Patrick.net

Double Dip

By HousingBoom   Follow   Mon, 4 Oct 2010, 11:07pm   23,495 views   555 comments
Watch (3)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

So did the double dip in housing begin? Why is everyone still bullish on housing?

« First     « Previous     Viewing Comments 36-75 of 555     Next »     Last »     See most liked comments

1. justme Follow Befriend (2) 33 threads 3,497 comments

   36   8:57am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says As for parallels, there aren’t any See what I mean, now iwog wants to misdirect into discussing whether Japan is similar to the US, whereas the real question was whether stock markets bubbles have the same shape as housing market bubbles, and also whether all stock market bubbles look the same. He says yes, I say no. Case in point: Japan!! iwog says and pretty much every other market example in the recorded history of mankind. And now suddenly Japan does not qualify? What is iwog's next misdirection going to be?

2. bubblesitter Follow Befriend (5) 10 threads 2,329 comments

   37   9:30am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   justme says What is iwog’s next misdirection going to be? I like his spins for amusement. I can't imagine this blog could be lively without his inputs..

3. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   38   9:31am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   justme says See what I mean, now iwog wants to misdirect into discussing whether Japan is similar to the US, whereas the real question was whether stock markets bubbles have the same shape as housing market bubbles Nope, you're absolutely wrong. You obviously didn't read the thread. Your straw man has nothing to do with any point I made. My reply was to this: bubblesitter says What amuses me as that correction started in 2006-2007 and people(existing homeowners) were calling bottom already in 2009. Like 10 years of crazy appreciation was okay but 2 years into down turn and we are fine….it is going to start recover now… After correcting BM that the bear market in housing lasted 3 years instead of 2, I then went on to prove that 10 year bull markets followed by 3 year bear markets are quite common. He should NOT assume that because a bull market lasts 10 years, that the bear market following it will be just as long. Now please explain to me how Japan has any relevance to my point whatsoever?

4. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   39   9:32am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   justme says And now suddenly Japan does not qualify? Japan is an exception and was caused by circumstances that do not apply to the United States.

5. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   40   9:35am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   RayAmerica says the bear market in residential real estate continues. Only if you pretend that up actually means down.

6. bubblesitter Follow Befriend (5) 10 threads 2,329 comments

   41   9:51am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says justme says See what I mean, now iwog wants to misdirect into discussing whether Japan is similar to the US, whereas the real question was whether stock markets bubbles have the same shape as housing market bubbles Nope, you’re absolutely wrong. You obviously didn’t read the thread. Your straw man has nothing to do with any point I made. My reply was to this: bubblesitter says What amuses me as that correction started in 2006-2007 and people(existing homeowners) were calling bottom already in 2009. Like 10 years of crazy appreciation was okay but 2 years into down turn and we are fine….it is going to start recover now… After correcting BM that the bear market in housing lasted 3 years instead of 2, I then went on to prove that 10 year bull markets followed by 3 year bear markets are quite common. He should NOT assume that because a bull market lasts 10 years, that the bear market following it will be just as long. Now please explain to me how Japan has any relevance to my point whatsoever? Look at Thomas's posting. Home price correction in CA and BA is still on going. Look at all the MLS history of a home prices on redfin. Just because banks can't clear the backlog of inventory doesn't mean house prices have bottomed. There was no bottom in 2009.

7. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   42   10:11am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   bubblesitter says Look at Thomas’s posting. Home price correction in CA and BA is still on going. Look at all the MLS history of a home prices on redfin. Just because banks can’t clear the backlog of inventory doesn’t mean house prices have bottomed. There was no bottom in 2009. Redfin is reporting prices are up since 2009. Case-Shiller is reporting prices are up since 2009. Everyone is reporting prices are up since 2009. There's no correction still going on for the greater Bay Area and there hasn't been since 1st quarter 2009. The BEST you can do is to say that the market has been flat for a year and a half. Furthermore Redfin is reporting that asking prices have increased since early August and have not stopped climbing. Asking prices lead sales prices by about 2-3 months. This means that 2011 is shaping up to exceed 2009 and 2010 highs. http://www.redfin.com/city/17151/CA/San-Francisco

8. mthom Follow Befriend 2 threads 139 comments

   43   11:22am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   bubblesitter says Look at Thomas’s posting. Home price correction in CA and BA is still on going. Look at all the MLS history of a home prices on redfin. Just because banks can’t clear the backlog of inventory doesn’t mean house prices have bottomed. There was no bottom in 2009. Thomas' posting prove nothing. If I buy a house for $500k and then list it for $1M and it doesn't sell, then drop the price to $900k or even to $800k and it sells, the price still went up. Just because they are lowering their list price doesn't mean prices are dropping overall. The same house could have been listed at $600k and then sold for $700k - that wouldn't necessarily mean prices are going up. You can't tell anything from the listing histories other than some people are pricing things higher than they should.

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

   44   11:28am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says 1. Japan is not relevant to our economy. The differences between the US economy and the economy in Japan are too numerous to list. As for parallels, there aren’t any. The only support you’re willing to give for using Japan is that it fits your bias. I wish Jp wasnt relevant in the Global economy, but they are viral in all industries. Even though their economy is seen weak with deflation, they continue to dominate in High Tech industries competing for US company revenues for the the past 25 years by cutting prices which slice into our margins. It hasnt changed much.

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

    45   11:34am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   mthom says You disprove your own point with these posts Thomas. Yes, in your mind it is worth $600k, but it’s listed at $900k. Fine, they’ve been dropping their price, but you don’t know where it will end up selling. It’s not gonna be $600k though. And it certainly doesn’t seem to be crashing down to the 97 price of $509k. Your in for a shocker if you think prices will not head down to 97+inflation. Fact is we may even go down further to nominal 97 prices. Yes! $509K and less... There were many home like this 3000 sq ft $1-1.5M which sold at peak years and will be underwater for many years. Many will sell at a loss, and that will push lower tier homes even lower for years to come. PS. Dont tell the owner of the home in the link prices are going higher!

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

    46   12:00pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   'The greater bay area' includes a lot of places that have crashed hugely - but also areas that have only begun. "Asking prices" only indicates what sellers are hoping to sell for, sale to list % is trending down again. Also - There were 811 NoDs in San Mateo County in September, 2010. There were 911 in August. There were 610 in July. 807 in June. 813 in May. 840 in April. 1021 in March. That's a lot of defaults in "rich" San Mateo County. What do you think all these defaults (on top of existing foreclosures and bank owned) will do to the market??

12. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    47   12:13pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   thomas.wong1986 says iwog says 1. Japan is not relevant to our economy. The differences between the US economy and the economy in Japan are too numerous to list. As for parallels, there aren’t any. The only support you’re willing to give for using Japan is that it fits your bias. I wish Jp wasnt relevant in the Global economy, but they are viral in all industries. Even though their economy is seen weak with deflation, they continue to dominate in High Tech industries competing for US company revenues for the the past 25 years by cutting prices which slice into our margins. It hasnt changed much. That wasn't the context I was using. I said Japan's economy isn't relevant to ours with respect to modeling our market movements after theirs. Unless there's a reason not to, I think using past United States markets to predict future United States markets is the best way to tell the future. Obviously all large nations like Japan are relevant to the functioning of our economy.

13. gameisrigged Follow Befriend 3 threads 617 comments

    48   12:46pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says gameisrigged says You didn’t say it had nothing to do with the conversation, you said it was “incorrect”. It is not incorrect, it is symmetrical - that is if you’d take your head out of your ass and actually LOOK at the fucking chart. If you think that 10 years of increase followed by 3 years of decrease is symmetrical, I can’t help you. It ALWAYS increases over time, because inflation exists, idiot. By your logic, we could start at the very first day of recorded data and say that everything up to 2000 was part of the "bubble". I see you still haven't actually LOOKED at the shape of the graph.

14. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    49   12:53pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   gameisrigged says It ALWAYS increases over time, because inflation exists, idiot. By your logic, we could start at the very first day of recorded data and say that everything up to 2000 was part of the “bubble”. I see you still haven’t actually LOOKED at the shape of the graph. You're absolutely correct sir!!!!!! Inflation DOES exist. That's probably why I went to GREAT LENGTHS to tell you that the bull market from late 1991 to 2000 exceeded inflation by a gigantic amount starting from the very first year. Contrary to your other assertion, that we could start from any point in history and call it a bull market, you probably should do further research to find out exactly what those terms mean because you're totally wrong.

15. TechGromit Follow Befriend (6) 85 threads 971 comments 44 male Egg Harbor City, NJ

    50   1:05pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Hey this topic has nothing to do with Ice Cream, I feel so cheated.

16. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    51   1:08pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   TechGromit says Hey this topic has nothing to do with Ice Cream, I feel so cheated.

17. gameisrigged Follow Befriend 3 threads 617 comments

    52   1:10pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says gameisrigged says It ALWAYS increases over time, because inflation exists, idiot. By your logic, we could start at the very first day of recorded data and say that everything up to 2000 was part of the “bubble”. I see you still haven’t actually LOOKED at the shape of the graph. You’re absolutely correct sir!!!!!! Inflation DOES exist. That’s probably why I went to GREAT LENGTHS to tell you that the bull market from late 1991 to 2000 exceeded inflation by a gigantic amount starting from the very first year. Contrary to your other assertion, that we could start from any point in history and call it a bull market, you probably should do further research to find out exactly what those terms mean because you’re totally wrong. Your cherry-picked starting and stopping points notwithstanding, the general shape of the curve is not that much different in the 1980s than it is in the 1990s. Besides which, none of this has a whole hell of a lot to do with the HOUSING MARKET.

18. TechGromit Follow Befriend (6) 85 threads 971 comments 44 male Egg Harbor City, NJ

    53   1:16pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   EastCoastBubbleBoy says Vain - 1) coming up with $90k - that’s the hard part. This may be too personal of a question, but since we only know by your Alias there's no harm in asking. You been a member of this website since before I joined in 2006. How much have you saved towards a down payment to buy a house.

19. TechGromit Follow Befriend (6) 85 threads 971 comments 44 male Egg Harbor City, NJ

    54   1:19pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   seaside says Vain, I think current DTI is 0.31 and 0.43 front and back. So, do your math again with that ratio, and see if bank will give 65Kers 360K loan at 30yrs/4.3%. I can hardly think so. If I were one of those 65K’er, I wouldn’t take 360K loan even if I could. 5400 gross, 3500 or so net/mo, and take 1800/mo for mortgage gives you 1700/mo in your hands. 1700/mo for prop tax, HOA if any, util, auto loan, credit card payments, food, cloth, health care, expenses for the kids, transportation, maintenance and other fees in place like SF? You gotta think twice about it before taking it. Last year me and my wife's combined pre-tax income was 112k and money is tight with paying our 340k 5% mortgage. (and no HOA). I don't think it's possible for someone to pay a 360k loan at 4.3% earning only 65k.

20. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    55   1:21pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   gameisrigged says Your cherry-picked starting and stopping points notwithstanding, the general shape of the curve is not that much different in the 1980s than it is in the 1990s. Besides which, none of this has a whole hell of a lot to do with the HOUSING MARKET. All bubbles are fueled by a speculative frenzy and driven by the media. It doesn't matter if it's real estate or beanie babies. Ignoring this fact so you can be "right" about the shape of a graph is absurd. There is no precedent in American history for a bear market lasting 10 years after a speculative bubble, and that includes the Great Depression. Those of you predicting falling real estate values to 2014 are the ones claiming "everything is different this time".

21. RayAmerica Follow Befriend (9) 120 threads 2,591 comments Burbank, CA

    56   1:24pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says All bubbles are fueled by a speculative frenzy and driven by the media. iwog says beanie babies Do you have any data as to when the beanie baby market bottomed out?

22. TechGromit Follow Befriend (6) 85 threads 971 comments 44 male Egg Harbor City, NJ

    57   1:26pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says Price changes have absolutely no relevance to anything. The only way to gauge prices is an index or a survey based on actual sales. Iwog's right, just look at Ebay for proof of this. You should see what people are asking for some of there crap they are selling, but when I'm doing research to how to properly price an item I look at sales, not inflated dream prices.

23. RayAmerica Follow Befriend (9) 120 threads 2,591 comments Burbank, CA

    58   1:27pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says There is no precedent in American history for a bear market lasting 10 years after a speculative bubble, and that includes the Great Depression. Don't anyone tell Iwog that it took 25 years for the stock market to reclaim the value it lost in the crash of 1929.

24. RayAmerica Follow Befriend (9) 120 threads 2,591 comments Burbank, CA

    59   1:28pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   I'm beginning to believe Iwog is an expert on the Beanie Baby Market. Any advice as to where we go from here Iwog?

25. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    60   1:28pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   RayAmerica says iwog says There is no precedent in American history for a bear market lasting 10 years after a speculative bubble, and that includes the Great Depression. Don’t anyone tell Iwog that it took 25 years for the stock market to reclaim the value it lost in the crash of 1929. The bear market lasted 3 years after the crash of 1929. From 1933 onward it was a bull market until 1937 nearly quadrupling in price. It's tedious having to explain these simple concepts to you.

26. RayAmerica Follow Befriend (9) 120 threads 2,591 comments Burbank, CA

    61   1:32pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says The bear market lasted 3 years after the crash of 1929. From 1933 onward it was a bull market until 1937 nearly quadrupling in price. What you are referring to is the Sucker's Rally that collapsed again back to 1929 levels. Stick to Beanie Babies. I'm sure you've got that market completely figured out.

27. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    62   1:36pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   RayAmerica says You are a total fraud. What you are referring to is the Sucker’s Rally that collapsed again back to 1929 levels. Stick to Beanie Babies. I’m sure you’ve got that market completely figured out. You are so confused and full of misinformation I don't even know where to start.

28. RayAmerica Follow Befriend (9) 120 threads 2,591 comments Burbank, CA

    63   1:43pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Your graph proves my point! The market remained stagnant for the most part and did not recover its value until the mid 1950s. Note the Sucker's Rally of '33 .... just as I stated. By the way, where's your Beanie Baby graph?

29. TechGromit Follow Befriend (6) 85 threads 971 comments 44 male Egg Harbor City, NJ

    64   1:56pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   RayAmerica says Do you have any data as to when the beanie baby market bottomed out? The Beanie babies product line stated in 1994, and the market peaked in 1998. The company noticed that when product lines were retired and new product lines introduced, sales spiked. So they continually retired and introduced new product lines. So they decided that if they stated if they announced that they would stop making Beanie Babies on December 31, 1999, (no reason was given) it would spark a feeding frenzy, but it had the opposite effect. People began to lose interest and the market started to slide. They later "changed" there mind about ending production, but once the slide began it just accelerated.

30. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    65   2:11pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   RayAmerica says Your graph proves my point! The market remained stagnant for the most part and did not recover its value until the mid 1950s. Note the Sucker’s Rally of ‘33 …. just as I stated. By the way, where’s your Beanie Baby graph? That's really odd!!! I thought your point was that there was a sucker rally from 1933 to 1937 before prices declined back to 1929. Hmmmmm........I'm almost sure that's what you wrote.

31. RayAmerica Follow Befriend (9) 120 threads 2,591 comments Burbank, CA

    66   2:22pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Tech .... are you sure you aren't describing the housing market? LOL

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

    67   2:26pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   RayAmerica says Tech …. are you sure you aren’t describing the housing market? LOL Of course, sort like they stopped making Eichler homes.

33. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,612 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    68   2:27pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   iwog says gameisrigged says Your cherry-picked starting and stopping points notwithstanding, the general shape of the curve is not that much different in the 1980s than it is in the 1990s. Besides which, none of this has a whole hell of a lot to do with the HOUSING MARKET. All bubbles are fueled by a speculative frenzy and driven by the media. It doesn’t matter if it’s real estate or beanie babies. Ignoring this fact so you can be “right” about the shape of a graph is absurd. There is no precedent in American history for a bear market lasting 10 years after a speculative bubble, and that includes the Great Depression. Those of you predicting falling real estate values to 2014 are the ones claiming “everything is different this time”. Iwog, Sometimes I feel like pounding you in the head so you can snap out of it. If my memory serves me correct, you wrote in another thread, and I quote or something close to this: "that twit doesn't know what he's talking about." when he was debating with Tatupu70. And here you are arguing with him. Hello? Anybody home? LOL. In regards to RayAmerica, I believe he meant he took 25 years for the stock maket to get back to 1929 high. However, he didn't acknowledge the fact that if you bought in 1932, you'd been handsomely rewarded. Just my 2 cents :o)

34. RayAmerica Follow Befriend (9) 120 threads 2,591 comments Burbank, CA

    69   2:29pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   E-man says However, he didn’t acknowledge the fact that if you bought in 1932, you’d been handsomely rewarded. Some people don't have 25 years to be rewarded for their investment efforts. My point is that the stock market took that much time to recover from the crash of '29.

35. RayAmerica Follow Befriend (9) 120 threads 2,591 comments Burbank, CA

    70   2:30pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   thomas.wong1986 says Of course, sort like they stopped making Eichler homes. ..... or McMansions with zero down and interest only?

36. tatupu70 Follow Befriend (3) 15 threads 5,718 comments

    71   2:35pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   RayAmerica says E-man says However, he didn’t acknowledge the fact that if you bought in 1932, you’d been handsomely rewarded. Some people don’t have 25 years to be rewarded for their investment efforts. My point is that the stock market took that much time to recover from the crash of ‘29. Looks to me like you'd be pretty happy after 5 years. 400% if I'm reading that correctly. I'd take that return...

37. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,612 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    72   2:35pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   RayAmerica says E-man says However, he didn’t acknowledge the fact that if you bought in 1932, you’d been handsomely rewarded. Some people don’t have 25 years to be rewarded for their investment efforts. My point is that the stock market took that much time to recover from the crash of ‘29. But if you bought in 1932, you would have been handsomely rewarded. It's kind of similar to the housing market. The peak was 2006. If you bought RIGHT in 2009, you'd probably be very happy looking back in 10 years, wouldn't you say? Of course, only time will tell.

38. E-man Follow Befriend (31) 34 threads 2,612 comments San Jose, CA Premium

    73   2:37pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   tatupu70 says RayAmerica says E-man says However, he didn’t acknowledge the fact that if you bought in 1932, you’d been handsomely rewarded. Some people don’t have 25 years to be rewarded for their investment efforts. My point is that the stock market took that much time to recover from the crash of ‘29. Looks to me like you’d be pretty happy after 5 years. 400% if I’m reading that correctly. I’d take that return… I believe it's about a 300% return in 5 years. LOL.

39. RayAmerica Follow Befriend (9) 120 threads 2,591 comments Burbank, CA

    74   2:37pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   tatupu70 says Looks to me like you’d be pretty happy after 5 years. 400% if I’m reading that correctly. I’d take that return… Don't forget you're looking at the DOW .... 30 stocks. There are an abundance of losers even in bull markets, so buying in '32 depends on an awful lot of variables.

40. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    75   2:56pm Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   E-man says Sometimes I feel like pounding you in the head so you can snap out of it. If my memory serves me correct, you wrote in another thread, and I quote or something close to this: “that twit doesn’t know what he’s talking about.” when he was debating with Tatupu70. And here you are arguing with him. Hello? Anybody home? LOL. I need a 12-step program for sure.

« First     « Previous comments     Next comments »     Last »