Double Dip


By HousingBoom   Follow   Mon, 4 Oct 2010, 11:07pm   24,257 views   540 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 21-60 of 540     Next »     Last »     See most liked comments

  1. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 comments
    47 male
    Lafayette, CA
    Premium

    21   10:25pm Tue 5 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected  

    gameisrigged says

    You’re taking that chart and starting the bubble 1990? By that warped logic, why not say the bubble started in 1975? You can see that the graph goes consistently upward from 1975 until 2000. So instead of that silliness, why don’t we actually look at the boom and bust, as I said? As you can see, there is a reasonably symmetrical inverted “V” shape. You want to count everything BEFORE that and claim it’s not symmetrical? Be my guest. Don’t expect anyone to take you seriously. Do you know what “symmetrical” means?

    Yeah, except it doesn't and the chart being "symmetrical" hasn't the slightest thing to do with what the conversation was about.

    From 1986 to 1991 the NAS gain was about 0%. From 1991 to 1995 there's a 100% gain. From 1995 to 1998 there's another 100% gain. From 1998 to 1999 there's another 100% gain.

    Clearly to anyone not blinded by an agenda, 1991 to 2000 was a 10-year bull market. 2000 through 2002 was a 3-year bear market. My POINT in posting all these facts is that the real estate bubble was ALSO a 10-year bull market and 2006 to 2009 was ALSO a 3-year bear market. Ultimately I was responding to bubblesitter, who thought that a 3-correction after a 10-year run wasn't enough.

    Not only is it enough, it's almost ALWAYS what happens no matter what market bubble you're studying.

  2. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 comments
    47 male
    Lafayette, CA
    Premium

    22   10:38pm Tue 5 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected  

    10-year bull market bubble starting in late 1920 and peaking in late 1929 followed by a 3-year bear market.

    graph

  3. seaside


    Follow
    Befriend (3)
    34 threads
    697 comments
    Alexandria, VA

    23   11:16pm Tue 5 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2010/10/05/n_whitney_banks_housing.cnnmoney/

    There's some mention at the end about possibility of double dip in housing sector.
    Some of you don't like whitney, I know, I know. I am posting this because of the other lady. :P

  4. thomas.wong1986


    Follow
    Befriend
    16 threads
    4,424 comments

    24   11:35pm Tue 5 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    iwog says

    Funny how San Francisco and California in general are the strongest markets in the country according to Case-Shiller during the last 16 months.
    Did they not get your memo?

    LOL! not to be found in South Bay! We have a long way to go...

    Property History for 1251 BIG TALK Ct

    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/1251-Big-Talk-Ct-95120/home/931773

    Date Event Price Appreciation Source

    Sep 10, 2010 Price Changed $798,950 -- MLSListings #81032026
    Aug 02, 2010 Price Changed $825,000 -- MLSListings #81032026
    Jul 23, 2010 Price Changed $870,000 -- MLSListings #81032026
    Jul 21, 2010 Price Changed $970,000 -- MLSListings #81032026
    Jun 28, 2010 Listed $900,000 -- MLSListings #81032026
    Sep 01, 2005 Sold (Public Records) $100,000 -- Public Records

  5. thomas.wong1986


    Follow
    Befriend
    16 threads
    4,424 comments

    25   11:43pm Tue 5 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    This one didnt get the memo either...for a 3000 sq ft home its worth $600K.

    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/6528-Leyland-Park-Dr-95120/home/1311146

    Property History for 6528 LEYLAND PARK Dr
    Date Event Price Appreciation Source
    Oct 01, 2010 Price Changed $900,000 -- MLSListings #81019940
    Sep 19, 2010 Price Changed $925,000 -- MLSListings #81019940
    Sep 09, 2010 Price Changed $950,000 -- MLSListings #81019940
    Sep 03, 2010 Price Changed $975,000 -- MLSListings #81019940
    Aug 20, 2010 Relisted -- --
    May 27, 2010 Delisted -- --
    May 21, 2010 Price Changed $995,000 -- MLSListings #81019940
    Apr 23, 2010 Listed $1,025,000 -- MLSListings #81019940
    Apr 23, 2010 Delisted -- --
    Jan 21, 2010 Price Changed -- --
    Jan 11, 2010 Listed -- --
    Mar 15, 2007 Sold (Public Records) $1,311,500 10.4%/yr Public Records
    Mar 02, 2007 Delisted -- --
    Feb 22, 2007 Listed ** --
    Sep 03, 1997 Sold (Public Records) $509,000 -- Public Records

  6. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 comments
    47 male
    Lafayette, CA
    Premium

    26   11:44pm Tue 5 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected  

    thomas.wong1986 says

    LOL! not to be found in South Bay! We have a long way to go…

    Price changes have absolutely no relevance to anything. The only way to gauge prices is an index or a survey based on actual sales.

  7. thomas.wong1986


    Follow
    Befriend
    16 threads
    4,424 comments

    27   11:50pm Tue 5 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

    It aint selling!

  8. gameisrigged


    Follow
    Befriend
    3 threads
    617 comments

    28   11:52pm Tue 5 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    iwog says

    gameisrigged says

    You’re taking that chart and starting the bubble 1990? By that warped logic, why not say the bubble started in 1975? You can see that the graph goes consistently upward from 1975 until 2000. So instead of that silliness, why don’t we actually look at the boom and bust, as I said? As you can see, there is a reasonably symmetrical inverted “V” shape. You want to count everything BEFORE that and claim it’s not symmetrical? Be my guest. Don’t expect anyone to take you seriously. Do you know what “symmetrical” means?

    Yeah, except it doesn’t and the chart being “symmetrical” hasn’t the slightest thing to do with what the conversation was about.

    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.

    From 1986 to 1991 the NAS gain was about 0%. From 1991 to 1995 there’s a 100% gain. From 1995 to 1998 there’s another 100% gain. From 1998 to 1999 there’s another 100% gain.

    Oooh, we can cherry pick dates. Aren't we clever?

    Clearly to anyone not blinded by an agenda, 1991 to 2000 was a 10-year bull market. 2000 through 2002 was a 3-year bear market. My POINT in posting all these facts is that the real estate bubble was ALSO a 10-year bull market and 2006 to 2009 was ALSO a 3-year bear market. Ultimately I was responding to bubblesitter, who thought that a 3-correction after a 10-year run wasn’t enough.
    Not only is it enough, it’s almost ALWAYS what happens no matter what market bubble you’re studying.

    That's utter b.s. That is NOTHING like any of the housing bubble/bust cycles.

    Look at the 1970s and 1980s bubbles. They go up, then come down in roughly the same amount of time. Where's this alleged 10 year up and 3 year down pattern? I don't see it. In fact, it looks like they actually took LONGER to deflate than they took to inflate. Now look at the current bubble. It goes up for about 9 years, then starts going down at roughly the same rate, then has a very odd looking little uptick, which just happens to coincide with the federal government pumping trillions of dollars into the housing market and making over 90% of all new home loans. Sorry, but your analysis does not cut it.

  9. tatupu70


    Follow
    Befriend (3)
    23 threads
    8,036 comments

    29   7:03am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  
  10. mthom


    Follow
    Befriend
    2 threads
    139 comments

    30   7:12am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    thomas.wong1986 says

    This one didnt get the memo either…for a 3000 sq ft home its worth $600K.
    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/6528-Leyland-Park-Dr-95120/home/1311146
    Property History for 6528 LEYLAND PARK Dr
    Date Event Price Appreciation Source
    Oct 01, 2010 Price Changed $900,000 — MLSListings #81019940
    Sep 19, 2010 Price Changed $925,000 — MLSListings #81019940
    Sep 09, 2010 Price Changed $950,000 — MLSListings #81019940
    Sep 03, 2010 Price Changed $975,000 — MLSListings #81019940
    Aug 20, 2010 Relisted — —
    May 27, 2010 Delisted — —
    May 21, 2010 Price Changed $995,000 — MLSListings #81019940
    Apr 23, 2010 Listed $1,025,000 — MLSListings #81019940
    Apr 23, 2010 Delisted — —
    Jan 21, 2010 Price Changed — —
    Jan 11, 2010 Listed — —
    Mar 15, 2007 Sold (Public Records) $1,311,500 10.4%/yr Public Records
    Mar 02, 2007 Delisted — —
    Feb 22, 2007 Listed ** —
    Sep 03, 1997 Sold (Public Records) $509,000 — Public Records

    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.

  11. bubblesitter


    Follow
    Befriend (5)
    10 threads
    3,046 comments

    31   7:13am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    thomas.wong1986 says

    iwog says

    People who bought real estate in 2009 will be well rewarded even if the 2006 peak doesn’t come back for decades

    Or as the NAR would say, buy now or be priced out forever.

    ...or who did not buy in 2009 missed the chance to build equity(negative).

  12. justme


    Follow
    Befriend (2)
    36 threads
    3,913 comments

    32   7:48am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    iwog says

    10-year bull markets ending with 3 year bear markets include the Great Depression, (late 1929 to late 1932) the tech market boom, (2000 to late 2002) and pretty much every other market example in the recorded history of mankind.

    Uh, except not so much.

    IF we are interested in stock market indices and their bubble and post-bubble behavior, Japan should be one of the major reference points. I think it is fair to say that they experienced the mother of all double dips, so far. In fact, it has been a succession of progressive dips, one worse than the other, for 20 years now. So there goes 10+3 theory down the drain.

    This also brings up the a larger question: Why on earth on earth is iwog using select stock market indices to argue that there will be no double dip in housing? And then turning it into a discussion of what STOCK markets bubbles "usually" look or do not like? I think it is more indicative of iwog's propensity to grasp for data, any data, that can somehow and disingenuously be contorted into supporting one of his usual arguments.

    Do not forget: This is about the *housing* market. If we are looking for models of what might happen here, we should again look to the Japan housing market 1980-2010, and not the stock market. Japan has been in a long and painful decline, even with very extensive support from Bank of Japan.

    I'm sure iwog will again latch onto some tangent and try his best to steer this discussion into the weeds again. You've been warned.

    This is a historical plot of the Nikkei 225 index

    Let me summarize:

    1. stock market bubbles don't always look like 10+3

    2. it is important to look at the relevant stock market, if you insist on correlating anyway

    3. it isn't stock bubbles we are looking at, it is HOUSING bubbles.

    NEXT!

  13. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 comments
    47 male
    Lafayette, CA
    Premium

    33   8:02am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected  

    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.

  14. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 comments
    47 male
    Lafayette, CA
    Premium

    34   8:07am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected  

    justme says

    1. stock market bubbles don’t always look like 10+3

    2. it is important to look at the relevant stock market, if you insist on correlating anyway

    3. it isn’t stock bubbles we are looking at, it is HOUSING bubbles.

    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.

    2. Apparently the way you define "relevant stock market" is "Japan". See #1.

    3. The oil bubble conforms to the 10/3 rule. The real estate bubble has ALREADY conformed to the 10/3 rule with prices turning right on schedule in 2009. It's hilarious to me that you argue against something that has already happened.

  15. RayAmerica


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

    35   8:43am Wed 6 Oct 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    iwog says

    My POINT in posting all these facts is that the real estate bubble was ALSO a 10-year bull market and 2006 to 2009 was ALSO a 3-year bear market. Ultimately I was responding to bubblesitter, who thought that a 3-correction after a 10-year run wasn’t enough.
    Not only is it enough, it’s almost ALWAYS what happens no matter what market bubble you’re studying.

    A completely false statement. First, the bear market in residential real estate continues. The next bubble to burst will be commercial when an enormous amount of loans begin to reset in 2011, which will put further pressure on the credit markets. Second, Iwog repeats this nonsense that a correction after a market bubble "always lasts 3 years." This is total, absolute nonsense. The stock market bubble and subsequent crash of 1929 did not recover to its levels of '29 until the bid 1950's. Stocks remained consistently stagnant for nearly two decades after the crash. After the collapse of the NASDAQ it has been stagnant there as well. Yet, Iwog insists his silly theory is written in stone that for every bubble the "10/3" rule applies.

    Talk about Voodoo Economics. Iwog, think before you post these silly observations of yours. Maybe, just maybe, you'll get someone to take you seriously.

  16. justme


    Follow
    Befriend (2)
    36 threads
    3,913 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?

  17. bubblesitter


    Follow
    Befriend (5)
    10 threads
    3,046 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..

  18. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 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?

  19. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 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.

  20. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 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.

  21. bubblesitter


    Follow
    Befriend (5)
    10 threads
    3,046 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.

  22. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 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

  23. 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.

  24. thomas.wong1986


    Follow
    Befriend
    16 threads
    4,424 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.

  25. thomas.wong1986


    Follow
    Befriend
    16 threads
    4,424 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!

  26. 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??

  27. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 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.

  28. 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.

  29. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 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.

  30. TechGromit


    Follow
    Befriend (6)
    85 threads
    979 comments
    45 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.

  31. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 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.

    dog

  32. 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.

  33. TechGromit


    Follow
    Befriend (6)
    85 threads
    979 comments
    45 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.

  34. TechGromit


    Follow
    Befriend (6)
    85 threads
    979 comments
    45 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.

  35. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 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".

  36. 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?

  37. TechGromit


    Follow
    Befriend (6)
    85 threads
    979 comments
    45 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.

  38. 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.

  39. 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?

  40. iwog


    Follow
    Befriend (46)
    371 threads
    19,647 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.

« First     « Previous comments     Next comments »     Last »

HousingBoom is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email
Home   Tips and Tricks   Questions or suggestions? Mail p@patrick.net   Thank you for your kind donations

Page took 188 milliseconds to create.