT’s interest rate. I had 4.75% in 2003. Maybe his broker is a crook.

  81. DreamT Says:

    RE, I already explained my circumstances. Mountain View condo in 2002 because it was just as cheap as renting at the time, Santa Clara house in 2005 because we could, wanted to leave our drug dealer & thief-infested condo, and I had an inkling the opportunity may be short-lived (which it was). Are you sure you’re not confusing me with someone else?

  82. Real Estater Says:

    >>I had 5.625% interest on the latest house, and it was just an impulse buy. Whatever.

    And you never bothered to refinance when the rates dropped?

  83. madhaus Says:

    SEA,

    Why don’t you hold off for a few minutes. I’d like to see how DreamT finishes off his story.

    Ah, another rule comes up! If RE plays mod, everyone but the instigator takes a shot. SEA, congrats again! Sish I sere wober, I could inpeop more vital to goin the jame.

  84. DreamT Says:

    yes SEA, welcome to the club, even though you bashed me about taxes…

  85. SEA Says:

    “Maybe his broker is a crook.”

    No, no! Your broker was a crook. If you wanted an honest broker, you’d have paid a higher interest rate. We’re in the RBA!

  86. madhaus Says:

    #82 — spurring RE to ask obnoxiously rude personal questions, this dround is runk as a noast to tomadic! I shake my tot and… excuse me, I gotta clean this up.

  87. nomadic Says:

    And you never bothered to refinance when the rates dropped?

    Um, HAD. Try to keep up RE. I’m hurt you don’t remember when I posted about refinancing…

  88. Real Estater Says:

    All,

    You see that? 2005 was when prices were “sensible”. Now is no longer the case. The guy is a repeat buyer; first 2002, then 2005. But…you guys better not buy. Homeownership is not for you. However, DreamT is almost due for another purchase.

  89. Real Estater Says:

    nomadic,

    Bottom line: What is your current rate?

  90. SEA Says:

    “Bottom line: What is your current rate?”

    Before or after taxes?

  91. nomadic Says:

    Promise to remember for me? I’d hate for you to forget again.

  92. Real Estater Says:

    I’d be willing to bet madhaus is paying less for her mortgage than what it costs to rent an equivalent shack. In a few more years, her payment will be 0, as she will own the house outright. However, don’t follow her footsteps. Rent until the day you die.

  93. madhaus Says:

    Somebody better Lalay that prink fast, because another rule is if you lind a fink that shows RE hontradicting cimself, everyone else dras to hink.

  94. DreamT Says:

    Prices are same as 2004-2005 in my neighborhood, which is better than one might say about most of the bay area, thanks to the rabid CUSD buyers that continue to keep it afloat.
    No, what was sensible in 2005 was the whole picture: overvalued price of our condo VS insane deals one could get on mortgages without going 3/1, 5/1 or option ARM, VS Santa Clara relatively’s reasonable 10-y growth 1995-2005 (100% increase) compared to say EPA or East Side SJ (400% increase) or inland. Some places lost 50% since then, others didn’t lose a penny. I have extended family members who bought in Las Vegas 3 years ago and it’s not pretty, I don’t believe they’ll see it gain back in value to what they purchased it for, in their lifetime.

  95. Real Estater Says:

    SEA,

    Simple question. Don’t make it more complicated. nomadic is having enough trouble answering.

  96. madhaus Says:

    I’d be willing to bet madhaus is paying less for her mortgage than what it costs to rent an equivalent shack. In a few more years, her payment will be 0, as she will own the house outright. However, don’t follow her footsteps. Rent until the day you die.

    But RE! Betting is illegal!

    Ha ha! I get to rass this pound!

  97. nomadic Says:

    I just want to know you’ll remember my interest rate. This is important. To you, apparently.

  98. madhaus Says:

    #95: Hic! I rought of another thule! If RE starts badgering you to answer one of quis hestions, everyone else drust make a tink.

  99. Real Estater Says:

    DreamT,

    Don’t bother to make a link with Vegas. Different place, difference story. If 2005 was a reasonable time to buy, how is it now is not? Santa Clara prices are still very reasonable. In fact, I would suggest people like Pralay to look there, but he’s talking Palo Alto all day long.

  100. madhaus Says:

    #94 — DreamT, that was very eloquently argued. So well written and typed that I accuse you of not drinking. But well done, so don’t take a drink with me.

  101. Real Estater Says:

    >>But RE! Betting is illegal!

    That’s right. Just goes to show how confident I am in that statement.

  102. DreamT Says:

    RE – Where again did I ever say that now is not a reasonable time to buy? Link please! Link please! And don’t respond with a question, answer with the link.

  103. SEA Says:

    I know Real Estater contributed plenty of wisdom, why is it so difficult to find?

  104. Real Estater Says:

    >>I just want to know you’ll remember my interest rate.

    I won’t deliberately forget. How’s that?

  105. SEA Says:

    DreamT- Don’t be silly; Vegas is not part of the RBA.

  106. madhaus Says:

    #99: Wowza, another gule for the rame! If RE drags in unrelated participants who aren’t even part of the discussion, everyone drink and let fly your favorite expression for Egg Skreeter.

    Wait, that wasn’t supposed to be rart of the pule. I mean let fly your favorite pet name for RE.

    Egg Skreeter.

    There.

  107. DreamT Says:

    madhaus – I’ll ask Mighty Leaf to offer an alcoholized tea.

  108. DreamT Says:

    SEA – My 95051 spot isn’t either, yet RE is arguing with me all night. How can that be? :)

  109. Real Estater Says:

    >>RE – Where again did I ever say that now is not a reasonable time to buy?

    Translation: DreamT is saying now is a reasonable time to buy — for him, not for you.

    Seriously, I’m tired of the double talk and hypocrisy. Otherwise, I wouldn’t waste so much time on this thread.

  110. DreamT Says:

    #106 – Roger that!

  111. madhaus Says:

    #103 — Oh yes he did contribute plenty of wisdom.

  112. nomadic Says:

    Santa Clara prices are still very reasonable.

    Sure, they may be reasonable. They’re at 2005 levels from what DreamT says… (Sorry all of you 2007 and 2008 buyers, better luck next time. In 20 years, you’ll have forgotten all about this little hiccup.)

  113. DreamT Says:

    Where did I say this is a reasonable to buy for me at the moment, RE? Oh wait – you haven’t responded the previous question with a link. Duh!

  114. nomadic Says:

    I won’t deliberately forget. How’s that?

    ahhhhhh, close enough. 4.5% Happy? Is that a life-changing answer? Does anyone actually care?

    Time for another shot. I’ve already forgotten our pet names for RE.

  115. Real Estater Says:

    DreamT,

    Why don’t you just state your position? Is it a sensible time to buy now or not?

  116. nomadic Says:

    Hey, didn’t we call him “hamster” for awhile? Maybe Roger the Hamster?

  117. DreamT Says:

    #112 – Candidly, there were almost no transactions in 2007 and 2008. So probably less than 5 buyers overpaid if you take 2005 or 2010 as a basis (but one of them did go overboard, although you’ll know more in a few days, so stay tuned)

  118. Real Estater Says:

    4.5%? Is that a Alt-A loan or what? Sorry for asking, because I don’t even know what an Alt-A loan is.

  119. madhaus Says:

    #109: Seriously, I’m tired of the double talk and hypocrisy. Otherwise, I wouldn’t waste so much time on this thread.

    If RE says something so mind-numbingly stupid that it doesn’t even make sense when you’re wee threets to the shind, ottoms bup!

    I mean… Mouth Gapes Open At The Sheer Idiocy Of That Last Remark… because… If You’re Tired of the discussion, why the f*ck are you still here?

  120. nomadic Says:

    Alt-A? That isn’t allowed in the RBA. Even in the slums of Los Gatos.

  121. madhaus Says:

    I think he meant A1 because he he has a steak in this discussion.

  122. SEA Says:

    Real Estater- Although I am not sure I believe that you don’t even know what an Alt-A long is, have you ever heard of Google?

  123. Real Estater Says:

    >>Sure, they may be reasonable. They’re at 2005 levels from what DreamT says…

    Just as I said, his home is essentially free. If he sold it today, he gets his money back at the very least. It doesn’t matter what the price is. It’s sensible buy as long as the home holds its value in the long term.

  124. nomadic Says:

    #109 was making me wonder if I’d hit my drinking limit. Good to know it really was as mind-numbingly dumb as I first thought.

  125. SEA Says:

    Real Estater- “Just as I said, his home is essentially free. If he sold it today, he gets his money back at the very least. It doesn’t matter what the price is. It’s sensible buy as long as the home holds its value in the long term.”

    What about all that interest?

  126. nomadic Says:

    whoa, he did it again! (#123) Incredible.

  127. nomadic Says:

    SEA, not to mention taxes, maintenance, real estate commissions to sell it, opportunity cost of the invested equity, etc.

    Math is very hard for RE.

  128. madhaus Says:

    I can assure you both that plumbers are not free, and you also forgot about insurance. Do any of you have earthquake coverage on your shacks? I do and it’s not only expensive but it has a ginormous deductable. Unlike interest and mortgage payments, these only go up.

    I need a drink.

  129. nomadic Says:

    I think I covered it in “etc.”

    No, I don’t have earthquake insurance. I’ll just ask the gov’t for a bailout if my house falls down.

    (In case karma is listening, I’m just kidding!)

  130. SEA Says:

    I almost thought he was going to break into difference equations, but it was a difference story.

  131. madhaus Says:

    #122:

    I’ll take Pralaying for Chucknuts at $200, Alex.

  132. madhaus Says:

    #130: excellent catch!

  133. Real Estater Says:

    madhaus,

    What year was your house built? You don’t think there have been earthquake since then? Your house is still standing, isn’t it? Buying earthquake insurance is just like throwing away flat screen TV.

  134. Real Estater Says:

    >>not to mention taxes, maintenance, real estate commissions to sell it, opportunity cost of the invested equity, etc.

    You’re not paying rent while you live in the house. The savings would cover these expenses.

  135. Real Estater Says:

    Besides, we’ve already gone over the maintenance question. What exactly have you had to maintain?

  136. SEA Says:

    “Buying earthquake insurance is just like throwing away flat screen TV.”

    Unless the earthquake doesn’t hit.

  137. Petsmart groomer Says:

    Real Estater, have you tried chamomile tea?

  138. Real Estater Says:

    Herve,

    I think madhaus and nomadic needs to drink some team. They’re the ones stressed out over earthquakes and home maintenance.

  139. Real Estater Says:

    correction: drink some tea.

  140. SEA Says:

    How about some freshly ground black people?

  141. DreamT Says:

    #115 – see #49 and have some Mighty Leaf

  142. Real Estater Says:

    Great. Now you’re giving me the run-around. I think I’m going to sleep now.

  143. McFly Says:

    Since I know math sucks for some, I’d encourage everyone to punch the relevant numbers into the NY Times rent-buy calculator since it does the math for you.

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/business/buy-rent-calculator.html

  144. madhaus Says:

    Hey, why do I always have to clean up after the parties?

    SEA: How about some freshly ground black people?
    We can’t use them, “because doing so would be ‘extremely hard,’ Sessions said.” Evidentally even harder than math class.

    Wow, do I have a headache.

  145. maryjane Says:

    I haven’t been around here long but I’m guessing Real Estater is very young. He seems to think that past performance will dictate future performance. I will concede that some people did get very lucky if they timed their purchases and sales right and, no there haven’t been any really big earthquakes around here in the past 20 years. Does that mean anything? Only that you’re not looking at the bigger picture.

    (Personally, I think Real Estater is someone’s alter-ego. No one can really believe this stuff.)

  146. sv_newbie Says:

    @145, there is a widely believe theory that at least two of {Pralay, Burbed, RealEstater} are the same person.

  147. SEA Says:

    “theory that at least two of {Pralay, Burbed, RealEstater} are the same person.”

    But never at the same time, sort of like the BTK serial killer. He was a friendly church guy by day, and a killer by night.

  148. SEA Says:

    “I haven’t been around here long but I’m guessing Real Estater is very young. ”

    Real Estater isn’t a fan of Taleb.

  149. DreamT Says:

    loll good one

  150. anon Says:

    MJ, I disagree. I think real estater’s misconceptions come from the fact that he is new to money and new to RBA. Imagine if bob had been a little older and lucked out on a couple real estate purchases. You’d have real estater.

  151. maryjane Says:

    I’ve had people tell me that they made more just sitting in their house for a month than they did working 40 hours/week for a year – just not lately. Funny how no one’s bragging about how everything they had saved over the past 5 years was wiped out in their last sale.

    You hafta know when to hold em – know when to fold em – know when to walk away – know when to run . . .

  152. bob Says:

    Your perspective is based on your personal level of poverty. To a farm boy everything seems amazing. Do you recall your first experience riding an elevator? It’s all relative. A similar looking house would cost even more in Palo Alto, and yes there’s a buyer for it.

    I love responding to your frequently ridiculous statements. If you look back to what you’ve just said perhaps you have answered the question already: Why would I think a house such as this one along with the myriads or others like it be ridiculously overpriced? ( and yes- I realize I made a grammatical mistake earlier, but that’s ok because I was having my after work whiskey double at that point) but putting that behind us let me explain.

    I grew up in a ‘normal’ part of the country. People in the BA seem to forget that 80% of the country has a fairly balanced income to cost of living ratio. Usually around 3:1 when it comes to houses. In the BA I’d say its as high as 5:1 or in extreme cases like the RBA to be 10:1. So in reality the BA is a freak of economic disparity and nonsense.

    About 90% of the folks I know here lived either on the East Coast where things are equally expensive or they came from some other metro area with similar circumstances. Most people are incapable of changing their environment so they migrate to similar locations. So in that respect it makes sense why so many of them so desperately claw at buying crazily priced houses because they don’t really know any better to start with. You obviously fit in that camp because you have no experience living outside of what you know.

    I actually went out and put myself in unfamiliar environments. I learned how to deal with many of the differences. Some of these changes were good. I learned a lot. Many of my friends who stayed back home have equally nasty opinions about California as you do of other places. Its called ignorance. Plain and simple.

    The major difference between people like you and myself is that I’ve been there, done that, and can live just about anywhere. People generally live about the same no matter where you go. Perhaps people in the BA claim they are different but they still go home at night, turn on the tube and go to work in office buildings.

    So putting this all into perspective- yes. 1.5 million dollars for this house is obscene. It doesn’t matter if someone buys it or not. Its still ridiculous.

  153. DreamT Says:

    “Perhaps people in the BA claim they are different but they still go home at night, turn on the tube and go to work in office buildings.”

    Hum. I don’t go home at night. I don’t have TV. I don’t work in office buildings. But carry on, bob, we’re listening…

  154. John Says:

    I think RE is a smart man who obviously know what he’s doing. When I think about what he says, I don’t find anything too unreasonable. For example, most people don’t actually buy earthquake insurance.

  155. anon Says:

    lol…

    Dear John “Real Estater” Doe:

    Welcome to the site.

    Signed,
    Anonymous J. Throckmorton III

  156. madhaus Says:

    Gosh, so many silly claims since I woke up this morning with a hangover the size of Montana and about 70 shot glasses on the floor. If bob enjoys after-work double whiskeys, it’s a pity he wasn’t matching me on the Johnny Walker Blue Label.

    Let’s see now… another day, another sock puppet, and today’s calls himself John. You know I love that about the French, they don’t have names, they call themselves something. Same with Monsieur Jean. Thankfully old chap Throckmorton will set him straight, carry on good fellow.

    Next, another amusing little rant from bob, where he tells us all about what a great job he’s doing getting along with people everywhere. Look how well he’s doing right here! He insults our houses, he tells us we all work in office buildings (no), watch TV (no), and go home at night (well, I did tonight but usually, um, no).

    He tells us our houses are obscenely priced, that we’re idiots for buying them, and that he’s saved more in his stock investments than we’ve made in real estate equity. This isn’t testable, of course, because I don’t know what’s in his savings plan, and I sure as heck don’t plan on giving him my investment property listings.

    He also goes on to say that mostly people from large metros live here because we wouldn’t live anywhere else. I have news for you bob. Not only do I not want to live in Tennessee or North Carolina, they don’t want me to live there either. See? It’s Win-Win! I won’t scratch Austin off my list of possibilities (that is, if the entire state breaks off when The Big One Hits), but that’s because I’m partial to Eric Johnson’s guitar playing. I’d probably fit in better there than rural TN or NC, and I certainly wouldn’t belong anywhere outside Austin in Texas either.

    I would also question exactly how well you’re getting along with all of us coastal types. You might be surprised what they say about you behind your back, if they call you a hick to your face.

    And it wouldn’t be a party on burbed if RealEstater didn’t have yet more stupid things to say, although I really thought #109 and #123 were truly stupendous. So let’s just have a little shakedown of the last little poke that I was too smashed to notice last night.

    What year was your house built? You don’t think there have been earthquake since then? Your house is still standing, isn’t it? Buying earthquake insurance is just like throwing away flat screen TV.

    Why how insolent of you. Why is it any of your business what year my shack was nailed together? Did you build it? Are you insuring it? And what makes you think it’s still standing? For all you know I’m renting the garage at SEA‘s house, and for even bigger win I’m leasing DreamT‘s dining room. Also, for a newbie that maryjane knows a thing or two about how fundraisers work, so I’m going to sublease her desk planner.

  157. SEA Says:

    “I’ve had people tell me that they made more just sitting in their house for a month than they did working 40 hours/week for a year – just not lately.”

    Remember the days when all that sitting added so much to the economy?

    RBA Baby!

  158. anon Says:

    What do you mean? It was everywhere before but it is still going on in the RBA.

  159. DreamT Says:

    do you have any idea how exhausting it is to generate wealth even during your sleep, without being able to stop it? No wonder so many RBA owners end up dying in their own home.

  160. SEA Says:

    Outside of the RBA I’m sure it was just a one time event.

  161. SEA Says:

    “do you have any idea how exhausting it is to generate wealth even during your sleep, without being able to stop it?”

    It’s like driving a Toyota!

  162. madhaus Says:

    I must say generating wealth in my sleep is so tiresome. So now I’m generating wealth while I eat.

  163. Petsmart groomer Says:

    I for one enjoy (sponge)bob’s long rants.

  164. DreamT Says:

    Groomist, let me guess: you go home at night, just gobbled down some Tube, and have a thing for office buildings?

  165. DreamT Says:

    what’s our favorite Palo Alto resident’s take on this? http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_14925643

  166. madhaus Says:

    what’s our favorite Palo Alto resident’s take on this?

    steve‘s not here.

    Frost, 61, has been a portly fixture on the streets of the city’s business districts for years. No longer homeless, he lives in a subsidized apartment in Redwood City but prefers to panhandle in Palo Alto, where he has also run unsuccessfully for city council several times.

    Wow, even the panhandlers say Palo Alto has a better downtown. I’m convinced.

  167. nomadic Says:

    steve’s not here… nice!

    As for bob’s rant of the night, I thought it was one of the more coherent posts he’s made. His distaste for CA was much more subtle and he even got in a good jab at RE. (Many of my friends who stayed back home have equally nasty opinions about California as you do of other places. Its called ignorance. Plain and simple.)

    Funny how way back in #134, RE lumps real estate commission as a minor expense that doesn’t merit consideration. Even on a million-dollar shack, you’re looking at $50k-60k. Then again, $500k is nothing in his mind.

  168. nomadic Says:

    BTW, where’s the punchline to post #154?

  169. steve Says:

    steve was out drinking last night — had I been home reading burbed I might have had to consume even more.

  170. Sio2 Says:

    What I don’t get is – if Bob dislikes CA so much, why stay? With the money you’ve been saving renting, you should be able to move to Austin today. I think you have a high tech job, so should gross at least $100k per year. Plus a working wife. And we know that you don’t blow money on redheads, fancy cars, restaurants and so forth.

    You mentioned that the Austin employers want people who are already in Austin. That’s a pretty easy problem to solve. Even if it takes a few months to find a job, you could rent a 1/1 for a while, for less than the current Alameda rental.

    i’m not saying “don’t let the door hit you on the way out” but I’m just puzzled. You have a dream, and it’s attainable, yet you are still living in a place you don’t like.

  171. Real Estater Says:

    Most people recognize that when they move out to another state, they can easily take care of their housing needs. On the contrary, we hear about foreclosures in places like Phoenix and Vegas where houses only cost $200K. In other words, people elsewhere can barely afford to pay for a house costing less than our down payment here.

    Ever wonder why there’s such a disparity? It’s because the Bay Area is where big money is made. It’s where the magic happens. Once you leave here, you’ll find out that life elsewhere doesn’t offer the same kind of opportunities. In fact, I’m sure Bob already found that out through his job search in Austin. He was rejected for a $60K job, which he can make here as taxi driver. When you’re here looking over there, it’s easy to overlook the disadvantages of the other place and the benefits you currently take for granted. By moving out you might solve your housing problem, but you’ll gain a host of other problems, such as bad weather, low income, lack of smart people, life with no style, banality as opposed to specialness, etc.

  172. SEA Says:

    Real Estater- “It’s because the Bay Area is where big money is made. It’s where the magic happens. Once you leave here, you’ll find out that life elsewhere doesn’t offer the same kind of opportunities.”

    Unlike New York, LA, and other major markets, where no money is to be made.

  173. Real Estater Says:

    >>Unlike New York, LA, and other major markets, where no money is to be made.

    Where money is made is where prices are high. New York is a perfect example.

  174. SEA Says:

    So if you move to rural Montana, the opportunities won’t quite be the same? Really?

    That said, where is the best value found in America?

  175. Real Estater Says:

    SEA,

    Why don’t you move to rural Montana and find out for us?

  176. SEA Says:

    Is that where the best value in America is located?

  177. nomadic Says:

    Here’s your “value” (depending what you value)…

    http://tiny.cc/027hq
    http://tiny.cc/sbn5v

  178. SEA Says:

    Low unemployment & Low housing cost. Do you have a graph of female redheads per available male?

  179. nomadic Says:

    No, but the male-to-female ratio is an unfortunate 59 to 41 for Alex…

  180. nomadic Says:

    (That’s the unmarried ratio.) CA is 55 to 45 for comparison.

  181. Alex Says:

    I’m touched that you guys think of me.

  182. madhaus Says:

    Alex, we’re always thinking of you. Especially me. As a redhead, I feel obligated to think of you, and then be relieved that you didn’t come to lunch with me today. Yup. Had lunch with an Asian lady. If you had walked in, you might have exploded from either lust, amusement, or shock.

    SiO2, #170; that’s a thought that’s been expressed here almost as much as the perennial “Is RE a troll or just an ass?”

    steve, #169; next time you go out drinking, you should take a few redheads along. Actually you should have been here when we were playing drinking games.

    Galileo, so you’re a PA resident? It’s nice to know some of you are reasonable people.


Leave a Reply

Please be nice. No name calling, no personal attacks, no racist stuff, no baiting, etc. Let's be nice to each other in the true Bay Area spirit! (Comments may be edited/removed without notice.)