« previous   housing   next »

2013 setting up to be highest real estate inflation ever


By iwog   Follow   Thu, 3 Jan 2013, 11:44pm PST   17,406 views   333 comments   Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (2)  

At least in the Bay Area. The numbers are stunning. There is simply nothing for sale with inventories approaching record lows.

http://blog.redfin.com/sfbay/2012/06/bay_area_inventory_continue_to_slide_prices_up.html

« First     « Previous     Comments 294-333 of 333     Last »

edvard2   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 7:59am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 294

Not sure what they have in San Jose, but around us in the east bay we have these tiny little ants called Argentinian ants. They're an invasive species and since they started from one colony, they are all "buddies" and so the whole state of California is basically one giant freakin' ant's nest. If I am anywhere in my yard, all I have to do is start digging and they come boiling out of the ground. I just spray the perimeter of the house with ant spray and that keeps them out.

JFP   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 8:01am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 295

edvard2 says

JFP says

If you do a little research, you will see that US stocks have returned on average about 5.5% for the last 100 years, and that's if you reinvested the dividends.

Most sources I've found mentions the 7-8% number and shows this has having been the norm for the past 100 years. Thats at the somewhat conservative end. Its not at all unfeasible to get as high as 10% or more if you invest wisely.

The difference between 5.5% and 7% isn't worth quibbling about, but I'll just note that the last 13 years brought the average for the last 100 years down significantly.

It's not unfeasible to get 10%, but you are unlikely to outrun the average for very long. If you do, you should be in the Finance industry, because you will have a track record better than the vast majority of professionals running mutual funds.

New Renter   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 8:09am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 296

Mark D says

your $250K/year don't mean SHIT when your neighbors make $400k/year. DEAL WITH IT.

Yeah, go take a second job at Mc. Donalds or something.

New Renter   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 8:10am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 297

edvard2 says

Not sure what they have in San Jose, but around us in the east bay we have these tiny little ants called Argentinian ants. They're an invasive species and since they started from one colony, they are all "buddies" and so the whole state of California is basically one giant freakin' ant's nest. If I am anywhere in my yard, all I have to do is start digging and they come boiling out of the ground. I just spray the perimeter of the house with ant spray and that keeps them out.

Same ants. Try the borax. Worst comes to worst you're out $5

JodyChunder   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 8:41am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 298

Mark D says

DEAL WITH IT.

Yeah, LOSERS!!!

Pfffftt!

New Renter   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 9:55am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 299

donjumpsuit says

Thanks for the ant update. I will try it. We have a SEVERE problem.

Please report back with results. It may take a few weeks.

rufita11   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 10:22am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 300

iwog says

rufita11 says

Those condos were probably off South Main in the "ghetto" part of Walnut Creek. I didn't want my friend living there. The apartment manager had that look of accelerated aging from either substance abuse or long white-T-shirt wearing boyfriend abuse. Yes. He was there. Pretty "ghetto". Why live in Walnut Creek at all if you have to live there. Oh ya, the schools.

Right off of Treat Blvd. You couldn't have been more wrong if you tried.

Depends on which part of Treat. If it's east, then were talking Mt. Diablo School District. Condos could be nice, but that district is getting worse by the minute.

iwog   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 12:13pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 301

rufita11 says

Depends on which part of Treat. If it's east, then were talking Mt. Diablo School District. Condos could be nice, but that district is getting worse by the minute.

So let me get this straight. South Walnut Creek is ghetto. North Walnut Creek is getting worse by the minute and may be ghetto too. Walnut Creek is turning into a hell hole.

Can we have a little less stupid on the site please? Pretty please?

iwog   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 12:42pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 302

I just think it's idiotic for someone in San Ramon to be characterizing Walnut Creek as anything other than a continuation of the aristocratic corridor that is Blackhawk, Danville, Alamo, Walnut Creek, Lafayette, and Orinda.

BTW I'm in Lafayette so San Ramon is a ghetto Mutha fucka!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

SFace says

Isn't there an Archstone that was built 2 years ago nearby, near the Pleasant Hill Bart?

I imagine your rent piggyback theirs.

Yup. You are exactly right. My condo is within a block of Pleasant Hill BART and is dominated by newly built high end professional units now.

JodyChunder   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 12:52pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 303

iwog says

Walnut Creek is turning into a hell hole.

Not in my opinion -- just highly...unremarkable.

Better move to Victorville.

thomaswong.1986   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 1:00pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 304

Mark D says

some people still don't get it. the Bay Area is not the whole country. and the reason you can't afford a house in the BA is not because it's overpriced but because YOU DO NOT MAKE ENOUGH. simple as that.

your $250K/year don't mean SHIT when your neighbors make $400k/year. DEAL WITH IT.

you couldn't say the same for decades prior when prices were more reasonable..and many people who made what ever pay scale bought homes they wanted.... thats why bubbles deal with publics misconceptions which is often disconnected from fundamentals..
and why prices eventual correct. AKA Irrational Exuberance.. read it one day..

JodyChunder   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 1:16pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 305

thomaswong.1986 says

AKA Irrational Exuberance.. read it one day..

I hear what you're saying here, Thomas...but give me an example of rational exuberance.

JodyChunder   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 1:23pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 306

No thanky. I shoot from the hip, Bob.

rufita11   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 1:26pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 307

iwog says

I just think it's idiotic for someone in San Ramon to be characterizing Walnut Creek as anything other than a continuation of the aristocratic corridor that is Blackhawk, Danville, Alamo, Walnut Creek, Lafayette, and Orinda.

BTW I'm in Lafayette so San Ramon is a ghetto Mutha fucka!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

SFace says

Isn't there an Archstone that was built 2 years ago nearby, near the Pleasant Hill Bart?

I imagine your rent piggyback theirs.

Yup. You are exactly right. My condo is within a block of Pleasant Hill BART and is dominated by newly built high end professional units now.

I'm just calling you out on your obsession with your rentals in the school district to which you would never send your own kids in a million years.

JodyChunder   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 1:30pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 308

rufita11 says

I'm just calling you out on your obsession with your rentals in the school district to which you would never send your own kids in a million years.

The problem with touting school districts is that teachers are the first ones over the barrel after librarians, and just before firefighters (then nurses, doctors, etc., etc., and so on down the line). How long before these teachers -- the building blocks which comprise these coveted schools -- are priced too far out into the boonies to make commuting an option by the very same RE obsessed goons who get all wiggy about school systems in the first place?...thereby rendering that selling point moot.

uh huh huh huh.

iwog   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 2:32pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 309

rufita11 says

I'm just calling you out on your obsession with your rentals in the school district to which you would never send your own kids in a million years.

No, you're not calling me out on anything. Obsession with my rentals? You mean mentioning a possible rental to someone who was looking for a place for a reasonable cost and quoting a rate?

Desperate much?

I'd happily send my kids to schools in Concord. I don't masturbate to Acalanes school district.

Facebooksux   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 2:42pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 310

Mark D says

a more realistic percentage gain for the stock market is around 5-7%. subtract 15% capital gain tax then you get 4-6%.

but this only applies to the difference between rent and cost of ownership. if your rent is the same as the cost of owning (like MANY great areas in the country), there is NO opportunity cost.

some people still don't get it. the Bay Area is not the whole country. and the reason you can't afford a house in the BA is not because it's overpriced but because YOU DO NOT MAKE ENOUGH. simple as that.

your $250K/year don't mean SHIT when your neighbors make $400k/year. DEAL WITH IT.

I'm only mentioning the fact that I make more than 400K so I can say:

FUCK YOU

The Bay area is overpriced.

NY/London/Tokyo/Singapore/Paris/Sunnyvale

Which one of those doesn't belong?

Just cause I can doesn't mean I should blow my money/nest egg/war chest on a 50's era shitbox.

Facebooksux   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 2:43pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 311

And by Bay Area I mean SF and Silicon Valley.

JodyChunder   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 2:51pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 312

Facebooksux says

Singapore

FWIW, I'd take a 50's era shitbox in Scranton over anyplace in Singapore. Honest to God.

Facebooksux   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 3:12pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 313

No you wouldn't Uncle Jody.

JodyChunder   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 3:24pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 314

Facebooksux says

No you wouldn't Uncle Jody.

Daddy Chunder -- and oh yeah, I would -- and yes, I've visited both. Also, I like 50's-era shitboxes.

RentingForHalfTheCost   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 11:53pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 315

JFP says

He said he can pay his rent with the dividends, not the appreciation. It would take a portfolio valued at over a million dollars to pay enough dividends to cover a $2,600 a month rent, and that assumes no taxes paid on the dividends.

And, stocks have not returned 7-8% over the last thirteen years. They've been essentially flat over the last 13 years.

They have not been flat, and that is a good thing. I have benefited from multiple things over the last 13 years.

- dollar cost averaging
- 3-5% premium on selling covered calls on solid dividend paying companies
- large increases in salary to keep up with inflated housing costs in the BA while my rent stayed the same
- dividend growth in nearly all the companies I have invested

You look at today's prices of the stock to generate the required income, but that is not what I consider. Yes, it would take over 1m of today's dollars, but I didn't pay that. I calculated my contributions and it was in the 400k range. So, over 13 years I have contributed 400K and created an investment that has income matching today's cost to rent a 1m+ home. Not many people talk about this side of housing. I am just putting it out there. And for the taxes I pay, taxes on dividends is only 15%.

And yes, I am only talking about dividends, and not appreciation. I couldn't care less about what someone wants to pay for my percentage of the company. I will care when I retire and need to sell, but for now all I care about is the dividend and the covered call income. I think just like housing we fixate on the day to day cost too much.

RentingForHalfTheCost   befriend   ignore   Mon, 14 Jan 2013, 11:56pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 316

iwog says

At least in the Bay Area. The numbers are stunning. There is simply nothing for sale with inventories approaching record lows.

Essentially, everything is for sale. I would argue that there is no buyers at the prices people want or need to sell. That will create a much different market dynamic than what you think. Good luck anyway.

RentingForHalfTheCost   befriend   ignore   Tue, 15 Jan 2013, 12:40am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 317

robertoaribas says

that is a cop out and nonsense. We are comparing actively for sale homes today to last year or the year before, to say that number doesn't matter is ridiculous.

It does matter, but I have only negative feelings towards the MLS numbers because the markets is quite different. Like many say in other posts today's inventory is highly manipulated by the holders of the foreclosed homes. I understand they do it to protect all the capital on their books, however it still distorts the market.

I believe that part of the debt ceiling talks will also be about the banks and the result will be forcing them to further deleverage. They are all asking for dividend and stock buybacks right now. This will change the market considerable. I could be wrong, but if right then 2013 will be a bumpy ride for housing.

JFP   befriend   ignore   Tue, 15 Jan 2013, 12:44am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 318

RentingForHalfTheCost says

You look at today's prices of the stock to generate the required income, but that is not what I consider. Yes, it would take over 1m of today's dollars, but I didn't pay that. I calculated my contributions and it was in the 400k range. So, over 13 years I have contributed 400K and created an investment that has income matching today's cost to rent a 1m+ home. Not many people talk about this side of housing. I am just putting it out there. And for the taxes I pay, taxes on dividends is only 15%.

I'm focusing on the size of the portfolio required to pay your rent at this time, because that is what is required to show how ridiculous your math is for most people.

If you put in $400,000 over 13 years, that comes to about $2500/month. So, you would need to average 13% return every year and have no down years to get to the $1,000,000 portfolio you claim to have.

So, just between rent and your investments, you are over $5,000/month, before you pay any taxes or any living expenses. Hardly typical.

Lastly, I don't believe that you have averaged a 13% return over the last 13 years considering that that time period included two of the biggest crashes ever in the stock market.

RentingForHalfTheCost   befriend   ignore   Tue, 15 Jan 2013, 1:04am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 319

JFP says

Lastly, I don't believe that you have averaged a 13% return over the last 13 years considering that that time period included two of the biggest crashes ever in the stock market.

That fact is precisely why I did get them averages. I do a few things on top of the traditional long-term investment strategies you find in any article.

- when I feel the market is overvalued I only contribute 1/2 of my monthly take, then when I feel it is undervalued I do 2x. If timed correctly this really exaggerates the dollar-cost averaging. In March 2009 I actually went to 4x and even did a lump sum contribution for the first time. Emotion was crazy and stupid. Remember, the world was coming to an end.

- selling covered calls and when things drop I buy them back immediately. Basically, using the choppiness of the market to my advantage. If I can get them for 1/4 of what I sold then I'm game. I actually put the order in immediately after selling. This offsets losses during negative times. Once I close out a call then I immediately sell another.

- when I feel the market is undervalued I never sell calls. Only when on par or overvalued.

- One word, Gold! Metals are part of the market and have done extremely well over the last 13 years. I have always had them as 20% of my holdings. It took some selling over the years, because the have appreciated much faster than anything else. I still have 20% as of today.

The real trick is in your judgement of under and overvalued. You need some type of system to make the call. Not your emotion that is driven by day to day activity.

I find it funny how everyone spends so much time doing the same type of work for 40-60 hours per week to get income. Then spends nothing on their investment approach with their investment savings. I spend at least 5hrs/wk and many times more reading and reviewing my currently plan. Probably about the same amount of time people spend on fixing their house up each week. ;) We all need a system.

RentingForHalfTheCost   befriend   ignore   Tue, 15 Jan 2013, 1:09am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 320

robertoaribas says

@rentingforhalfthecost:

actually, I'm quite serious. I plan on starting on my book this summer, and though we argue on here all the time, if you really did that over the fairly rough stock market of the past 13 years it is a story to tell.

We could put the two together, as different views and long term investment options.

I'd be game for that. Let me know when you start. I have been trying to get all my past trade records as I have good account keeping now, but in the beginning didn't. Back in 2000-2007 there were so many discount broker buyouts that I have little options now to go back and get them. I only have my tax records and all the stupid mailings that I have stashed in boxes. What a pain. It would be nice to just go to an account and dump get them all in a spreadsheet.

RentingForHalfTheCost   befriend   ignore   Tue, 15 Jan 2013, 1:31am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 321

Here is a chart showing Gold and S&P500 from 2001 to 2012. This is where I benefited the most. I make trades at the end of every month to make sure I maintain 20% gold/gold stocks compared to my regular dividend equity holdings (close to the S&P 500 index). So, each time there was fear in the market my Gold would normally rise while S&P500 falls. I then take my gold appreciation and use it to buy cheap S&P500 stock. In the case of gold dropping and S&P500 rising (didn't happen too often in the last 13 years) I would reverse. These movements alone provide lots of benefits. March 2009 was my best move. I hope we get more "end of the world" sessions before I expire. ;)

http://www.acamaronline.com/content/comparativechart.aspx

David9   befriend