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.
Do you consider it a loss if you've lived in a home for 8 years and sold it for the same price that you bought it for? To me, it's a loss b/c all of the interest paid and closing costs on the mortgage. I know people say consider yourself lucky, a lot of homeowners are upside down or have lost their homes. I think breaking even would be selling to cover your initial cost, interest, closing costs and realtor fees.
What do you think?
It depends on how you evaluate it, and what your goals & objectives were when you bought it.
If you bought it as an investment, run the numbers & see how well you did. End of story.
If you bought it as a place to live & be happy, with family, friends, lifestyle and all that, well then you have to evaluate it very differently, and none of us an do that for you.
I never really made a profit on the sale of a home It seems I don't catch the "right time". I've owned 3 homes at this point that I bought to live in, not to make a profit. (would've been nice) My intentions are to buy down to hopefully have a paid off house even if it means smaller.
I know the market is going through a slump now but I wonder how long it's going to take to actually get back where a home should be appreciating. I know, nobody knows but to me I'd like to have at least made the 3-7% appreciation that is average for a home.
Another analogy is sell low, buy low. I am lucky that I'm not upside down. It just bothers me to pay out all that interest with no return. I guess that's the name of the game.
Unless you pay straight cash for the home. But than again you have those who say if money is tied into home, it's lost oppportinity cost to invest in other returns like the stock market.
I am just now selling the home in which i have lived fo nine years. It was bought with cash.
Doing the math, it cost me about $850/month to live here...including loss of principal, maintenance, and taxes. For that i have had a three bed, three bath, 2,000 sq ft home, bought new, which has served me very nicely.
In my mind it would have cost me something close to $2,000 per month to rent a similar place, so i feel that even though i am selling it for less than i paid, i am coming out ahead.
Real Estae as a residence is NOT an investment. It is a place to raise family and enjoy good home time. If you make a little, or lose a little, so what.
Everyone running around in 2006/07 found this out the hard way, thinking that they were going to make a killing. When you think like that, you forget that for every killing, there is a killer...and you most likely are NOT the killer.
Another analogy is sell low, buy low. I am lucky that I'm not upside down. It just bothers me to pay out all that interest with no return. I guess that's the name of the game.
I understand how you feel. But my feeling is that paying interest is at least getting me the "return" of a home that I can do what I want with (within reason), not dealing with a landlord or other neighboring tenants, and having a safe place to raise our family. I feel it's well worth the meager interest rates available these days.
It depends on how you evaluate it, and what your goals & objectives were when you bought it.
If you bought it as an investment, run the numbers & see how well you did. End of story.
If you bought it as a place to live & be happy, with family, friends, lifestyle and all that, well then you have to evaluate it very differently, and none of us an do that for you.
Purely from an investment standpoint - yes a loss. But you can't put a price on pride of ownership, the ability to do with the home what you want, etc.. And there's the tax write-off of the mortgage interest.
Consider yourself lucky that the house hasn't gone down in value.
Consider yourself lucky that the house hasn't gone down in value.
A house sold for the same dollar amount that it cost 8 years ago has gone down in value.
The price has stayed the same. Therfore, it is worth less.
As an example, the value of a gallon of gasoline is the same as it was in 1964.
The price, however, is much higher. If you use a dime minted in 1964, you
can buy more than half of that gallon of gasoline - just like you could in 1964.
As aneftp and others have pointed out, there are tax savings and qualitative
things to consider if you are trying to decide if you have "lost" anything.
A house is a deteriorating asset. It should tend to go down in value every year.
Since the dollar is also a deteriorating asset, your price may vary.
A house sold for the same dollar amount that it cost 8 years ago has gone down in value.
The price has stayed the same. Therfore, it is worth less.
As an example, the value of a gallon of gasoline is the same as it was in 1964.
The price, however, is much higher. If you use a dime minted in 1964, you
can buy more than half of that gallon of gasoline - just like you could in 1964.
As aneftp and others have pointed out, there are tax savings and qualitative
things to consider if you are trying to decide if you have "lost" anything.
A house is a deteriorating asset. It should tend to go down in value every year.
Since the dollar is also a deteriorating asset, your price may vary.
I'm an appraiser and when I speak of "value", I mean "market value". It's the same, dollar wise. Worth? It's less. Value or Market Value - the same. Buying power has nothing to do with market value.
Houses do not always go down in value; not necessarily a wasting asset. Houses do depreciate, but when replacement costs are increasing at a higher rate than depreciation, older houses (improvements only) can and do go up in value.
I've been teaching courses on value, depreciation, and appraisal theory since 1993. Your argument has some basis in fact, but you are arguing semantics here.
Do you consider it a loss if you've lived in a home for 8 years and sold it for the same price that you bought it for? To me, it's a loss b/c all of the interest paid and closing costs on the mortgage. I know people say consider yourself lucky, a lot of homeowners are upside down or have lost their homes. I think breaking even would be selling to cover your initial cost, interest, closing costs and realtor fees.
What do you think?
You can determine whether or not it is a loss, by adding up everything you spent on the house (mortgage interest, maintenance, upgrades, property tax, insurance, etc) to find how much it cost you to live there for 8 years.
Then estimate how much you would have spent on rent during the same 8 years.
Which is bigger? I'd bet that renting would have been more expensive than buying. At least for me that is the case.
Frankly, if someone came to my door tonight and offered me what I paid for my house in 2002, I'd think that was a good deal.
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.
It seems I don't catch the "right time". I've owned 3 homes at this point that I bought to live in, not to make a profit. (would've been nice) My intentions are to buy down to hopefully have a paid off house even if it means smaller. 
