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.
I am surprised that Philadelphia and Atlanta aren't on the list.
But, that isn't necessarily a bad thing, you can get more house (and nice house) for your money. San Jose should not be proud of that statistic, that ridiculous.
Also, the spillover from New York is rather small, Philadelphia has its own real estate market.
Yeah, this shows you how expensive some markets have gotten, but I would love to see what you GET for that money in these places.
We just stayed at an AirBnB in Cupertino for a wedding. We were literally across the street from the Apple headquarters. What shocked me wasn't just the $2.3 million price we looked up on our home, it was the drab quality of almost all the homes in that area. They were ok for what they were, smaller post WWII homes that hadn't been updated much in decades. Entire neighborhoods of them - for literally millions and millions of dollars. I was confused why they weren't being upgraded and bought as tear-downs. Must be something with the local laws.
That $2,300,000 house stayed at in Cupertino? It would have sold for around $160,000 here in the Chicago area and maybe $120,000 back in Iowa where I'm from. A small dated 3-bedroom 2-bath 70's ranch that needed a lot of work. As someone who's in real estate extreme markets like that are so crazy to me.
Yep, and Austin is pretty sprawlish as well. Surprised to see Austin's median home price ahead of Chicago...by quite a bit.
Austin is a newer market with overall newer housing. So that's going to bring prices up in itself, or at least Chicago is going to have miles and miles of postwar fairly dated housing, still might be in good shape, but the price premium people will pay for that is low and it keeps the metro area low.
Also one thing Chicago has that keeps the prices down is the city is never afraid to build like crazy. The city has been throwing up 10,000 new housing units a year lately and overall the population isn't even increasing. Of course it is downtown and in the areas where the housing is going up, and that housing is normally at least $500K price points and above, but what it does is not cause surrounding lower priced areas to appreciate like crazy. They just flood the hot areas with even more units and overall it keeps things fairly low.
You have always been able to and can still get some great deals on the amount of housing you get for what you pay for it in the city and the suburbs.
Yeah, this shows you how expensive some markets have gotten, but I would love to see what you GET for that money in these places.
We just stayed at an AirBnB in Cupertino for a wedding. We were literally across the street from the Apple headquarters. What shocked me wasn't just the $2.3 million price we looked up on our home, it was the drab quality of almost all the homes in that area. They were ok for what they were, smaller post WWII homes that hadn't been updated much in decades. Entire neighborhoods of them - for literally millions and millions of dollars. I was confused why they weren't being upgraded and bought as tear-downs. Must be something with the local laws.
That $2,300,000 house stayed at in Cupertino? It would have sold for around $160,000 here in the Chicago area and maybe $120,000 back in Iowa where I'm from. A small dated 3-bedroom 2-bath 70's ranch that needed a lot of work. As someone who's in real estate extreme markets like that are so crazy to me.
It really is insane right? Look, money no object, yes California is GREAT. But at those prices? My company is locating people from Palo Alto, some c-suite types, and for what they're paying in PA, 5-7 million, they could buy a million dolllar house in Denver that's just as nice, buy a beach home in Florida and a mountain home wherever and still have a ton of money left over. At one point is it not worth it?
Yeah, this shows you how expensive some markets have gotten, but I would love to see what you GET for that money in these places.
We just stayed at an AirBnB in Cupertino for a wedding. We were literally across the street from the Apple headquarters. What shocked me wasn't just the $2.3 million price we looked up on our home, it was the drab quality of almost all the homes in that area. They were ok for what they were, smaller post WWII homes that hadn't been updated much in decades. Entire neighborhoods of them - for literally millions and millions of dollars. I was confused why they weren't being upgraded and bought as tear-downs. Must be something with the local laws.
That $2,300,000 house stayed at in Cupertino? It would have sold for around $160,000 here in the Chicago area and maybe $120,000 back in Iowa where I'm from. A small dated 3-bedroom 2-bath 70's ranch that needed a lot of work. As someone who's in real estate extreme markets like that are so crazy to me.
Which makes me wonder why people think that is a good investment?, and who how that many people can afford those prices! At least a $3M condo in Manhattan gives me the benefit of being in Manhattan, but $2M for a bungalow in Cupertino.....
You could buy a gorgeous home for under a million in Chicago, Philadelphia, and so many other cities. How that market is sustained for this long confuses me (and this is coming from an engineer in real estate in Manhattan).
Yeah, this shows you how expensive some markets have gotten, but I would love to see what you GET for that money in these places.
We just stayed at an AirBnB in Cupertino for a wedding. We were literally across the street from the Apple headquarters. What shocked me wasn't just the $2.3 million price we looked up on our home, it was the drab quality of almost all the homes in that area. They were ok for what they were, smaller post WWII homes that hadn't been updated much in decades. Entire neighborhoods of them - for literally millions and millions of dollars. I was confused why they weren't being upgraded and bought as tear-downs. Must be something with the local laws.
That $2,300,000 house stayed at in Cupertino? It would have sold for around $160,000 here in the Chicago area and maybe $120,000 back in Iowa where I'm from. A small dated 3-bedroom 2-bath 70's ranch that needed a lot of work. As someone who's in real estate extreme markets like that are so crazy to me.
I agree and that's how most of the Bay Area housing is. Los Angeles is similar though much better on home upgrades. Many people are only house rich in the Bay. Bought at the right place at the right time or inherited the home. If they sell, they can make bank but they don't want to sell because the value keeps going up. You see this in Hunters Point-Bayview now. A lot of Blacks were selling their homes there 10-15 years ago but it's stopped because the values are skyrocketing.
But I agree with what was said earlier. A $1M+ home in Cupertino? Mountain View? For what exactly? Those places are the epitome of bland suburbia. You're basically paying for good weather and being 45 minutes away from San Francisco.
Which makes me wonder why people think that is a good investment?, and who how that many people can afford those prices! At least a $3M condo in Manhattan gives me the benefit of being in Manhattan, but $2M for a bungalow in Cupertino.....
You could buy a gorgeous home for under a million in Chicago, Philadelphia, and so many other cities. How that market is sustained for this long confuses me (and this is coming from an engineer in real estate in Manhattan).
1 million dollars goes a long way in every city except NYC and San Fran.
Austin is expensive for Texas, but nationally, not as much as you would expect.
I was actually thinking Dallas would be higher. At least higher than Nashville, Phoenix and Houston.
Kinda surprised Charlotte is on the list but ATL isn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylord_Focker
Dallas and Atlanta are affordable.
So is Charlotte, Nashville, Phoenix and Houston; even Austin. Yet they are all on the list.
Again I am speaking relatively. And with all the cooperations headquartered in Dallas and Atlanta I was assuming they would be listed higher. Add to that the popularity of Atlanta in terms of reality stars and musicians I was expecting Atlanta to be on the list.
Put it this way, why do you think nearby areas of Nashville and Charlotte have a higher percentage than Atlanta other than Atlanta being more populous. No shade to Nashville and Charlotte, this may be a learning experience.
So is Charlotte, Nashville, Phoenix and Houston; even Austin. Yet they are all on the list.
Again I am speaking relatively. And with all the cooperations headquartered in Dallas and Atlanta I was assuming they would be listed higher. Add to that the popularity of Atlanta in terms of reality stars and musicians I was expecting Atlanta to be on the list.
Put it this way, why do you think nearby areas of Nashville and Charlotte have a higher percentage than Atlanta other than Atlanta being more populous. No shade to Nashville and Charlotte, this may be a learning experience.
I'm really not sure what we're arguing about. Yes Austin is affordable nationally, but according to this, a median house in Austin is 90k more than in Houston. What do you get for that 90k?
I honestly have no idea why Dallas and Atlanta aren't higher, but I consider that a good thing.
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.
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.
