Patrick.net

233 Bay View Dr, San Carlos, CA 94070

By pkowen   Follow   Fri, 2 Apr 2010, 12:31pm   4,206 views   53 comments
In San Carlos CA 94070   Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

And the overpriced winner of the day is:

http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Carlos/233-Bay-View-Dr-94070/home/1919821

Look at those fancy closet doors, the nice sink, and the backkyard concrete paradise!  Classy!

« First     « Previous     Viewing Comments 14-53 of 53     Last »     See most liked comments

1. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

   14   12:29pm Thu 8 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   @ pkowen, I am one of those cuckoo. I would pay $500k for that house in a heart beat. Yes, that fast.

2. pkowen Follow Befriend 30 threads 555 comments San Carlos, CA

   15   4:40pm Thu 8 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   @e-man, I'll backpedal a little and say @$500k, I can't really judge you as 'cuckoo'. I guess it's just a little cuckoo for me. Currently, at that price given this local market it would definitely be a 'good deal'. it will surely sell for much more than that. I, however, am pretty stubborn and still see bay area housing perceived valuation as a bunch of silliness - I have lived in NYC, VA, several towns in MI and also north AL. I've travelled all over this country and a good part of the western world. What people will willingly buy at very high prices here continues to astound me. Suffice to say I have my own standards for what I will buy. First, it MUST pencil out. I.e., it is equal or less to buy than rent a similar place (using my own variation on what everyone else does - estimating what the rent would be versus the monthly to buy, including tax deductions etc.). Second, as my Dad would say, "the house had to be something in the first place". That's where this one fails for me. Architecturally it's a turd. Finally, along with the house itself and the numbers working, comes the location. And more than just the general area ('it's in the bay area'!), I am talking about everything from the neighborhood to the micro-climate to the lot itself and the way the house sits on it. I have admittedly high standards on that, coming from my upbringing to my education in natural resources and land use. It's fun to have a view (I LOVE a great view, and I currently rent one that is better), but in my estimation this house is not well situated. This is a good sized lot but it is mostly unusable (or appears to be). Now, let's talk about $989,000. Surely we can all agree that is pretty ridiculous? That was my original point.

3. Hysteresis Follow Befriend (2) 14 threads 648 comments

   16   6:35pm Thu 8 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   for those saying it's not even worth $500k, that's $190/sf. how many cities on the Peninsula have prices in that range? none. even east palo alto is over $200/sf and oakland is $170/sf. it's fine to say prices are too high, but most of you are unrealistic perma-bears. if san carlos gets prices cut in half, then east palo alto and oakland will drop a lot too.

4. mel1474 Follow Befriend 6 threads 6 comments mel1474's website

   17   11:10pm Thu 8 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Look at this one - it is only $300M - about 300 of the san carlos house :-) http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2010/real_estate/1004/gallery.commercial_real_estate/6.html

5. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

   18   8:17am Fri 9 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   sfbubblebuyer says We had bid very low on it on after the fourth price drop and had gotten the “multiple offer” runaround. We told them we weren’t upping our offer and walked. A month later (and another price drop), we resent our offer and it was accepted. Goes to tell you how much "multple offer" fraud from realtors there is going around in the Bay Area, and its been going on for a very very long time.

6. sfbubblebuyer Follow Befriend 1 threads 750 comments Redwood City, CA

   19   8:36am Fri 9 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Thomas, I actually believe there was another offer this time. And I think that guy told them to stuff their 'multiple offers' and walked, leaving them blinking bewilderedly and moaning. If the info I got from a 3rd realtor (who was brought in to help out the seller's realtor when she had to take a trip to the hospital) is true, the heirs had turned down an offer that was ~200k over ours when they first put the place on the market, because they wanted 'full price', turned down ANOTHER buyer who was offering ~100k more than we did because they were owed at least the 200k bid, and finally scared off the guy who was bidding with us, and he had bid about 35K more than us. These people really needed to learn that the first offer is usually the best offer. One of the heirs was an east coast Realtor, so you'd think he'd have known better. Sheesh.

7. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

   20   9:03am Fri 9 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Golden!

8. pkowen Follow Befriend 30 threads 555 comments San Carlos, CA

   21   12:18pm Fri 9 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   mike says for those saying it’s not even worth $500k, that’s $190/sf. how many cities on the Peninsula have prices in that range? none. even east palo alto is over $200/sf and oakland is $170/sf. it’s fine to say prices are too high, but most of you are unrealistic perma-bears. if san carlos gets prices cut in half, then east palo alto and oakland will drop a lot too. Yup, in today's penninsula market it's much more than $500k. What should it be? Surely not $998k, to my original point. For reference, in MOST of this country, $100/sq ft is considered pretty high. I had a 2900 sq/ft historic craftsman in a major AL city I bought for $235,000, did restoration and sold for $308,000.

9. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

   22   4:41pm Fri 9 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   @ pkowen, I was just pulling your leg. The fact that a lot of cuckoos in the Bay Area are willing to pay $700k for this home, how do you expect this home to drop to $500k? Well, maybe if interest rate is at 15-20% :D

10. Quant HF Mgr Follow Befriend 13 threads 37 comments

    23   6:47pm Fri 9 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   With all due respect, it sounds like most of you have only seen the past couple decades of a falling interest rate environment....and more recently quantitative easing. Check out the 300+ year study on home prices in Holland (I have it and know it well)...housing will only keep pace with wage inflation over the long run. Want to know what a reasonable (and realistic, i.e., where it is heading) price for this house is? A price that would include the buyer putting 20% down, and financing with a conventional mortgage for 30 years at a historically average interest rate level. Why does that sound like punishment to most people? Especially in the Bay Area? Because they cannot afford it, and the bubble has gotten way out of hand (read: decades). "The way it used to be" is not 1995 or 1985...housing will revert to very long term averages, which it cannot fundamentally stay above for a sustained amount of time (especially void of funny money easy credit zero interest rate lending and toxic mortgages). Sure, California and the Bay Area included will always be more expensive than the middle of Iowa, but that house will go back to the mid $500 thousands before this is said and done...mark my words. For those of you who have not seen 8, 9, and 10% and higher interest rates, wait and see what happens. The past few decades have been an interesting, unsustainable ride...it is not a "new norm" that will prevail.

11. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    24   7:07pm Fri 9 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Quant HF Mgr says With all due respect, it sounds like most of you have only seen the past couple decades of a falling interest rate environment….and more recently quantitative easing. Check out the 300+ year study on home prices in Holland (I have it and know it well)…housing will only keep pace with wage inflation over the long run. Want to know what a reasonable (and realistic, i.e., where it is heading) price for this house is? A price that would include the buyer putting 20% down, and financing with a conventional mortgage for 30 years at a historically average interest rate level. Why does that sound like punishment to most people? Especially in the Bay Area? Because they cannot afford it, and the bubble has gotten way out of hand (read: decades). “The way it used to be” is not 1995 or 1985…housing will revert to very long term averages, which it cannot fundamentally stay above for a sustained amount of time (especially void of funny money easy credit zero interest rate lending and toxic mortgages). Sure, California and the Bay Area included will always be more expensive than the middle of Iowa, but that house will go back to the mid $500 thousands before this is said and done…mark my words. For those of you who have not seen 8, 9, and 10% and higher interest rates, wait and see what happens. The past few decades have been an interesting, unsustainable ride…it is not a “new norm” that will prevail. Yes, I did see interest rate at 8% in the early 2000. I will mark your words. I hope I live long enough to see this house goes down to the mid $500k.

12. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    25   7:33pm Fri 9 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Quant HF Mgr says Sure, California and the Bay Area included will always be more expensive than the middle of Iowa, but that house will go back to the mid $500 thousands before this is said and done…mark my words Yes i been here a few decades, long enough to have seen you cant burn a candle at both ends. You cant expect employers to keep feeding higher salaries, due to housing costs, given they can easily set up shop in other states and keep operations going. And very oftern lured with tax incentives and freebies. Thats why many local companies in SV have many more people outside of SV than locally. So either prices fall easing up on job outmigration or migration takes a full swing as prices to up which in the end game will fall permenant to a very few local employees. Sure to be plenty of inventory and price reduction then. Is Intel really hiring that many people in Hillsboro, Or ?... may be so... http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=Intel&l=hillsboro%2C+or&start=100

13. Hysteresis Follow Befriend (2) 14 threads 648 comments

    26   11:10am Sat 10 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   i say that house will be $50M - mark my words. stupid prediction why? because it'll probably happen in 3010. put on a timeline on it. when will this be all said and done? here's the other thing. i never believe anyone that is so strongly convinced of their predictions ("mark my words!"). in fact i automatically assume they don't know what they are talking about - because they're too dense to identify the hundreds of times they've been wrong before with their predictions. if you're so good at seeing the future, you'd be rich and you wouldn't be on this board arguing with a bunch of nobodies. Quant HF Mgr says house will go back to the mid $500 thousands before this is said and done…mark my words.

14. Quant HF Mgr Follow Befriend 13 threads 37 comments

    27   6:24pm Sat 10 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Perhaps you feel like a "nobody", Mike, and for that I feel sorry for you. I enjoy the posts at Patrick.net and do not consider the readers "a bunch of nobodies", nor am I arguing with anyone. The great thing about the internet is, you have no idea who you may be trading comments with...could be a guy who runs a multi-billion hedge fund with a legendary investor...you just never know. But it is probably more comfortable to assume I'm "stupid" and "not rich". :-) I'm all for your prediction of the home being worth $50M some day: care to produce a study or any hard scientific or quantitative data on which you base your prediction? After all, my "prediction" isn't much of a stretch, considering how home prices have historically (over long periods of time) only kept pace with [wage] inflation...hence I referenced the 300+ year Holland home price study. Professor Robert Shiller's work demonstrates the same phenomenon here in the U.S.

15. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    28   10:30pm Sat 10 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   @ Mike, Your prediction is way off and too nservative. If history is any indication. This home should worth $50M in 200 years or less, not 1,000 years :-) @ Quant, I don't care who you are, and I don't care if you work for Warren Buffet. The old man is the greatest investor of all time, but he has been wrong at time. Of course, he was right a lot more times than he was wrong. As Mike indicated above, if you're so confident with your prediction, tell us when this home will go down to the mid $500k. 5 to 7 years? I am willing to make a bet with you. Tell us when this home will hit the mid $500k. The loser will have to take the winner and his/her spouse out to lunch or dinner at a restaurant of the winner's choice. Are you up to the challenge and willing to put your $$ where your mouth is :-)? I was taught that it's easier to make an enemy than a friend. It doesn't hurt to have a new friend who is willing to admit that (s)he's wrong at time :-)

16. Hysteresis Follow Befriend (2) 14 threads 648 comments

    29   1:59am Sun 11 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   i am a nobody. my ego isn't big enough to assume i'm a somebody. the great thing about the internet. is you are judged solely on your post. not your title, or your position in life or your appearance. it's a bit of a meritocracy and to be blunt you don't come across as all that bright. you're not a billionaire. you're not smart enough. you're not rich either. again, not smart enough. i think you're probably poor and not anywhere near rich:) Quant HF Mgr says Perhaps you feel like a “nobody”, Mike, and for that I feel sorry for you. I enjoy the posts at Patrick.net and do not consider the readers “a bunch of nobodies”, nor am I arguing with anyone. The great thing about the internet is, you have no idea who you may be trading comments with…could be a guy who runs a multi-billion hedge fund with a legendary investor…you just never know. But it is probably more comfortable to assume I’m “stupid” and “not rich”. I’m all for your prediction of the home being worth $50M some day: care to produce a study or any hard scientific or quantitative data on which you base your prediction? After all, my “prediction” isn’t much of a stretch, considering how home prices have historically (over long periods of time) only kept pace with [wage] inflation…hence I referenced the 300+ year Holland home price study. Professor Robert Shiller’s work demonstrates the same phenomenon here in the U.S.

17. Hysteresis Follow Befriend (2) 14 threads 648 comments

    30   2:11am Sun 11 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   he won't take you up on his bet. guys like this don't have much going on in real life and pumped themselves up online. if he met you, the jig would be up that he's got nothing going on. E-man says @ Quant, I am willing to make a bet with you. Tell us when this home will hit the mid $500k. The loser will have to take the winner and his/her spouse out to lunch or dinner at a restaurant of the winner’s choice. Are you up to the challenge and willing to put your $$ where your mouth is :-)? I was taught that it’s easier to make an enemy than a friend. It doesn’t hurt to have a new friend who is willing to admit that (s)he’s wrong at time

18. pkowen Follow Befriend 30 threads 555 comments San Carlos, CA

    31   10:31am Sun 11 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Quant HF Mgr says [..] I’m all for your prediction of the home being worth $50M some day: care to produce a study or any hard scientific or quantitative data on which you base your prediction? After all, my “prediction” isn’t much of a stretch, considering how home prices have historically (over long periods of time) only kept pace with [wage] inflation…hence I referenced the 300+ year Holland home price study. Professor Robert Shiller’s work demonstrates the same phenomenon here in the U.S. Did you all see the Shiller article today on NYT? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/11/business/economy/11view.html?ref=todayspaper I still think much of the bay area is way overpriced due to the cuckoo effect. I was hit pretty hard by Uncle Sam this weekend. No mortgage, no kids, no write-offs. So it does get one looking at making changes. Specifically, I am looking harder at buying. But short of moving to the dregs of the bay area or somewhere that's nice but too damn far away from work -- I doubt a reasonable option is going to pop up. I still refuse to pay $500k (or more) for a dump even if it means I don't get to itemize.

19. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    32   11:15am Sun 11 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   @ pkowen and Quant, I think you guys are comparing apples to oranges. This home is 2,650 sq.ft., not 1,500 sq.ft. Imagine if this home were listed for $700k, how many offers do you think they will get? The SF Bay Area has a lot of smart people; they're making good money, need the deductions, and don't want a long commute. So homes will always be expensive. I don't think home prices will go up in the near future, but I don't see them dropping another 30% from here. Remember the saying that 10% of the people own 80%+ of the wealth. That would only leave 20% for the rest of us. Also, 10% of the people in the Bay Area are millionares. 56% of the people in the Bay Area own their homes (ok, the banks own them). That's why when I look at the median household income and affordability, I only look at the upper 30% to 40% of the index. Hope that makes some sense for you guys.

20. pkowen Follow Befriend 30 threads 555 comments San Carlos, CA

    33   5:31pm Mon 12 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   @ e-man, yeah you make sense. I guess I missed the size of that house, given it looks so crappy in the pics. You are right, that's a lot of sqft (to be verified by buyer?). ;) It is the level of 'premium valuation' that I think is at question for me. The peninsula will definitely bear a premium for the foreseeable future. But how much? Houses I see here for $800k are literally $80k (at most) in my home state. Income in my CA zip is around $100k and in where I grew up, it's more like $40k. So, like I've said in the past there are a couple things I come back to again and again - 1) When most of the country is maybe 3x median income and (insert prime location here) house costs are 10x, seems like an unsustainable bubble. I'll grant a premium, but not that much. 2) This factor of desireability, where many want to move 'in' to the prime space (like where I lived in the upper west side NYC, or in this area parts of SF and places like Palo Alto, Woodside, Portola Valley) is hard to quantify. There are a lot of these people, but how many? I think of it as two bars on a chart. First, the number of people with the money and desire to move in to the prime area and who will therefore bid it up. They create an upward pressure that makes the median income less useful. They may have a bucket of cash but not that amazing of an income (previous house equity, parental loans, all the things we hear around here) The second bar on the chart is the number of 'desireable' properties in the prime area. I think both bars go up and down with market fluctuations. The question for me is (and this is really what I care about), what do I do about it? I have ranted a bit but I do not have hard feelings about all of this. I would *like* to find a good house (or condo, or really cool: a loft) near my work. I know that what a 'good house' means has to be much less here than in say, Detroit. I am a student of the market, and feel I have been correct to date in 'watching and waiting'. Next move? Not sure.

21. pkowen Follow Befriend 30 threads 555 comments San Carlos, CA

    34   5:48pm Mon 12 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   SF ace says median income in SFBA don’t mean anything to me, the income in the bay area is way too diverse to make any kind of meaningful conclusion. I honesty think you should throw out the top 10% and bottom 40% of salary to get a better idea of what people actually makes and can afford. I might also think about the 3X salary as well. It may work in Fresno, but every costs does not correlate to housing cost evenly. Yeah, well I am thinking about individual zip codes not the entire SFBA. In some areas of the 'greater' SFBA median income to house costs actually match pretty well. Medians may not mean much, but I believe they mean something. I agree it ain't Fresno. I have lived in 5 states, from small towns to medium and large cities (including NYC) and frankly this area correlates more closely to NYC than anything else.

22. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    35   8:44pm Mon 12 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   @ pkowen, A lot of old money in the above mentioned fortress areas. With the help of Prop 13, people leave their homes behind for their kids and grand kids when they pass away. I totally understand your frustration and some others on this board. May I ask which zip code are you looking to buy? Looking at your logo, are you a stock day trader?

23. pkowen Follow Befriend 30 threads 555 comments San Carlos, CA

    36   9:02pm Mon 12 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   E-man, yeah, I get it wrt the old money. Day trader? More like a decade trader! That's the Shiller chart. I tend to look basically from RWC to San Mateo. Or really anywhere within a decent commute of RWC, including by Caltrain. Sometimes I think of going up to SF ... This week I've browsed a bit in 95125 and 95112 because I used to live and work in those and feel I know them pretty well, and they are ok. I see you are in Milpitas.

24. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    37   10:00pm Mon 12 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   That's right. That's the irrational exuberance chart. Alright, I'll be on the look out. I've been talking to a guy that's buying bulk REO's in the Bay Area. If I come across some decent deals, I will post it on here. I don't buy them in the above-mentioned areas because they don't cash flow. Don't give up hope yet. On a side note, Goldman Sach trades have been treating me well. It looks like the stock is setting up a cup with handle, but in the last several days, there is lack of volume for it to break out above $180. Am I reading it correctly? If it broke out, would the next resistance be $193? I am still learning the art of trading. Thanks advance for the tips. Btw, I am not a day trader. HAPPY TRADING!

25. pkowen Follow Befriend 30 threads 555 comments San Carlos, CA

    38   4:02pm Tue 13 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   E-man, afraid I am not a good stock trading reference for reading the technicals. I generally stay away from financials. I know a bit about the tech industry, but I trade very little. I was one of those who just did the 401k and let that fill up on big cap mutuals over the years rather blindly, which was fine as everything went up. Now I am undoing the results of that laziness. I have been moving a little toward commodities ETFs - but I am definitely a long trader. I'll always take a good tip on property to check out! Thanks.

26. Nomograph Follow Befriend (1) 104 threads 2,851 comments

    39   4:12pm Tue 13 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Quant HF Mgr says What about the fact that the median is way out of reality with local incomes? Housing prices in well-established neighborhoods are NEVER in line with median incomes, nor do the need to be in order to have stable prices. Most of the people in that neighborhood have likely owned for many many years and have much lower payments than new buyers, if any at all. This fact highlights one of the benefits of buying: protection from inflation. If you expect a house in a desirable, well-established neighborhood to be in line with the median income for that neighborhood, you will be renting forever. It almost never happens. The only thing that matters is the median income of the buyer pool, since they are the "demand" side of the whole "suppy and demand" thing.

27. kentm Follow Befriend (1) 117 threads 971 comments

    40   3:09pm Mon 26 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   That was an informative post, thanks very much. (13 :-)

28. pkennedy Follow Befriend (8) 28 threads 1,342 comments Redwood City, CA

    41   4:05pm Mon 26 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Yes very informative, it basically debunks "fortress areas need to fall" that everyone talks about here. Many areas around here will never fall due to exactly what you stated. Places like palo alto, los gatos and others will remain high because they are very desirable.

29. Quant HF Mgr Follow Befriend 13 threads 37 comments

    42   6:26pm Mon 26 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   You guys should research what happened to Tokyo and other "very desirable" areas of Japan....60-80% reductions in price....20+ years later...no bounce. And that is on an island with very limited space... btw, no takers yet on the overpriced 233 Bay View POS....big surprise someone will likely roll in and buy it with a tax-payer back mortgage, and they'll put a whopping 3% down...also given to them by the gov't and taxpayers

30. pkennedy Follow Befriend (8) 28 threads 1,342 comments Redwood City, CA

    43   9:27pm Mon 26 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   He points to specific reasons why a small area of the city can maintain such high property values, and you cite one of the worlds largest cities as a counter example. The small area being described doesn't fall because it has a very small number of homes for sale per year. The people who live there have no interest in moving. The number for sale doesn't exceed the number of wealthy people coming into the city and/or building enough wealth to move into that area. Hence it's prices are supported by small customer base and smaller supply. These are nothing alike. If you don't understand, re-read his statements, they are very clear.

31. RogerD Follow Befriend 4 comments San Carlos, CA

    44   10:10pm Mon 26 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Yes it's overpriced by about $450,000 but it will sell for near asking, unfortunately. Only after interest rates start to rise will San Carlos property prices start softening.

32. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    45   11:07pm Mon 26 Apr 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Quant HF Mgr says You guys should research what happened to Tokyo and other “very desirable” areas of Japan….60-80% reductions in price….20+ years later…no bounce. And that is on an island with very limited space… btw, no takers yet on the overpriced 233 Bay View POS….big surprise someone will likely roll in and buy it with a tax-payer back mortgage, and they’ll put a whopping 3% down…also given to them by the gov’t and taxpayers Thank you for showing us your knowledge. You really have no clue what you're talking about. There is no such a thing as 3% down loan given by the gov't and taxpayers for this kind of property. The max limit is $729.5k. Yes, it is a POS, but still worth a half million dollars by your estimate. By your standard, the people that will buy this home must be idiots, and you're like so smart.

33. Quant HF Mgr Follow Befriend 13 threads 37 comments

    46   9:59pm Tue 4 May 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Still no action on this house....tick, tick, tick "New Aggressive Price"...lol

34. SFace Follow Befriend (2) 61 threads 1,307 comments Premium

    47   1:14am Sun 20 Jun 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   just want to to give some conclusions to these old topics. everyone was right that the property was gonna be low-balled. sold for 970K.

35. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    48   8:44am Sun 20 Jun 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   I was gonna look into this. Thanks for doing the homework. The way I see it is that the market is in the process of replacing qualified buyers from the wanna be qualified buyers during the boom years. Quant, are you still out there? The bomb just exploded at $970k. I would love to hear your take on this.

36. Quant HF Mgr Follow Befriend 13 threads 37 comments

    49   4:26pm Sun 20 Jun 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   My relatives paid $565 / sq ft at the peak of the bubble a stones throw away from 233 Bayview, which just sold for $366 / sq ft. That's a strong down trend and an ugly situation. Lots of people in the same situation up there who either won't fess up to it or don't understand how bad their situation actually is (my relatives are the latter). My calculations suggest their home will likely continue to depreciate until it is worth 31-39% off the peak price.

37. pkowen Follow Befriend 30 threads 555 comments San Carlos, CA

    50   4:47pm Mon 21 Jun 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Quant HF Mgr says My relatives paid $565 / sq ft at the peak of the bubble a stones throw away from 233 Bayview, which just sold for $366 / sq ft. That’s a strong down trend and an ugly situation. Lots of people in the same situation up there who either won’t fess up to it or don’t understand how bad their situation actually is (my relatives are the latter). My calculations suggest their home will likely continue to depreciate until it is worth 31-39% off the peak price. It's not ugly in my view at all, with regrets to your relatives. It's what needs to happen.

38. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,552 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    51   11:01pm Mon 21 Jun 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Quant HF Mgr says My relatives paid $565 / sq ft at the peak of the bubble a stones throw away from 233 Bayview, which just sold for $366 / sq ft. That’s a strong down trend and an ugly situation. Lots of people in the same situation up there who either won’t fess up to it or don’t understand how bad their situation actually is (my relatives are the latter). My calculations suggest their home will likely continue to depreciate until it is worth 31-39% off the peak price. I don't think it's fair comparing the price per square foot between a 2,650 square foot home to a 1,700 square foot home. The land alone is worth more than 1/2 of the value. The other half is improvements. Also, this home is really run down comparing to your relatives. Anyways, I think your relatives are down about 15% to 17%. If they put 20% down, there is no incentive for them to walk at this time. I like pkowen's perpective "It’s not ugly in my view at all, with regrets to your relatives. It’s what needs to happen."

39. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    52   12:18pm Tue 22 Jun 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   E-man says I like pkowen’s perpective “It’s not ugly in my view at all, with regrets to your relatives. It’s what needs to happen.” Agreed. I would add it was just plain stupidity and arrogance of buyers as prices skyrocketed to become cheerturds.

40. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    53   12:42pm Tue 22 Jun 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   pkennedy says Yes very informative, it basically debunks “fortress areas need to fall” that everyone talks about here. Many areas around here will never fall due to exactly what you stated. Places like palo alto, los gatos and others will remain high because they are very desirable. http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news_features/real_estate/fall2000/2000_09_22.trends.php "No one wants to recognize it, but between 1989 and 1992, prices dropped 30 to 40 percent. There's no question that could happen again. Everything has a cycle and real estate is no exception. It's foolish to think prices will go up forever. In the longer term they will, if you can weather the downturns in between. There's no way to know," Dancer said. So what makes PA or LG imune to price declines? The majority of the price inflation comes form the free wheeling stock options of 1999. Take away IPOs and stock options what do you have left to support these prices. There is very little to support these prices. Desirabilty means very little.

« First     « Previous comments