Median house price in LA County surprasses the 2006 peak (Los Angeles: balloon payment, sale)

[Hippityhop]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Pasadena seems more desirable though. Don't you think?

1) whether Pasadena is MORE or less "desirable" than LA has no effect on whether LA is "desirable". Your post doesn't logically follow.

2)Most people include the surrounding cities when they say "LA” and not just Los Angeles city. But you knew that, right?

3) Look how I can answer your question: no, I don't think NW Pasadena is as desirable as Pacific Palisades. Neither LA nor Pasadena are homogenous cities. Trying to compare them is like comparing an overripe banana to a gigantic melon.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by Hippityhop

1) whether Pasadena is MORE or less "desirable" than LA has no effect on whether LA is "desirable". Your post doesn't logically follow.

2)Most people include the surrounding cities when they say "LA” and not just Los Angeles city. But you knew that, right?

3) Look how I can answer your question: no, I don't think NW Pasadena is as desirable as Pacific Palisades. Neither LA nor Pasadena are homogenous cities. Trying to compare them is like comparing an overripe banana to a gigantic melon.

You must be real fun to be around!

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives

The median home value for Pasadena is over $700k, more expensive than most of the city of LA. Not sure what point you're trying to make.

Since you live in Pasadena I was just asking you if you thought Pasadena was more desirable than L.A.
That's all.

[Hippityhop]

Originally Posted by jm1982

You must be real fun to be around!

That all you got? Disappointed.

Actually my friends greatly enjoy my wry wit and can handle a thoughtful repartee. But I do understand not everyone has the intellectual prowess to keep up.

[Hippityhop]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Since you live in Pasadena I was just asking you if you thought Pasadena was more desirable than L.A.
That's all.

Did you not understand anything from my post? Your question is entirely too vague.

LA city includes skid row, Boyle heights, Palisades, Venice, the valley, etc.

Certain markets in LA are more desirable than certain areas in Pasadena, and the reverse is also true. You cannot universally compare the two.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by Hippityhop

That all you got? Disappointed.

Actually my friends greatly enjoy my wry wit and can handle a thoughtful repartee. But I do understand not everyone has the intellectual prowess to keep up.

I'm sure they are all just like you!
Arrogant and rude people to avoid.
I've learned those that are constantly bragging about being so smart usually aren't so smart.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by Hippityhop

Did you not understand anything from my post? Your question is entirely too vague.

LA city includes skid row, Boyle heights, Palisades, Venice, the valley, etc.

Certain markets in LA are more desirable than certain areas in Pasadena, and the reverse is also true. You cannot universally compare the two.

The question was asked to another poster. Not you. Relax.
Yes I was born in L.A , I don't need the geography lesson. Thanks though.

[FloridaBeachBum]

Originally Posted by Mr_Geek

I'm pretty sure the 1986 date isn't what you meant lol

Might be 1986. There was a real estate bubble back the that crashed after stock mkt crash and savings and loan melt down that bottomed in 1991 with Resolution trust company.

if you inflation adjust still might be underwater. The condo development near my house sold units when built in 1978 for $40,000. Today worth $300,000.

Inflation adjusted they are underwater. Remember inflation was sky high in late 70s and early 80s.

Now back to 1986. A 30 year risk free treasury bond was paying 9% interest.

Lets say you bought a house in 1986. for $500,000 vs buying a 30 year bond on that day.

House would need to be worth $1,850,000 to account for the interest payments.

Now if you reinvested the $45,000 in interest payments in more 30 year bonds each year for last 30 years house would have to be worth several million inflation adjusted.

I paid 300k for my house in Jan 2000, today worth 450K. Sounds good but if I bought a 30 year bond on that day it was paying 6.60 percent.

I would have earned $19,800 on my bond interest for almost 17 years or $336,000 in interest. So my house would need to be worth $636,000 today just to match me buying a plain old treasury bond.

But a realty will say great investment, paid 300K now worth 450K.

[FloridaBeachBum]

Originally Posted by Hippityhop

1) whether Pasadena is MORE or less "desirable" than LA has no effect on whether LA is "desirable". Your post doesn't logically follow.

2)Most people include the surrounding cities when they say "LA” and not just Los Angeles city. But you knew that, right?

3) Look how I can answer your question: no, I don't think NW Pasadena is as desirable as Pacific Palisades. Neither LA nor Pasadena are homogenous cities. Trying to compare them is like comparing an overripe banana to a gigantic melon.

Pasadena is much better for Little Old Ladies

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by floridabeachbum

pasadena is much better for little old ladies

lol