U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [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)
 
Old 05-28-2008, 12:04 PM
 
1,297 posts, read 5,102,746 times
Reputation: 566

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdawgx View Post
No area is going to go unscathed as prices return to their historical values.
Historical meaning year 2003.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-28-2008, 04:52 PM
 
Location: Below the fray
422 posts, read 1,651,707 times
Reputation: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by moxiezbug View Post
Everyone is talking about SoCal. What about SF and the surrounding Bay Area? Will they be subject to the same correction, or not as severe?
This is an LA forum, so the discussion sort of focuses on SoCal, you know? You might try the SF forum.

San Francisco Forum - Relocation, Moving, Local City Discussions - City-Data Forum
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2008, 03:31 AM
 
2,197 posts, read 6,812,671 times
Reputation: 1687
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdawgx View Post
No area is going to go unscathed as prices return to their historical values.
MDR is a very small pocket, and I know what every single home in there has sold for in the past two years. My broker checks new listings and pendings twice a day. MDR-- not including Mar Vista, Playa Vista and surrounding areas that are not MDR-- hasn't dropped anywhere close to 27%.

Who knows where these bogus numbers come from? The only way to know what's really happening is to watch the market yourself and see what's selling and for how much. Doing that on a macro view would be difficult, but taking a micro view lets you weed out misrepresented information.

Having these ultra-desirable areas return to historical values is unlikely to happen. A lot of us wish it would, but there's too much demand and equity on the sidelines. And people who think it's happening now are simply not in touch with the areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2008, 08:08 AM
 
830 posts, read 2,618,777 times
Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodbyehollywood View Post
MDR is a very small pocket, and I know what every single home in there has sold for in the past two years. My broker checks new listings and pendings twice a day. MDR-- not including Mar Vista, Playa Vista and surrounding areas that are not MDR-- hasn't dropped anywhere close to 27%.

Who knows where these bogus numbers come from? The only way to know what's really happening is to watch the market yourself and see what's selling and for how much. Doing that on a macro view would be difficult, but taking a micro view lets you weed out misrepresented information.

Having these ultra-desirable areas return to historical values is unlikely to happen. A lot of us wish it would, but there's too much demand and equity on the sidelines. And people who think it's happening now are simply not in touch with the areas.

Why is it unlikely to happen? You act like there has been some new revelation in housing in MDR. Did it just take this long for rich people to get this stupid? Why weren't they willing to pay these prices 5 years ago? Things aren't any different now than they were then. So what's the logic supporting such high home values? Please tell me. I've yet to see anyone make a rational argument.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2008, 08:09 AM
 
830 posts, read 2,618,777 times
Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by greggd View Post
Historical meaning year 2003.

Exactly. In fact, when we get back to long-term historical price to income levels, we will indeed be close to 2002-2003 prices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2008, 08:26 AM
 
830 posts, read 2,618,777 times
Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheri257 View Post
Depending on how the numbers break down ... this could be one reason:

Try this rent versus buy calculator.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/bu...T_GRAPHIC.html

I don't know how accurate that is, but let's assume it is. Good find by the way. Pretty cool.

Based on my current rent, if I bought a $350,000 house and put 20% down, it would take 10-11 years for me to break even on renting versus buying, assume home prices appreciated 5% per year and my rent increases 3% per year.

Remember that the graphic is just showing the annual savings. In the first four years I save by renting, on average, but then it shows it is better to buy after that. But it takes 6-7 years to offset the savings I had in the first 4 years, for a total of 10-11 years.

That's a long time horizon. And that's at $350,000. At $400,000, it's 14-15 years.

Given what I am paying in rent, prices would have to fall to about $250,000 to $300,000 for it to make sense for me to buy, given a reasonable time horizon of something less than 10 years.

I would be curious to know what the underlying assumptions are, such as do they include selling costs of about 8% of the property? At a 5% annual appreciation, selling costs alone will be about 2 years worth of appreciation. What are the maintenance assumptions? Do they include the tax benefits of the mortgage? Etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2008, 04:15 PM
 
148 posts, read 435,830 times
Reputation: 122
Another great analysis, motoman. Well said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2008, 07:45 PM
 
2,197 posts, read 6,812,671 times
Reputation: 1687
Quote:
Originally Posted by motoman View Post
Why is it unlikely to happen? You act like there has been some new revelation in housing in MDR. Did it just take this long for rich people to get this stupid? Why weren't they willing to pay these prices 5 years ago? Things aren't any different now than they were then. So what's the logic supporting such high home values? Please tell me. I've yet to see anyone make a rational argument.
Rich people own. Non-rich people pay rich people's mortgages in rent, while rich people take the tax deductions. Years down the road, the rich people own a property they've paid nothing for; the non-rich own nothing and have nothing to show for years helping someone else get richer. You and I clearly have a different definition of stupid.

Last edited by goodbyehollywood; 06-02-2008 at 07:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2008, 07:52 AM
 
830 posts, read 2,618,777 times
Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodbyehollywood View Post
Rich people own. Non-rich people pay rich people's mortgages in rent, while rich people take the tax deductions. Years down the road, the rich people own a property they've paid nothing for; the non-rich own nothing and have nothing to show for years helping someone else get richer. You and I clearly have a different definition of stupid.

Umm...there isn't a single house in MDR or anywhere around that area that could be rented at a high enough rate to even come close to covering the mortgage, given current price levels, let alone maintenance, property taxes, insurance, management, and a decent return.

So again, why is it you think prices in these areas are immune from reality?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2008, 06:46 PM
 
2,197 posts, read 6,812,671 times
Reputation: 1687
Whose reality? You're trying to make an irrational market fit your concept of what you think the correct valuation should be. And while I don't disagree with your thought process, our theoretically free market is being propped up, bailed out and jump-started by manipulators at every level, from lenders up to the Oval Office, then overseas to global financiers with much to lose. Applying fundamental logic to illogical manipulation leads to frustration and makes market timing virtually impossible. Not that anyone can ever really game the market, but we really can't, given the puppeteering going on.

L.A. is a dichotomous market. In some parts of L.A., you're buying a house; in other parts, you're buying a lifestyle. Some warrant a premium; others don't. People who don't want to pay the premium bottomfish elsewhere. A lot of people are willing to pay a premium to insulate themselves from the hoi polloi, so they do. High demand and low supply lead to artificially escalated prices in lifestyle locales.

For whatever reason, there is a psychological difference between renters and owners. I would hate paying someone else's mortgage and having them dictate what I could and couldn't do and when. So I choose to own and rent to others, who're content being on the other side of the equation. When I'm buying investment properties, I pencil it out. But that's a whole different scenario.

All JMO. I don't profess to know what will happen; I'm just trying to make smart decisions based on what I think will happen. And I don't see all of L.A. falling equally, for varied reasons. Others disagree, so time will tell.
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > California > Los Angeles
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, 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