Austin, as another post mentioned, is falling off those best of lists... (Houston: leases, movers)

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by sliverbox

I sort of figured. Nashville in comparison to Austin is cheap. I've got my own theory and that is if you trace where all the "best cities" are, they're also in places where major homebuilders also own vast chunks of land. Its easy really- buy up a bunch of undeveloped land in such and such Southern city- Like Austin, Raleigh Durham, Nashville, etc etc and then proceed to get stories published talking about how wonderful those places are, then people flood in, buy up the houses, prices jump,and once the word is out on just how awesome such and such a place is... move along to the next city.

Good analogy there silverbox. I often wondered myself how these cities rise and fall from the lists. That there must be something else driving the choosings. That's one good theory you have that I agree with.

[Melissa78703]

I agree with the poster above. Something else other than hard data is driving those "Top" lists. A Facebook friend recently posted a thread of best states for business (below). I'm sorry, but Oregon --? Don't we all know what's happening there? Oregon is one of the last states I'd choose to start a business, right after Michigan.

Slide Show: The Best States For Business - The Best States for Business - Forbes.com

[Handd4utexas]

I can always use good data. I don't care if it is the TOP TEN or THE DOOWOP FIVE!
I also don't disregard data that doesn't reflect positive information as long as it is valid.

[Jennibc]

Originally Posted by Melissa78703

I I also find it odd that the media never touches on small to small-mid-sized cities. You know, those with populations under 100,000. When they do write about a place, it's always a big city or metropolis. I'm sure a lot of people would love to live in Manhattan, San Francisco, L.A., etc. Whether they actually have the means to do so is another story entirely.

Actually, I often see "best small towns" and "best small cities" lists.
Best Places to Live 2010 - from Money Magazine The preceding link will take you to one.

[RaleighLass]

Originally Posted by sliverbox

I sort of figured. Nashville in comparison to Austin is cheap. I've got my own theory and that is if you trace where all the "best cities" are, they're also in places where major homebuilders also own vast chunks of land. Its easy really- buy up a bunch of undeveloped land in such and such Southern city- Like Austin, Raleigh Durham, Nashville, etc etc and then proceed to get stories published talking about how wonderful those places are, then people flood in, buy up the houses, prices jump,and once the word is out on just how awesome such and such a place is... move along to the next city.

This is pretty clever but nope, not true for Raleigh. Like you guys, we've been on the Best of ...lists for some years. I wish they'd stop. We have big time issues with our county school system both with politics and problems of growth. I've lived here since '74 and saw it all happening. We've lost farms to subdivisions, lovely countryside to highways, some road is always under construction. A main thoroughfare, I-40 has been re worked and repaved so many times I think the Work Zone signs are permanent. I think we need to start the Worst of...Lists, Raleigh is happy to be # 1 if it will halt growth so we can catch up. Sounds like we might have to wrestle Austin for it though

[sliverbox]

The only reason I came to the previous conclusion that "best cities" might be tied to homebuilders is that two of the country's largest homebuilders have big parts of their portfolios in the Southeast. About a year and a half ago one was bought out by the other. One of the reasons stated was because the competitor owned a lot of land in NC and TX- coincidentally the two fastest growing states. There's nothing wrong with this because its good business: The Midwest is in decline. The coasts are now too expensive for most in the middle class. Thus that leaves the Southeast as one of the last holdouts. Thus if you're a large homebuilder where would be a good place to sell your product? Where people are moving of course. I'm perhaps a little glad they are building so many new homes there anyway. Its a mixed blessing. On one hand most of what gets built are cookie-cutter houses in subdivisions. But that keeps the housing supply high and prices lower. That means better affordability.

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by sliverbox

The only reason I came to the previous conclusion that "best cities" might be tied to homebuilders is that two of the country's largest homebuilders have big parts of their portfolios in the Southeast. About a year and a half ago one was bought out by the other. One of the reasons stated was because the competitor owned a lot of land in NC and TX- coincidentally the two fastest growing states. There's nothing wrong with this because its good business: The Midwest is in decline. The coasts are now too expensive for most in the middle class. Thus that leaves the Southeast as one of the last holdouts. Thus if you're a large homebuilder where would be a good place to sell your product? Where people are moving of course. I'm perhaps a little glad they are building so many new homes there anyway. Its a mixed blessing. On one hand most of what gets built are cookie-cutter houses in subdivisions. But that keeps the housing supply high and prices lower. That means better affordability.

That's an interesting theory.

However, if you are going to take it to the next logical conclusion, wouldn't it be likely that the homebuilders might also be tied to forums like this one?

[sliverbox]

That's an interesting theory.

However, if you are going to take it to the next logical conclusion, wouldn't it be likely that the homebuilders might also be tied to forums like this one?

I just looked up and there's a few real estate related ads. Not saying that there's a connection as its just plain old fashioned advertising, which makes perfect sense given that this is a relocation site thus I'd expect to see such ads.

I'm in no way saying that there's anything wrong with homebuilders wanting to get more customers. They're just like any other business. Its just that I find it funny that if you look online, there are literally dozens and dozens of "Best cities" reports, and almost all of them seem to be in cities that have large quantities of newer housing stock in and under the 200k mark. Most of these cities exist in states that have loose zoning regulations. Thus its perhaps cheaper to build houses and thus I'd imagine the profit margins are higher. Try building a new home in most of coastal California and for starters, local NIMBYism , zoning, and the need to build semi-commercial quality houses that withstand earthquakes makes these houses costly.

Naturally if I were in the business of building houses, I'd be choosing the areas that people are moving to- and that for the time being is TX and NC. TN, AL, GA, and other Southern states are probably going to be good bets for the next 10-20 years.

Like I mentioned- I have no problem with this. I'm actually glad homebuilders are building so many houses there. Sure- there are negative repercussions but the positive is that the prices stay cheaper. I can pull up any number of real estate sites in various Southern cities and generic cookie cutter houses can be bought for $100,000-$150,000 all day long. Not that I really like such homes, but most people do and as long as there is a plentiful supply, well then good for all of us who don't want to spend a fortune on housing.

[inthecut]

Originally Posted by sliverbox

The only reason I came to the previous conclusion that "best cities" might be tied to homebuilders is that two of the country's largest homebuilders have big parts of their portfolios in the Southeast. About a year and a half ago one was bought out by the other. One of the reasons stated was because the competitor owned a lot of land in NC and TX- coincidentally the two fastest growing states. There's nothing wrong with this because its good business: The Midwest is in decline. The coasts are now too expensive for most in the middle class. Thus that leaves the Southeast as one of the last holdouts. Thus if you're a large homebuilder where would be a good place to sell your product? Where people are moving of course. I'm perhaps a little glad they are building so many new homes there anyway. Its a mixed blessing. On one hand most of what gets built are cookie-cutter houses in subdivisions. But that keeps the housing supply high and prices lower. That means better affordability.

I don't think the builders are CREATING the trends, just following what have been long term trends..the sunbelt has been the fastest growing region of the USA since the end of WW2..builders simply set up shop in what they feel gives them long term growth opps...I don't think any builders have ever created a hot city or region out of whole cloth where no interest or movement existed before..

Builders are simply creatures of opportunity, looking to pass as many costs off as possible to the communities they build as well..They are not really in the public interest so to speak, and will build out tons of generic crap if they have no regs in place forcing their hand, not to mention subverting environmental laws as close as legally possible, per wetlands, dumping thier debris from construction sites, etc...I worked for a highway department in a bad areas many years ago in another city, and the builders from the good areas would come at the crack of dawn while it was still dark, and dump all their building refuse in our area..and we are talking top builders...

Builders just take advantage of what they can, and follow trends at best...they may help hype certain communities, but its the city leaders and chambers that do all the hyping in Austin and the other sunbelt cities..

[sliverbox]

If you really want to take this down to the underlying fundemental problem, its that the US has been building communities in a mostly unsustainable fashion for decades. Its not really the builder's fault. Its more to do with that most Americans feel that they simply must have a 3-4 bedroom home, a large yard, 2-3 cars, and so on and so on. That type of developments means cities rapidly run out of land in a few decades. California is proof as it was mostly rural with smaller cities up until after WW2 when the property boom occurred there. All of the metro areas were filled up with subdivisions and suburban developments and now there's simply no more room. The same will probably happen in metro Texas and other states.

Of course I would be lying if I said I too didn't want my own 3 bedroom house with a yard and 2 cars. Thus I guess I'm a hypocrite. It might not happen in my lifetime, but eventually not everyone is going to be able to have that 3 bedroom house near perfect schools yada yada yada...