About SkyPirate

SkyPirate

Follow
Befriend
4 threads
100 comments
Followed by 1
Following 0
Ignored by 0
Ignoring 0
Ignore SkyPirate
Registered Oct 04, 2012

SkyPirate's most recent comments:

  • On Wed, 2 Apr 2014, 5:40am PDT in Sellers are ditching realtors, pocketing the 6% themselves, SkyPirate said:

    If you want to look at houses that are unoccupied (ex: foreclosure, corporate sale, etc) that's where you need a real estate agent.

  • On Mon, 27 Jan 2014, 2:48am PST in Recommendations on a SHTF gun?, SkyPirate said:

    Assuming this is a serious topic...

    1. For handguns, go with 9mm. Or 45 if you're feeling nostalgic (but 9mm is the more efficient choice). The debates over polymer vs steel frame and striker fired vs hammer fired were relevant in the 80's - 90's like the debate a thousand years ago on whether Earth was flat or round. Today, it's obvious: Polymer frame, striker fired such as Glock, S&W M&P, Springfield XD, etc... Even Sig Sauer, arguably the premier handgun manufacturer, went with a polymer frame and striker fired with the P320. Polymer is a lot lighter and still very strong. Striker fired is mechanically more simple and less prone to failure than hammer fired.

    2. Shotguns are simple and good for a variety of hunting purposes. When loaded with buckshot, they serve well for home defense at short (inside home/average backyard) ranges. Remington 870 or Mossberg 500 or 590. You can't really go wrong with either, but the Remington 870's finish needs to be cared for (oil it or put a coat of Eezox) while the Mossberg arguably is a bit less mechanically robust.

    3. If you're really committed to protection in even the most extreme circumstances, get yourself a semi-automatic AR-15 or AK-47. Note that these are legal in most states but are illegal or restricted in commie states such as NY, CT, MA, CA, etc.

  • On Thu, 31 Oct 2013, 5:12am PDT in So, Do You REALLY Think We Are At The Bottom???, SkyPirate said:

    Looking at historical inflation-adjusted values of homes alone is not the correct methodology. You must also consider rental rates. Rental rates, IMO, is the real way to value a home.

    Much of the housing "recovery" is because house prices were a relative "steal" for investors to rent out. Ex: Buy a home/condo for $30,000 and net $500/month AFTER expenses and taxes. So at $6,000/year return on a $30,000 investment, they were pulling in 20% annually which is great. A whole bunch of investors jump into real estate, it becomes a feeding frenzy, and pretty soon that home which was $30,000 in 2010 is now $120,000 in 2013 and only yielding 5% annually. The frenzy cools off.

    Because much of the "recovery" was investor-driven (rather than buyers drinking realtor koolaid), I think prices will level off and track rent, at least for the short-term. If rents increase, home prices will increase. If rents decrease, home prices will decrease.

    There are some areas with manias that are sellers' markets (ex: California) and other areas where there are still relative deals for buyers (parts of Midwest/Rustbelt) but the norm for most of the country right now is buyer-seller equilibrium.

home   top   share   link sharer   users   register   best of   about   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net