U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-09-2009, 07:35 PM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,179,255 times
Reputation: 22373

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolina Blue View Post
At least according to a recent Forbes Magazine article. Again, everything is relative...

Article: Ten Best And 10 Worst U.S. Housing Markets - Forbes.com
CarolinaBlue . . . that phrase summed it up. When one compares the carnage that has occurred in other markets, it does appear Charlotte's market is not nearly in the same proverbial toilet bowl with other markets, such as Las Vegas. So you nailed it on the head - it is all relative.

That doesn't mean that things are all cupcakes and rainbows here in Charlotte, wh/ is the point I think Jack was trying to make.

And I personally agree with him that most of these articles belong under the kitty litter pan, cause by the time they are published, the data is out of date.

However, I think it is meaningful to process that even tho our PERCEPTION as residents here is that the housing market is waaaaay off . . . and indeed - it is NOT the robust market of even a year ago . . . the housing market here is definitely not the nuclear waste of a mess that many other regions of the country have experienced.

Which brings me back to CarolinaBlue's original point - "it's all relative."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-09-2009, 07:37 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
2,193 posts, read 4,544,833 times
Reputation: 1072
LOL. Sorry but I thought the article was hilarious. IMHO, I think it's a funny way of looking at it. San Diego was #5 as the best housing market when it dropped 25%. I don't see how that is a good housing market...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2009, 10:05 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
4,761 posts, read 6,440,607 times
Reputation: 5272
Maybe ol' Coupon is tired of people moving here and complaining about the lack of jobs when they were told before the move that there were plenty of jobs, free houses, no cars on the roads, and it was always 72 degrees and sunny...because they read it in a maggazine article?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2009, 07:36 PM
 
Location: Waxhaw, NC
60 posts, read 140,116 times
Reputation: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by spankys bbq View Post
Maybe ol' Coupon is tired of people moving here and complaining about the lack of jobs when they were told before the move that there were plenty of jobs, free houses, no cars on the roads, and it was always 72 degrees and sunny...because they read it in a maggazine article?
What?????You mean it's not 72 degrees and sunny every day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2009, 07:46 AM
 
5,462 posts, read 5,939,436 times
Reputation: 1804
I've read the article several times and still can't figure out what "best" means in context. It looks like it's some combination of how far prices have fallen so far, the rate they're falling at, and the author's opinion on what "low but not too low" prices should be. So you end up with weird results where cities like Dallas, where prices have fallen less overall and less per month are ranked lower than Charlotte. On the other hand, you also have cities like DC, where prices have fallen much more overall and are currently falling at about the same rate ranked as a better market than Charlotte. So maybe the author is including some sort of affordability measure, but then you read that two cities were arbitrarily moved to the worst list based on their low prices.

And this ignores the obvious math errors in the article as well. Check out the stats for Chicago (#6 in the worst list) and see why it'd be ranked much lower than Charlotte. The answer - because the numbers there are wrong. Were they counted correctly when putting the list together, or is this just a copy and paste error in the article itself?

Add in that this only seems to cover the 20 large metro areas reported on by Case-Shiller data - minus those cities the author penalized for whatever reason - and it's really a mystery what the goal was. Does anyone know what the ranking in this article is actually supposed to mean?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top