patrick.net

Oops I can't subtract, it should be 11 weeks instead of 9 weeks of off-peak time.

I hope we get another topic started to have something to work on over the weekend.....

Selling time shares..... mutter mutter mumble...

ptiemann Says:

> And only idiots “buy” timeshares.

Smart people (with no morals) “sell” them…

You can sell a unit by the week for many times more than you can get for selling the entire unit.
Timeshare developers then hit the “owners” with high fees and capital costs so most “owners” will “give” them back and allow them to sell than again (timeshare weeks that owe back fees and capital costs are almost worthless on the secondary market)…

P.S. Last week the snow was not very good, but it should be great after these storms...

Just to clarify, with the pure quarter shares at the Marriott Grand Residence you get one week of time every four weeks. Every year the rotation is staggered by a week so that each owner gets 2 weeks at Xmas&New Years every four years.
A savvy developer staff member pointed out they could probably get more $$ if they changed this scheme so they also sold some units for 5 week intervals at winter peak time, 5 week intervals at summer peak time, and 3 week intervals for the spring/fall period. Indeed, if you check the resale prices your can see that the 5 week periods sell for around $20k/week while the 13 week quarter shares go for around $10k/week.
The quarter shares probably aren't a bad gig (at the resale price) if you like Lake Tahoe, plan to go up once a month for a long weekend, and like the convenience of not having to prep a cabin. I can't imagine there are too many folks who fall into that category. Also, the Grand Residence places you within walking distance of food/shopping/gambling and at the base of the mountain.
BTW, here is a guy who owns three studios and a 1bed/1bath unit. I keep waiting for his site to going down, but he so far seems to have avoided foreclosure. I have used his site to reference orginal developer asking prices as he has noted them on his For Sale page. Also, notice what he is trying to sell a studio for versus the resale price at the site I posted previously.
An interesting footnote to the RE bubble is that it provided a window of opportunity for high end fractionals to be marketed as a product different than timeshares. When the rubber hits the road (and specUvestors got involved), its clear that they may share at least one attribute -- price depreciation. I am curious to see when they bottom out and if they will appreciate from their resale lows.

EBGuy,

I remembered some Northstar condo in the new village was selling for 200K for 1/7 share, any ideas what they are worth now?

OO says,

I have puts in a bunch of retailers

I can see that coming when retailers drop like a rock, too bad Crate and Barrel isn't public...

I must say it was a great week with tech taking a spanking. Also, Standard Pacific homes called me today to say the townhouse my wife and I looked at a month ago in Fremont has been lowered from 625 to 569. I told him I just lost my job becasue I worked for a real estate company. He said I guess it's happening everywhere, because SP just closed their South Bay office and laid off all accounting and administration.
Also, A house built in 1991 in Fremont just closed for 670 after originally being listed for 759, the same price that the house next door closed for in May. Both houses are identical models and lot sizes (with identical kitchen remodels using the same contractor only difference was granite color). Sucks to be the neighbor that listed his house 2 days after his neighbors went pending.

Timeshares are the classic boomer product.

Anyone watch the TV show King Of The HIll? The one where Cotton Hill almost buys a timeshare is a good one.

But yeah, while Cotton's a WWII vet who killed fitty men, timeshares are the classic Boomer product.

FAB said:

>I bet the average guy in the Bay Area that makes $250K has a nicer home >and car than the average guy in the Bay Area that is worth $25mm…

This really, really struck home. I am worth $x million (small profitable private company, no debt) but I never think of the my net worth. I make about 1.4 HaHa in income, and that is the _only_ think I count. I just cannot stomach the thought of buying in the fortress.

That’s an interesting sociological point, but irrelevant to my argument.

So what exactly then is your argument? That it sucks that you can't afford to buy a house large enough for your station in life?

Remember 40 years ago, American routinely raised three or four children in 1500 sq ft homes and even today most of the world lives in homes half our size. You aren't the only American that is going to have to learn to readjust their expectations with their shrinking share of the global pie.

There is no particular reason that a middle manager *should* be able to afford a large home in the Los Altos foothills. This might have been true 40 years ago, I honestly don't know, but it isn't true now and probably will not be true ever again. Silicon Valley is now inhabited by far too many financial types, who make much much more than technical manager can ever hope to make.

It’s a tragedy that IN SPITE of earning such high income, people cannot live to that standard.

What standard is that? Either you should leave the Bay Area or stop complaining about your lot in life. Seriously. That people might have to consume a little less and save a little more is hardly a tragedy.

Every few months I come and check things out and it is always the same set of bitter nay-sayers, all claiming that they will finally be able to afford the mansion of their dreams real soon now, after prices drop 50%.

And as an aside, almost everyone I know (who has bought a home) is in a fixed rate 30 year mortgage. But they also think that a 1000 sq foot zero lot line "shitbox" is a perfectly fine home, suitable for raising children in.

I have a few coworkers who are in trouble, but they all bought McMansions in the suburbs, are now sick of their commute and cannot get out now that prices have dropped. As transportation costs continue to soar, the homes near jobs are going to become even more valuable. The global recession that so many of you are wishing for would make things more affordable, but I just don't see that in the cards.

Just for chuckles, I happened to be reading this article at the same time:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2y7u7k (Fortune Magazine)

What $1M will buy you in various parts of the world.

That Mt. View stucco sh*tbox doesn't really look so overpriced now, does it? The San Francisco home is the only one in the First World that isn't a ~1000 sq foot apartment, in fact.

Jimbo :

What standard is that? Either you should leave the Bay Area or stop complaining about your lot in life. Seriously. That people might have to consume a little less and save a little more is hardly a tragedy.

It might be better if you try to understand the view point before declaring those things !

Dude ... I have nothing to complain. I chose to rent and good or bad, it's my decision and my luck and my life. Let me spell out this for you. I was feeling sad for those who work hard and earn high income only to transfer that to some lender. Let me repeat. I am not complaining about my life. I am simply feeling bad for some one else - the loanowners.

Now, that is their choice, their luck and their life. Maybe they don't see it that way, maybe they are happy to work for a lender, maybe they feel miserable, maybe they feel great. They are not asking for my opinion and all that. But we are discussing financial choices and I feel their choice is TRAGIC.

You may disagree, may disagree strongly with my view point. No problem with that. But if you want to preach me about how I should take my lot in life, better understand how I am taking my life before you do that.

And to repeat. I thank all the people in Cupertino paying property taxes on their 1M+ homes so that my kids get good schools. I consider myself mu smarter in financial matters than them.

And weather you like it or not, I am not leaving BA. I am StuckInBA.

Oh oh ... whether not weather ... I blame the spelling mistakes on the storm (!) :-)

The San Francisco home is the only one in the First World that isn’t a ~1000 sq foot apartment, in fact.

I much rather live in a luxurious 1000 sqft 1-bedroom condo with marble baths than a "starter" house in the bay area.

BTW, a nice apartment in SF costs $1500+/sqft.

http://tinyurl.com/2ex9zo

That people might have to consume a little less and save a little more is hardly a tragedy.

This line of thinking is completely un-American. Why do you hate freedom? :)

This $1M home is in the same first world US. It is hardly an apartment:

http://www.springshomes.com/home.php?listingid=506908

ex-sunnyvale-renter Says:
Anyone watch the TV show King Of The HIll? The one where Cotton Hill almost buys a timeshare is a good one.

what about the South Park timeshare episode?

Busted Says:
Standard Pacific homes called me today to say the townhouse my wife and I looked at a month ago in Fremont has been lowered from 625 to 569.

that's good

I told him I just lost my job becasue I worked for a real estate company.

that's bad

A house built in 1991 in Fremont just closed for 670 after originally being listed for 759, the same price that the house next door closed for in May.

that's good

Dude … I have nothing to complain. I chose to rent and good or bad, it’s my decision and my luck and my life. Let me spell out this for you. I was feeling sad for those who work hard and earn high income only to transfer that to some lender.

Okay, I apologize then for coming on so strong. I thought you meant it was a tragedy that they could not live more luxuriously. I guess it might be a sad if they lost it all in the upcoming real estate downturn, but other than that I don't feel particularly sorry for them.

That Mt. View stucco sh*tbox doesn’t really look so overpriced now, does it?

What does that prove ? That there are expensive real estates all around the world ? There always have been and the always will be.

I can tell you several places in India where the RE prices are way more expensive than BA - even after you covert Rs to US$. That is completely unrelated.

Point is, in most of these expensive places the people who live there in general do not desperately need a monthly income to remain in that home. Heck, it's just a part of their net worth.

And that's what is wrong (financially, not morally) about a code monkey living in a 1M home. A job loss and he is at serious risk of losing it all. He doesn't have 1M net worth, he has 1M DEBT. The problem is getting in debt way over his head. The problem is not having any cushion.

And yes, I ALSO was feeling sad about them not able to live luxuriously. Again, I am not saying they should. I am saying they simply CANNOT. They have no choice in that matter even after earning all these big bucks. I am not feeling sad because of the lifestyle choice, I am feeling sad that they do NOT have a choice. I am not feeling sad that they are saving money instead of spending, I am feeling sad because they do NOT have money to save even at that high salary.

Think about it. They are mortgage slaves - with only hope of freedom that can be brought by a greater fool. What is not tragic about it ? It's not that they will go bankrupt if a serious RE downturn hits, although that is not ruled out. But working hard, earning high income should result in financial freedom, not mortgage slavery.

I also don't feel sorry for them. They are taking a risk and the future may prove them smart for taking that risk. I doubt it though. As I have said before, they (typical Cupertino buyers) are spending all that money so that their kids can get good primary education - at the cost of not having enough money for their kids' college education. I find that ironic. And tragic.

StuckInBA,

Long time lurker and liker of your logic. I do think that what you think will bring down home prices down (tighter lending) and what most others think (loss of jobs, stocks going down) happening in conjunction would be the perfect recipe for most of us waiting for sanity to return.

Just curious, what makes you stick to BA? Is it the gorgeous weather which enables us to have days like we had today (oops..thats yesterday already!)? :-)

Jimbo,
You need to stop making assumptions about my or other posters' motivations, desires and living situations. I am perfectly happy where I am right now, in a very financially strong position, and am enjoying watching this housing tragedy unfold. You honestly come off really, really defensive and bitter, more so than the posters here.

And again, you are buying into the myth that the Bay Area is populated by uber-rich who price out all the lowly worker bees. My original point is that personally, I have observed many stark juxtapositions of high income families buying right into neighborhoods with likely a median income nearly an order of magnitude lower, just because they bought their home 5-10 years later than the rest of the neighborhood. These neighborhoods you claim are mostly populated by "financial types" are full of mid-level engineers who happened to have bought 10-20 years ago. Now their neighbors are those financial types who bought in the last 2-5 years. There has clearly been an acceleration of housing price disconnect here, and your retarded attitude of put up or shut up just doesn't cut it. What do you propose? Just to not say anything and deal? C'mon, we all have a right to comment, observe, and post. If you don't like it, then shut up yourself.

Stuck,
You responded to Jimbo's comments much better than me.

I think it cannot be emphasized enough that, yes, the "masses" may be moving to 30y FRMs, they may have high incomes by national or even state standards, but the economy ALWAYS cycles. And as a result, many people who currently feel secure in their income prospects will lose their jobs. It's unavoidable.

There has never been a period in US history, much less CA or Bay Area history, where the economy remained in monotonically positive sustained growth for decades and decades. The typical business cycle is 4-8 years. We have had about 6 years of sustained growth since the last (mild) recession in 2001. Why are things different now that we will somehow avoid the contractionary phase of this business cycle? It's likely in fact that December may be seen in retrospect as the start of this recessionary cycle.

It's just my impression that many people across all income brackets bought homes with assumptions that they will have secure incomes for years to come. This will most likely be untrue.

Peter P:

More to the point, here's what $275K gets you in Boise. This is the same floorplan as my house although in a less-desirable location in my subdivision.
http://www.cbaspen.com/default.cfm/Page=/ForSale/Cat=/ShowPropertyInfo/PropertyType=/Residential/ML_Number=/98330478.htm

The real tragedy of BA RE prices is that they tear families apart. The parents who bought in the 1950s and 1960s will grow old separated from their children and grandchildren who were forced to re-locate out of state for financial reasons.

Dennis, I want to visit Idaho and Montana someday. I love natural beauty.

Different Sean - haven't seen the South Park timeshare episode, I'm sure it was good!

StuckInBA - good points as always on mortgage slavery. The thing with the BA is, to afford to live there you have to work such long hours that you never get to go anywhere or do anything. It's just work work work all the time. The only people enjoying the place before the age of 70 (assuming a workaholic lifestyle will allow you to live that long) are the social dropouts, the hippies living in vans and itinerent street musicians and guys who carve wooden spoons that look like hands etc. The weather's not TOO cold, the punters at the farmer's markets and gathering places are generous, and if you get a "mommy" van you can live out of low-profile, you've got it made.

With the long hours everyone works, they might as well be in Dallas TX or Davenport IA.

>> StuckInBA - good points as always on mortgage slavery.

All,

Do you understand that mortgage is a form of taxation which is privatized. Basically the name of the game is to provide government tax breaks so that more and more people pay this kind of privatized tax to banks ....

Peter P:
Bring your fillet knife and have the world's freshest sashimi by the river. Just whack the steelhead or salmon's head on a rock and dig in. Pack some wasabi and cold rice and you are all set. Sorry but sturgeon is a protected species here so no fancy caviar. See http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/ for details. Although a contrary opinion is here http://www.rain.org/~hutch/sashimi.html .

My point was that your $1M house is way too fancy for most families, whereas the $275K house I linked is more than adequate and quite comfortable inside. Plus I can walk to golf and horseback riding.

Oh my goodness....I finally posted something that went into moderation.

>> Think about it. They are mortgage slaves - with only hope of freedom that can be brought by a greater fool. What is not tragic about it ?

I would like to know how may bay area families know about this TRUTH? How many families know that they are paying high TAXES to banks...

Permarenter,

How about these two:

1. The 6% private sales tax on real-estate transactions.

2. The 3-5% private sales tax on credit card transactions.

Justme

DennisN - that's an interesting and valid way of looking at it. Imagine our country as being run by and for the banks, which is not hard since it's true.

Then imagine every way to get a person into lifetime slavery for the banks being pushed as a Good Thing.

40+ years ago people paid mortgages OFF and had a party where they burned the note.

According to the Center for Immigration Studies, 22 of the 94 foreign-born nationals convicted or indicted on terror charges from 1993 to 2004 were in the U.S. on student visas. Many were visiting here from Saudi Arabia, one of 34 predominantly Muslim states Homeland Security lists as "countries of interest for terrorism."

Yet in a little-noticed 2005 deal struck between President Bush and Saudi King Abdullah, 21,000 young Saudi men will gain U.S. student visas by 2009. The program is supposed to heal the wound left by the 15 Saudi hijackers by promoting cultural exchange and understanding. Abdullah promises the new wave of Saudi students will be on their best behavior and allay our suspicions.

Brothers keeping phones to selves during tiger case
Police want to examine text messages, photos from day of fatal mauling
By Linda Goldston
MEDIANEWS STAFF

Article Launched: 01/05/2008 03:02:08 AM PST

Two San Jose brothers mauled by a tiger at the San Francisco Zoo on Christmas Day have refused to allow police to examine their cell phones for possible text messages or photos believed to be taken the day of a tiger's escape.
In a letter sent Friday to the brothers' attorney, celebrity lawyer Mark Geragos, San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera asked that Paul and Kulbir Dhaliwal preserve "this potentially critical evidence."

"The digital content of your clients' cell phones, which we understand are currently in the possession of the police, may help reconstruct what happened at the tiger exhibit and cafe," Herrera wrote.

Geragos did not return a phone call from MediaNews.

He said earlier this week that news reports of his clients taunting Tatiana, a Siberian tiger, before she escaped from her grotto were not true. A friend of the Dhaliwals', Carlos Sousa Jr., 17, of San Jose, was fatally mauled when the tiger escaped.

Sousa had tried to distract the tiger when she attacked one of the brothers. After Sousa was fatally mauled, the brothers ran to the zoo cafe, near where police shot and killed the tiger.

===========

Conclusion:

Mix of Indian Punjabi and Mexican youth is a deadly cocktail of STUPIDITY

The word for today is 'juxtapositions', skillfully used by Skibum.

Mix of Indian Punjabi and Mexican youth is a deadly cocktail of STUPIDITY

Even if you are not serious, it is not that funny as a joke. Besides, there's no indication that Sousa did anything wrong.

There are many witnesses saying the wogs were taunting the tiger and the tiger attacked only them.