October 17, 2010

The Most Expensive Zip Codes: The Also Rans

Any zip that isn’t in the Top 50 shouldn’t qualify for Real Bay Area (RBA) status, right?  Here are the Bay Area zips in Forbes Magazine’s Most Expensive Zip Codes #51 through 100.  Since these aren’t good enough to have made the cut, we can assume any city featured here is no longer fit to inhabit the RBA.  So enjoy reading about these loservilles, that are still more expensive than most anywhere else in the country.

In case you missed the previous entries in this series, the Top 25 appear here, and #26-50 can be found here.  I encourage you to check them out, as obviously they are better places to live than what you’ll find in this article.

image #53 – 94920 Tiburon

Median Home Price: $2,046,939
Median Price Change: -22%
Average Days On Market: 126
Inventory: 116 properties
Median Household Income:$106,492

Yeesh, down 22%.  No RBA for you, Tiburon.  Wait, we already saw this zip.  It’s also #8.  So, um, they split Belvedere from Tiburon?

Well, well, well, there are 39 properties for sale in Belvedere (median home price, $3.28 million), and 116 here.  And yet both places have (what a surprise) the exact same median household income.

You blew it again, Forbes.  Am I going to have to rewrite that entire article for you?

image #59 – 94588 Danville

Median Home Price: $1,922,523
Median Price Change: NA
Average Days On Market: 276
Inventory: 4 properties
Median Household Income: $92,644

Be sure to check out this East Bay interloper: the idiots at Forbes got the wrong map.  They can’t tell Danville from Dublin. And with only 4 properties on the market, they have no idea if it’s up or down.

Maybe those East Coast provincials ought to be told they’ve managed the equivalent of confusing Westhampton Beach with Levittown.

 

image#62 – 94904 Kentfield

Median Home Price: $1,911,822
Median Price Change: 6%
Average Days On Market: 99
Inventory: 40 properties
Median Household Income: $82,528

This Marin County city is right next to Ross and may even manage to get more precipitation.  Why people would want to live here when they could buy a palace in San Jose is beyond me.  Plus San Jose only gets 11 inches of rain a year.

And San Jose is so much closer to Google!  Priorities, people!

 

image #69 – 94970 Stinson Beach

Median Home Price: $1,790,196
Median Price Change: -7%
Average Days On Market: 232
Inventory: 27 properties
Median Household Income: $88,184

Stinson Beach can’t be in the RBA, it’s down 7%, and next to Bolinas, home of the high-priced water meter.

First one to make a joke about this zip code’s ranking and “Sex on the Beach” is going to be asked to leave the room.

No, I do not want to hear about what that peninsula with Seadrift Road looks like.  You all have filthy minds.  Yes, especially you.

image #71 – 94024 Los Altos

Median Home Price: $1,746,928
Median Price Change: -6%
Average Days On Market: 91
Inventory: 67 properties
Median Household Income: NA

Down 6%, and another zip-splitter.

Seriously, is there anything funny to say about Los Altos?  Other than the featured listing that’s running tomorrow, that is?

Well, that and the dude with the cellular antenna farm.

And the fact that this same zip in Los Altos Hills is ranked so much higher at #18.  And that Forbes couldn’t tell the difference between the two and showed houses from Los Altos when featuring The Hills Hills.  And yet, 67 properties here, 15 properties there. Household income, not available here, not available there. Oh, oh. They match.

image #73 – 94301 Palo Alto

Median Home Price: $1,730,889
Median Price Change: -6%
Average Days On Market: 128
Inventory: 58 properties
Median Household Income: $97,758

We already knew this zip code wasn’t in the RBA anymore.  Its low ranking merely proves it.  As does this listing which hasn’t sold in more than 2 years.

Didn’t we all agree not to talk about Palo Alto anymore?  Anyone?  Bueller?

Oh yeah, Steve Jobs lives here!

 

image #74 – 94611 Piedmont

Median Home Price: $1,709,577
Median Price Change: -3%
Average Days On Market: 96
Inventory: 23 properties
Median Household Income: $68,853

Down 3%, and suspiciously Bradburylike.  Oakland, I tell you, it’s surrounded by Oakland!

And a freeway runs through it!  Just like Oakland!

And this place hasn’t sold yet. And neither has this one.  This city is FAIL: 100% of its listings on burbed unsold!

 

image #83 – 95070 Saratoga

Median Home Price: $1,652,013
Median Price Change: -1%
Average Days On Market: 124
Inventory: 177 properties
Median Household Income: $138,206

Down 1%.  That’s borderline for remaining in the RBA, but coming in at #83 just cannot be allowed.

Can anyone remember why Saratoga used to be in the RBA?  What exactly did it do to get there in the first place?  Why should a city with seven different school districts thinks it’s real anything?

I say no, not until they manage to sell this house.

image #84 – 95030 Monte Sereno

Median Home Price: $1,647,239
Median Price Change: -34%
Average Days On Market: 142
Inventory: 84 properties
Median Household Income: $117,564

Stop me if you’ve seen this zip code before.

Down 34%. Wait, it’s right next to Saratoga.  Plus borrowing Los Gatos’ zip code.  84 properties?  WTF?  In a town of 3,483?  And only 53 properties listed in Los Gatos (#38), population 28,592?  That’s a real knee-slapper!  Now can you tell me the one about the Santa Claran, the San Joseite, and the Saratoger?

 

image #92 – 94123 San Francisco

Median Home Price: $1,609,753
Median Price Change: 9%
Average Days On Market: 58
Inventory: 63 properties
Median Household Income: $84,710

burbed, voted best real estate blog in San Francisco, would like to welcome 94123 to the list of Most Expensive Zip Codes!  This is the first zip in San Francisco to make the cut.  And that is really awful, because several New York City and Los Angeles zips have already shown up.  Congrats, you losers.

Up 9%.  This is the Marina District and includes some of Billionaire’s Row.  Yes, including the place selling for $45 million.

image #93 – 94506 Blackhawk

Median Home Price: $1,604,976
Median Price Change: 19%
Average Days On Market: 143
Inventory: 51 properties
Median Household Income: $142,459

Up 19%.  Wait, this is the East Bay.  Prices don’t go up in the East Bay.  The proper expression is “Blackhawk down.”

Seriously, this is a developer-designed golf-course community that didn’t even exist before 1980.  Having this zip appear right after one full of history, architecture, design, and taste is just wrong.

 

image #94 – 94022 Los Altos

Median Home Price: $1,600,139
Median Price Change: -28%
Average Days On Market: 87
Inventory: 53 properties
Median Household Income: NA

Wait, is today Groundhog Day?  Didn’t I just say something about Los Altos Hills, and that we already saw this zip, and that… someone must have hit me over the head, because I’m seeing double.  Los Altos Hills in this same zip is #15 on this list, with a median home price of $3.04 million.  And (what a coincidence), 58 properties.  Sloppy work, Forbes, very sloppy.

This place doesn’t even have the cell phone antenna farm!

And that’s it for the Also Rans of the Most Expensive Zip Codes in the Whole Fracking Country.  Except… the list goes to 500 zips.  If you don’t want to see anymore of these Bing Maps, commence whining.

Next installment in this thrilling series: The Most Expensive Zip Codes, Volume 714,

Comments (59) -- Posted by: madhaus @ 5:01 am

59 Responses to “The Most Expensive Zip Codes: The Also Rans”

  1. Some Guy Says:

    East Bay Rulez!

  2. waiting_for_the_fall Says:

    If you had a loaf of penis shaped bread, what part would you bite into first?

  3. madhaus Says:

    #2, you have a dirty mind. Is the bread San Francisco sourdough or not?

    #1, what’s with the new monicker? Can I still call you A? Are you going to cheer the East Bay entries in this series if I continue it? Where do you bite your bread?

  4. Mary Pope-Handy Says:

    Your entry for # 84, Monte Sereno, is mixed up. Your map is showing all of the 95030 zip code, which is partly Monte Sereno but mostly the town of Los Gatos. The tiny city of Monte Sereno has only 4000 residents, not 28,000 (which is about the population of the town of Los Gatos, including 95030 plus 95032).

  5. Real Estater Says:

    Good news! AT&T to open multi-million dollar tech center in Palo Alto.

  6. Real Estater Says:

    Over-bidding is still very common in Palo Alto, as described in this article.

  7. Real Estater Says:

    More justification to buy sooner than later: Rent is going up, at least in Palo Alto:

    In fall of last year, his compilation noted the average rent for a three-bedroom house was $3,100. Today, that average rent is up to $3,500. He said he was able to rent all of his May/July listings in less than four weeks.

    A major reason for rents going up in Palo Alto is the schools:

    schools in Palo Alto are driving up the demand and keeping the occupancy rate high. Leong said that many of his renters are families looking to enroll their children in the Palo Alto public school system. Palo Alto class sizes have only increased from 20 to 22 students, while other schools in the Bay Area have increased up to 30 students per class

  8. anon Says:

    I hope you enjoy footing the bill to educate these transients. You will be doing it for the rest of your life.

  9. Alex Says:

    Where’s my shotgun?!! Shoot that TeaL DeeR!!!

  10. Real Estater Says:

    Alex,

    We all know you got a gun, but you don’t have any bullets.

  11. Mole Man Says:

    Palo Alto has taken on a dour edge of late. Nearly all the art galleries have shut down or moved away because people there don’t buy art, or at least they don’t buy art there. Everything the city does is overshadowed by a half billion dollars of backlogged infrastructure work. High speed rail is stirring things up, and the billions that may be needed to dig a big ditch for it or whatever else are not easy to come by. Strangely enough, the higher Plao Atlo flies, the shallower it gets. Look upon my listings, ye mighty …

  12. DreamT Says:

    If the art had been any good, Shallow Alto would have bought it.

  13. DreamT Says:

    Regarding today’s post, an interesting exercise would be to speculate on the impact of a hypothetical earthquake on each of these zips. I suspect some prices wouldn’t budge much whereas others would be devastated.

  14. Petsmart Groomer Says:

    #2 – Great interview question.

  15. madhaus Says:

    #9: Okay Alex, more zip code reports coming right up! And if you’d read the Too Long article, you would have found all the dirty pictures. Come on, weren’t you wondering what the heck #2 was about?

    #4, MPH, if you would have done the slightest amount of reading instead of kvetching, you would have found out that:

    1. Everything you said was mentioned right there in the entry for #84, including the actual population and the fact that we’ve seen this zip code before when Los Gatos 95030 appeared earlier in list at #38.

    2. These are not my maps, they are from the Forbes piece, and I have criticized their sloppy work in every entry of this series. If you’d read this article instead of just looking at maps, you would have noticed that #59, Danville, shows a map for Dublin, thanks to Forbes not knowing the difference between a well-heeled suburb where the median house sells for $1.9M and a ho-hum commuterville that clocks in at $647,256.

    I’m using the same source Forbes did: Altos Research.

    But why am I footnoting everything for you? You’re didn’t read the paragraph right next to the map you complained about.

  16. SEA Says:

    Did you see #73? It’s no surprise it’s so low. In fact, I’m surprised 94301 isn’t much lower. Why? 94301 spans both sides of Middlefield, and both sides of Oregon Expressway. How un-RBA like.

  17. Petsmart Groomer Says:

    #15 – There is a reason people didn’t read. Hint: it may have to do with the fact that it takes five hits on Page Down to get to the comments.

  18. madhaus Says:

    #17, five page downs to comment? Doesn’t that confirm what I said? #4 took the time to go all the way to comments without reading the graf right next to the map she derided. It’s a perfect illustration of the capability of a typical real estate agent.

    Given how many little dangerous things are buried in those offers, would you trust someone as unobservant as #4 to represent you on a $1.6M contract?

  19. Alex Says:

    #15 madhouse,

    Real Estater may be obsessed about biting into penises, but I don’t.

  20. nomadic Says:

    #17, lol. Reminds me of a coworker who hated long emails because she was too lazy to scroll down. BTW, it takes EIGHT “page downs” to get it all on my monitor. I don’t even have it set for large print… ;-)

  21. Mary Pope-Handy Says:

    madhaus –

    I did read the first paragraph of the post AND the words which accompanied the story on Monte Sereno. Your mixed up description did NOT say that the map was Forbes’. A mouse roll-over showed that you uploaded the content yourself, it wasn’t a link to the image on the Forbes story. (I wonder if they appreciated your taking their images without permission?)

    Your tongue-in-cheek comments about Monte Sereno might have been obvious to people who read the prior two posts on the Forbes misinformation, but for someone coming in from searching “Monte Sereno”, it wasn’t at all clear.

    Finally, the Burbed “comments” admonition says “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!” How about if you follow your own advice?

  22. nomadic Says:

    hmm, seems clear to me:

    Down 34%. Wait, it’s right next to Saratoga. Plus borrowing Los Gatos’ zip code. 84 properties? WTF? In a town of 3,483? And only 53 properties listed in Los Gatos (#38), population 28,592? That’s a real knee-slapper!

    Sorry, but that reads a lot like post #4.

  23. SEA Says:

    Mary Pope-Handy- Do you know the velocity of the “buyable” inventory in Monte Sereno?

  24. nomadic Says:

    I hope so, because she has those awesome initials (MPH).
    :-)

  25. madhaus Says:

    #21, MPH, I don’t know what to say to you. Your #4 comment makes no sense if you actually read the whole entry on Monte Sereno, even if you skipped everything else.

    How about you tell me how I could have written the piece better given that you didn’t read the whole thing?

  26. Alex Says:

    #21 MPH,

    If you had taken the time to read all the previous Teal Deers in this series, you would not have made that rookie mistake.

    Even I, one who refuses to read anything longer than 10 sentences, recognize that this is from the Forbes listing merely by page-downing previous blog entries.

    As for the “no baiting” stuff, it went out the window the second I showed up. Live with it. Chaos is good. Entropy.

  27. sonarrat Says:

    Madhaus, your copy is not always the clearest. The reader misjudged because the sarcasm missed the mark.

  28. madhaus Says:

    #27: What? 1250 words and you couldn’t find the sarcasm? That’s like being needled in a needle factory! Tell me that you didn’t miss the bread in #69 too!

    #26 probably ate yours. Speaking of #26, I had no idea you had such an incredible attention span. Hey look, an Asian with a redhead!

  29. bob Says:

    More justification to buy sooner than later: Rent is going up, at least in Palo Alto:

    In fall of last year, his compilation noted the average rent for a three-bedroom house was $3,100. Today, that average rent is up to $3,500. He said he was able to rent all of his May/July listings in less than four weeks.

    Yeah? Too bad my rent is still the same $1,200 its always been for my nice 3 bedroom house in Alameda. I will never buy in the Bay Area. But saving money by renting is awful nice.

  30. DreamT Says:

    Alameda is in the Bay Area.

  31. DreamT Says:

    nevermind, I got confused – I thought you were talking about buying something else…

  32. SEA Says:

    Real Estater- What’s the capitalization rate on that $3,500 per month?

    Cap rate is bounded from above by gross rent rate (gross rent receipts/value). Let’s assume these are decent, ~$1.5M, Palo Alto properties.

    Gross Annual Rent = $42k (assuming 100% occupancy)
    Base Value = $1.5M (approximate current market value)
    Gross Rent Rate = 2.8%

    Cap rate < 2.8%

    And you recommend buying?

  33. anon Says:

    Don’t look at cap rates, occupancy rates, or any sort of math or logic, SEA. You have to think to your self: are my kids worth it? If you say yes, you are awesome. Pat yourself on the back. If you say no, you are not awesome. Nobody will like you and you will be ugly inside and out and you will raise children that are garbage just like you. It’s that simple. Just ask Mary Patrick Harris.

  34. Alex Says:

    #28 madhouse

    my attention span is improving. slowly.

    What were we talking about again?

  35. madhaus Says:

    #34: Huh?

  36. Petsmart Groomer Says:

    #15 – What’s with the overreaction? We don’t get new readers very often, no need to scare them away.

    I for one am looking forward to more comments from Mary Pope-Hins.

  37. SEA Says:

    anon- The kids are definitely worth the $3,500, but please don’t ask about that $1.5M.

  38. DreamT Says:

    Hey guys. I have $7,000 right here. I hear there are two kids for sale? My front yard needs some work.

  39. Tuno Says:

    #21: Mary, have you sold any houses to people who are now underwater? People who took out loans that they couldn’t really afford? People who now wish that they had rented? Just curious.

    I had a friend who became a realtor in the midst of the bubble (she then became an ex-friend), and from the things that she said to me early on, I know that she did all of those things. I wonder how she can live with herself now.

  40. SEA Says:

    DreamT- Don’t worry, they’ll come with new soccer cleats. Your front yard will get a good Palo Alto workout.

  41. anon Says:

    “I for one am looking forward to more comments from Mary Pope-Hins.”

    I wouldn’t get your hopes up. It takes a thick skin to stick around here. She’ll be out having tea with willow glenner before the week is over..

  42. anon Says:

    “anon- The kids are definitely worth the $3,500, but please don’t ask about that $1.5M.”

    You’re still being so short sighted! What about when the school bully finds out that you’re *gasp* renting!? Your kids will never live it down!

  43. DreamT Says:

    SEA – I can’t wait. Anything to get the respect of my colleagues.

  44. madhaus Says:

    #36, I just whined cuz she dissed my article without even reading it. That’s #34’s job and he was here first.

    I bet #39 scared her away forever, which is too bad as those are damned good questions.

  45. SEA Says:

    Tuno! She only sells RBA homes. It’s tough to get underwater when the values are going up so fast. And even if the transient guest couldn’t afford the home, such guest can always cash out and get out of the RBA, even if the total profit isn’t maximized–just admit, these transient guests were supposed to be temporary. No one living in the RBA wants to rent. (Except those of us wondering if the kids are really worth the $1.5M–Simply put, I guess I’d better face the facts as listed by anon.)

  46. SEA Says:

    Tuno- After keeping it Real, The Real RBA, I decided to look at MPH’s website. What’s today’s feature?

    “Saratoga Distressed Properties: Short Sales and Bank Owned Homes for Sale in Saratoga, CA, 95070
    October 18th, 2010

    In Silicon Valley, it seems the more expensive the neigbhorhood, the less likely it is that you’ll find a bargain. Saratoga home buyers who are working hard to get their feet in the door during this opportunity in the market (with low prices and even lower interest rates) are scrambling to find a creative way to make their budget line up with Saratoga real estate prices.

    One solution is to attempt to buy a distressed property in Saratoga – namely foreclosure or a bank owned (REO – real estate owned by the bank) house, condo or townhouse or a pre-foreclosure or short sale listing.

    There aren’t many of them to choose from, which makes the few that do come available very prized by motivated buyers.

    Below please find a list of all available distressed properties for sale in Saratoga, CA. This city has several school districts so if you are looking for one in particular, please contact me and we can chat about finding you that perfect home.

    Note: some of the homes which have a “Saratoga mailing address” with a Saratoga, CA 95070 address actually belong to a neighboring city (or the county), such as Campbell. So you may see some homes in the list below which say Campbell, for instance.”

    Now short-sales are “prized properties.” My guess: the velocity of ‘buyable’ inventory is increasing (favorable for everyone, I am sure).

  47. madhaus Says:

    Why would the velocity of buyable REOs be increasing? Bank of America stopped processing foreclosures in all 50 states. So have several other banks. There have been hearings over the last two weeks about all the foreclosure fraud, mortgages that can’t be proved cleanly, and companies like DOCX essentially making up docs that prove whoever is paying them owns the house.

    Probably ought to be the subject of one of my weekend Teal Deers, just so Alex can be ready to make fun of it.

  48. SEA Says:

    Hm. I guess I’m still not sure exactly what the “velocity of ‘buyable’ inventory” is. I was thinking with all those bank REOs slowing down, the ‘buyable’ inventory would move faster (MOI decrease), but maybe I’m thinking about this all wrong?

    Ultimately, I think the velocity of ‘buyable’ inventory probably has something to do with moving parts, and my best guess is that the velocity is measured in MPH, as pointed out by nomadic. Talk about busy streets!

  49. nomadic Says:

    #45, she sells in Los Ghettos. We got kicked out of the RBA about two years ago. :-(

  50. Tuno Says:

    I really meant my questions. The person I knew who became a realtor was not actually stupid. However, during the bubble, she worked herself up into basically a psychotic state, doing several hours a day of cold calling in order to sell houses. She told me early on that there had *never* in the history of America been a nation-wide property bubble – and so this could not be one. She told me with pride – practically with tears in her eyes – of a woman whom she had helped to get a special loan to buy a home, so that the woman could “leave something” to the woman’s child; something of substance.

    I would imagine that she was pretty typical for a bay area realtor. And I didn’t drop her as a friend, btw. It’s just that as soon as the SHTF real-estate-wise, she stopped calling me. I wouldn’t have said anything, really. But I will admit that I would have been wondering – hey, what happened to all those people whom you sold houses to???? Are they in foreclosure now???? Back living with mom if they’re lucky??? How does it feel to have been part of the biggest scam in human history????

    She was pretty good as an ESL teacher.

  51. anon Says:

    Ahh the 2000s. When every zero-earning-power shitbag was sure that someone who actually had earning power would come along and actually pay them for their garbage *ahem* real estate.

  52. SEA Says:

    Tuno- I’ve actually had one owner blame the seller (i.e. the former owner). The usual theory went something like this…

    “…the former owner purchased years ago when prices were so low, and then he walked away with a pile of cash.”

    SEA: Did you agree to the purchase price? Who made the first offer?

    Current Owner: “Yes, we made the first offer, and we offered more than the asking price.”

    SEA: WTF-You wrote the offer for more than the asking price, and now you’re blaming who?

    Current Owner: “It’s not right that the former owner has all the money, and I’m going to be left with nothing.”

    SEA: Didn’t you get the use of the property? Just consider it expensive rent.

    ===========

    I guess we live in the new America–you know the one. The one where you name the price and then blame the other guy.

    By the way, instead of going to open houses, try checking out some rentals. Some of the stories are quite sad. Many of these rentals are owned by so-called owners who only trying to minimize the financial drain. The best part is that so many homes today can be purchased with less than ‘not a lot of money.’

    Look back at what $500k purchased in 2006 and compare that to what $500k buys in 2010. (The 25th percentile asking price in San Jose was about $600k in 2006, now it’s closer to $300k. The 25th percentile in SF is similar at ~$500k in 2006 and ~$270k today. I hope it’s clear that no 25th percentile home was ever in the RBA, unless we’re talking about Palo Alto.)

    If you really want to see the sad state of REALTOR affairs, check out the gross value of the property sold over the last few years. I hope it is clear that this is the average selling price times the number of homes sold in a given time period, such as a month.

    Non-RBA home prices have gone down by up to 50%.
    Non-RBA home sales (remember this is not ‘buyable’ inventory these days) have gone down.
    I’ve not heard REALTOR commissions going up.

    Now we have many more sales for far less money at the same level of percent commission.

    It goes without saying that the RBA agents are the fat cats today.

  53. madhaus Says:

    #50, Tuno, I’d love to hear more about that (or any) realtard post-bubble. I know someone who got into loan brokerage during the insane years. Surprise, she’s out of it now, and *doesn’t* want to talk about it. At all.

    Typical bubble story, at one point she and her engineer husband owned 3 properties including one in Woodside they couldn’t afford to rebuild as they wanted, once property values stopped climbing. Now renting in (cough) Willow Glen. Not the core part either. The 60s housing tract part.

    #52, SEA, there’s a word for bubble-buyers trying to rent out property they can’t afford to live in anymore: fliplords. Their choice is a huge loss now or a monthly drain for years. So do their homeowner non-recourse loans turn into recourse if they rent the place rather than live in it for more than 2 of the last 5 years? I bet that’s something fliplords didn’t even think about.

  54. nomadic Says:

    The velocity of buyable inventory is down. Redfin says so:

    Many of our customers complain about the low quality of the homes that are available for sale, a situation that we don’t think will change until March 2011. If anything, inventory will drop again with the approach of Thanksgiving.

  55. SEA Says:

    madhaus- RE: “fliplords”

    My understanding of fliplord was a flip gone bad. There are plenty of those. While there are too many fliplords, I don’t consider a landlord renting what was once his own home to be a fliplord, since there never was a possible flip.

    Often the owner is “waiting for better market conditions.”

    It’s funny that so many buyers are waiting for better market conditions too.

  56. madhaus Says:

    #54 – Is buyable inventory down or is the velocity of buyable inventory down? For both to be true, the buyable inventory would have to be dropping faster and faster (e.g. negative derivative).

    Probably true if Redfin observes there’s nothing for sale but crap.

    #55 – I thought a flop was a flip gone bad, which would make those floplords. So what do you call someone renting a home they can’t get out from under? A fckedlord?

  57. SEA Says:

    I thought a floplord ran a flophouse. But maybe the real money is made housing cats–cat house.

    As far as the velocity of ‘buyable’ inventory, my guess is that ‘buyable’ inventory is currently zero. Once the inventory of ‘buyable’ properties hit zero, the velocity of buyable inventory is no longer flying high–it’s all clear for takeoff, I suppose.

  58. Tuno Says:

    SEA – ha ha ha, blaming the *seller*!!! that’s hilarious! I hope they’re blaming their parents, too. their own parents, that is. but hey – why not blame the seller’s parents, too???

    There should be a giant survey of underwater homedebtors: Whom Do YOU Blame?

    madhaus – yes, where *are* all those realtards now? If I find out more, I’ll post (with identifying details omitted, of course).

  59. Non-RBA Poseurs Not Priced Enough for Top 50 | Burbed.com Says:

    […] I am supposed to make dirty jokes about number 89?  Chew on a baguette, then.  I found a $3.6M house (pictured, literally, as in check out the freestanding picture […]


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.)