[von949]

Originally Posted by BBMW

In the end most people buying houses to live in are payment buyers. Some have cash, but most need a mortgage. Given that, housing prices will inversely track interest rates. Assuming a buyer can afford the payment they bought the house at, they can always refinance to a lower rate if that's available. So basically a buyer is better off buying when rates are high. They'll pay a lower price. If rates drop, they can then refinance to a lower payment. If you buy when rates are low, and then rates pop, the value of the property will drop, and there's nothing you can really do about it.

I guess I follow you...

I just can't see these post 2005 built homes dropping significantly any lower. I remember some rougue poster on here a while back talking about homes that sold for $450K(2006 era) going for under $50K when the "true" bottom hits. Man, would there ever be a buying frenzy.

Originally Posted by Tek_Freek

We'd love to see this if the corresponding drop in prices would follow. Loan? What loan?

EXACTLY!!

If today's prices were cut in half, 20% IR would not even be a factor. I would do what Scoop did and buy the home down the street from us(cash) and rent it out. Hell, my in-laws would probably have me working over time trying to find them all the deals in the valley.

Frenzy!

[von949]

Originally Posted by ScoopLV

Agreed. The reasons for "buy a house" or "buy a house quick as you can" and even "buy many houses" are compelling. This entire thread appears to be a debate between "people who have taken an economics course at some point in their lives" vs. "those who haven't."

What would help this debate is if every poster had a title next to their name. Example:

-Investor
-Primary home owner
-RE Agent
-Still waiting for the bottom
-I purchased between 2004-2008
-The world is going to end


Then we all can get a better understanding of where people stand on the subject. I work or have some family in every category...none of them can agree on anything. And these anonymous comments are very "interesting".

[ScoopLV]

Von, I literally can check off five of your six categories. (Although my license is "on-ice" with NVRED.) The only one that doesn't describe me is "still waiting for the bottom." That clearly happened in 2012.

We may get ANOTHER drop. But that will be independent on the Great George W Bush Recession of 2007-2012. And that's what we should call it. For instance, "What did you do during the GGWBR?"

"I worked at a restaurant and bought as many houses as I could during the GGWBR."

That sort of thing.

[logline]

Originally Posted by von949

I guess I follow you...

I just can't see these post 2005 built homes dropping significantly any lower.

Agreed. I've bought 2 homes here. Both were between 20-25 cents on the dollar from what they originally sold for... and well below replacement costs. When homes sell for less than what it costs to build, it's a no-brainer. The prices were so low, a loan was not even needed which makes the whole interest rate argument pointless.

Additionally, with lending standards having been so tight for several years now, those who have bought homes in Las Vegas with all-cash offers are much more stable because they are not going to be foreclosed on. This is exactly how the system is supposed to work: clear out the bad inventory into stronger hands.

People like Trader Joe99 seem to think that Las Vegas prices have to go lower with higher interest rates because they are inversely correlated... but if that's so, then why have prices come down AT THE SAME TIME that interest rates came down? You can't have it both ways. It's a bad argument.

As the chart in the previous link shows, the inverse correlation between prices and interest rates is not as closely correlated as you think:
http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt...ller-56453.php

As for Vegas, I think we bounce around here until wage inflation begins to take hold. All that money printing will eventually have to work it's way into the economy. The current velocity of money is minimal, no matter how many chicken littles are screaming about gas prices or food prices. This is not inflation (yet). When it hits, you'll know because the whole world will be in a tizzy. If anything, Trader Joe99 makes a strong argument for future inflation which means you better buy your home(s) now or be a completely screwed renter (for life) once inflation hits.

[Tek_Freek]

Originally Posted by logline

If anything, Trader99 makes a strong argument for future inflation which means you better buy your home(s) now or be completely screwed once inflation hits.

We are fortunate in that we own our home and have for a decade. We are wanting to move, but if things go to Hell in a hand basket we'll just stay put.

[observer53]

Originally Posted by von949

What would help this debate is if every poster had a title next to their name. Example:

-Investor
-Primary home owner
-RE Agent
-Still waiting for the bottom
-I purchased between 2004-2008
-The world is going to end


Then we all can get a better understanding of where people stand on the subject. I work or have some family in every category...none of them can agree on anything. And these anonymous comments are very "interesting".

Posts deleted.

While certain background information on the posters can be helpful in discussions and in assessing the various opinions on any number of topics, including this one, if a poster chooses not to disclose that information, they can't be forced to. If that influences how their opinions are viewed, so be it, but let's keep requests for background information, and speculation about a poster's background/motivation, out of the threads, please.

[ScoopLV]

Originally Posted by observer53

Posts deleted.

While certain background information on the posters can be helpful in discussions and in assessing the various opinions on any number of topics, including this one, if a poster chooses not to disclose that information, they can't be forced to. If that influences how their opinions are viewed, so be it, but let's keep requests for background information, and speculation about a poster's background/motivation, out of the threads, please.

But certainly if the person in question posts the same information over and over in multiple threads, it is only reasonable to ask, "Why?"

The fact that house prices are manipulated by the actions of the Federal Reserve, the mortgage insurance companies, large-scale investors and banks isn't being debated. I haven't seen anyone argue that the housing market in Las Vegas is free and unfettered.

What IS being debated is whether or not it is a good idea to buy real estate in Las Vegas despite market shenanigans. Surely that falls under the umbrella of "Las Vegas Real Estate Manipulation."

So how about if we ask people hypothetically what they would do instead of buying a house? If they hit the Lion's Share slot machine jackpot, for instance.

If I hit the Lion's Share jackpot, I'd buy 22 houses and rent them out, enjoying the five-figure monthly income for the rest of my life.

What would everyone else do?

[von949]

Originally Posted by observer53

Posts deleted.

While certain background information on the posters can be helpful in discussions and in assessing the various opinions on any number of topics, including this one, if a poster chooses not to disclose that information, they can't be forced to. If that influences how their opinions are viewed, so be it, but let's keep requests for background information, and speculation about a poster's background/motivation, out of the threads, please.

Well then, this thread might as well be in the general real estate section with all the other complete anonymous experts on every subject. The beauty of this area of the forum is that there is a little "back story" to all the regular LV posters. It is easier to tell if someone is posting to give info, receive info or just trying to stir the pot. No one has to do anything, but damn, at least say why or how you are invested in this town. Or at least why you care. How many different ways can you say "LV market sucks"?

Anyone can call BS if Mac starts posting about his love for Droid or if LVOC comments about its a bad time to buy RE or if NLVgal posts that she dreams of one day living in Summerlin or Scoop posting tips about beating casino odds or Dyn bragging about visiting Stratosphere... You get the point.

[mod cut-- personal attack]




[language]


Motorola DynaTAC 8000x

[von949]

Originally Posted by ScoopLV

What would everyone else do?

I would purchase a Dottys. Or find a way to franchise it. All of the gambling revenue without dealing with the big casino BS. A single employee. Open 24/7. Just watch the revenue roll in.

If I could, I would attach a laundromat on one side and a day care on the other. One stop shop.

It sounds bad but that's what Vegas locals want. Believe it or not.




Motorola DynaTAC 8000x

[aardogfsu]

2 years ago if I had hypothetically saved $300,000 and had a current steady income I would buy condos in a safe area and rent them out and then buy a house for myself. I cannot think of another investment these days that is any better and any safer...if people are talking manipulation...how about the stock market?...monster manipulation...gold too, manipulated.

Since people on here continually argue that real estate is no good and inflation kills any money in the bank, what can you say is a better alternative than a "manipulated" real estate market...so far, not an answer. Simply A is better than B because_____. (where B represents the investment topic)...simply asking people who consistently bash RE on multiple threads to stand by their reasoning as to why turning their back on an investment that yields a lifetime of consecutive annual positive gains doled out in monthly dividends is a wonderful idea and those who decide to sign up for that are foolish.