« previous   misc   next »

Nice little house in South Pasadena...


By PasadenaNative   Follow   Tue, 22 Feb 2011, 10:55am PST   5,817 views   99 comments
Watch (4)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

This one is about four blocks from me. Looks like they are asking less than they paid for it in 2006. I've always loved this house, it has a beautiful tree in the front.
http://www.redfin.com/CA/South-Pasadena/1511-Marengo-Ave-91030/home/7007773

« First     « Previous     Comments 60-99 of 99     Last »

tatupu70   Sun, 6 Mar 2011, 9:49am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 60

dunnross says

If they don’t, then I am right, and you are wrong.

Do private schools charge more to parents of A students? Or do they give a discount to C students?

If they don't then I am right and you are wrong.

dunnross   Sun, 6 Mar 2011, 10:02am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 61

tatupu70 says

Do private schools charge more to parents of A students? Or do they give a discount to C students?

You completely missed the point, tatapu. Public schools have no incentive for their students to do better, because their source of revenue is not linked to the actual student achievement (Bush's NCLB program tried to change this, but it failed, miserably). Private schools do, because if their students don't do well, their parents will pull them out, and take their money elsewhere. Hence, private schools have to compete with each other for the parent's money. Public schools don't compete with each other, because students don't have a choice which public school to attend. If they did, like children in Belgium do, for example, the level of public education would be highly superior in this state. In Belgium, children are not tied to a particular school, based on their particular street address. A given student in Belgium has a choice of 5-6 schools which they can attend, so schools compete with each other for that student's money.

SubOink   Sun, 6 Mar 2011, 10:10am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 62

Philistine says

Bogus. In Sherman Oaks you’ll spend far more than $1000k extra over renting a comparable house in a neighborhood with “amazing” public schools.

Dr. Housing Bubble’s statement is merely a call to live smarter, not poorer.

Depends on how many kids you have, right? If you have 3 kids in private school = $3000/month

That alone is more than my mortgage...

tatupu70   Sun, 6 Mar 2011, 12:24pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 63

dunnross says

You completely missed the point, tatapu

No I got your point. I was just showing you that it's ridiculous. Do you think most teachers went into that profession for the money? Obviously not. Money is not the only motivator. So, your entire premise is wrong....

dunnross   Sun, 6 Mar 2011, 12:46pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 64

tatupu70 says

Do you think most teachers went into that profession for the money?

Maybe the teachers don't, but the schools do. If the schools don't get their money, they will close, and there won't be any education. Unfortunately, for the children, the schools get their money according to attendance, and not according to academics. That's why no public school can compete with a private school or with a public school in Belgium.

tatupu70   Sun, 6 Mar 2011, 8:24pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 65

dunnross says

Maybe the teachers don’t, but the schools do. If the schools don’t get their money, they will close, and there won’t be any education. Unfortunately, for the children, the schools get their money according to attendance, and not according to academics. That’s why no public school can compete with a private school or with a public school in Belgium.

I understand your point, but your logic is flawed. You agree the teachers aren't motivated by money. And teachers have the largest impact on the performance and learning of a student (at school anyways. Home environment is obviously VERY important as well). Therefore, money isn't the driving force behind public school performance.

rpanic01   Sun, 6 Mar 2011, 9:41pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 66

The largest difference between public and private are parents not teachers, just like with the difference between a good and bad public school. With private I would think parents would be more involved since they are having to pay for it just like they would have to pay more mortgage to live near good public school. Just like anything else when people have skin in the game they tend to care more.

dunnross   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 1:25am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 67

tatupu70 says

. You agree the teachers aren’t motivated by money. And teachers have the largest impact on the performance and learning of a student (at school anyways. Home environment is obviously VERY important as well). Therefore, money isn’t the driving force behind public school performance.

Maybe teachers are not motivated by money. But they are motivated by having to keep their jobs in the first place. Money is what makes it possible.

tatupu70   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 4:24am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 68

dunnross says

tatupu70 says
. You agree the teachers aren’t motivated by money. And teachers have the largest impact on the performance and learning of a student (at school anyways. Home environment is obviously VERY important as well). Therefore, money isn’t the driving force behind public school performance.
Maybe teachers are not motivated by money. But they are motivated by having to keep their jobs in the first place. Money is what makes it possible.

Money makes everything possible. Not sure how they relates to your ridiculous assertion that the worst private school is better than the best public school.

Mark_LA   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 7:58am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 69

It took less than 2 weeks for this quaint little house in a great school district to sell...a lot cheaper than paying for private school for 2 kids at $40k/year.

I'm guessing it didn't sell for anywhere close to what all of you PermaRenters think it should sell for, and a lot closer to the list price:

dunnross says

2006 was a the peak of the bubble. They should be asking 1/4 of what they paid for it in 2006.

SubOink   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 12:52pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 70

Mark_LA says

It took less than 2 weeks for this quaint little house in a great school district to sell…a lot cheaper than paying for private school for 2 kids at $40k/year.
I’m guessing it didn’t sell for anywhere close to what all of you PermaRenters think it should sell for, and a lot closer to the list price:
dunnross says

2006 was a the peak of the bubble. They should be asking 1/4 of what they paid for it in 2006.

I am not surprised - the real world is quite different than depicted in this forum...

dodgerfanjohn   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 12:58pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 71

SubOink says

Mark_LA says


It took less than 2 weeks for this quaint little house in a great school district to sell…a lot cheaper than paying for private school for 2 kids at $40k/year.
I’m guessing it didn’t sell for anywhere close to what all of you PermaRenters think it should sell for, and a lot closer to the list price:
dunnross says

2006 was a the peak of the bubble. They should be asking 1/4 of what they paid for it in 2006.

I am not surprised - the real world is quite different than depicted in this forum…

LOL. IF it sold at or near list and IF it doesn't fall out of pending status(My money is on this LOL), I'd love to speak to the cross-eyed people who paid 2006 prices.

Specifically, I'd love to know if they bought so that their children(if any) can attend school there, as that seems to be an overriding concern of those posting here(and if a family of 3 or 4 is just fine with one bathing facility). I'd also LOVE to querry them as to how long they intend to reside there(I'm guessing less than 5 years).

709hannah   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 1:00pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 72

i think this was jack nance's home in pasadena that he was killed in by a serial killer...? he was in blue velvet....his body was discovered on the bathroom floor.

FortWayne   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 1:05pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 73

I'm not sure why school is such a big factor. I graduated from a public school and I'm doing much better than many who went to private schools. Success depends more on parent involvement and personal desire to succeed.

Our girl is going to be fine with her public schooling. I rather prefer that she sees the harsh realities of life and the destitute immigrants who have very few chances in life. This way she appreciates success a lot more, seeing the important things in life from different perspectives. For me that certainly was motivation.

709hannah   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 1:09pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 74

Mr.Fantastic says

Nance didn’t own a home in South Pasadena, he was of the permarenter population that MarkInLA seems to look upon with disgust.

nance went to private school.......

Nomograph   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 1:12pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 75

Mr.Fantastic says

Nance didn’t own a home in South Pasadena, he was of the permarenter population that MarkInLA seems to look upon with disgust.

You'll get out of your parents house someday. Just hang in there and don't give up on your dreams.

dodgerfanjohn   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 7:18pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 76

ChrisLA says

I’m not sure why school is such a big factor. I graduated from a public school and I’m doing much better than many who went to private schools. Success depends more on parent involvement and personal desire to succeed.
Our girl is going to be fine with her public schooling. I rather prefer that she sees the harsh realities of life and the destitute immigrants who have very few chances in life. This way she appreciates success a lot more, seeing the important things in life from different perspectives. For me that certainly was motivation.

You've got the right point of view.

But there are people who live by the motto that nothing is too good for Jr. So even though Jr. could go to a mediocre school and do plenty fine...go on to do what ever career or life path they wish, many parents want the very best for the kids.

I can't explain the obsession. I'd probably slit my wrists if my parents sent me to someplace like Whitney. But some people place a priority on that.

Frankly, I think they fail if they don't teach the children how to be proper grown ups and also to view life in a logical manner(ie most parents fail), but thats just me I guess.

PasadenaNative   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 11:42pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 77

709hannah says

i think this was jack nance’s home in pasadena that he was killed in by a serial killer…? he was in blue velvet….his body was discovered on the bathroom floor.

No, Jack Nance lived on Fair Oaks by the 110 and he was not killed by a serial killer. Google him, and read about it!

PasadenaNative   Mon, 7 Mar 2011, 11:45pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 78

Forgot to add that Nance lived in an apt ;-) A friend of mine almost rented the same apt. after Jack's passing...

sfvrealestate   Tue, 8 Mar 2011, 4:26am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 79

I think the point has already been made in this forum, and not to sound too sell-sell-sell-y, but: homes in L.A. county that are less than 30 years old are considered YOUNG. Most homes built here are at least 60 years old.

The value of schools here can't be underestimated, and South Pasadena's public schools are excellent -- all the way through high school. Very few other communities have schools anywhere near as good for grade, junior and high schools. And local private schools cost about $20k+ a year -- for grade school. Multiply that by, say, three kids. All of a sudden, a high mortgage (with its attendant tax deductions) begins to look pretty good by comparison...

PasadenaNative   Tue, 8 Mar 2011, 4:31am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 80

Mr.Fantastic says

PasadenaNative says

Forgot to add that Nance lived in an apt ;-) A friend of mine almost rented the same apt. after Jack’s passing…

Did your friend drop out after finding out about Nance?

No, the reason he looked at it in the first place was because Nance lived there (kind of morbid, I know). It was a tiny unit, that's why he passed on it.

PasadenaNative   Tue, 8 Mar 2011, 4:34am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 81

sfvrealestate says

I think the point has already been made in this forum, and not to sound too sell-sell-sell-y, but: homes in L.A. county that are less than 30 years old are considered YOUNG. Most homes built here are at least 60 years old.
The value of schools here can’t be underestimated, and South Pasadena’s public schools are excellent — all the way through high school. Very few other communities have schools anywhere near as good for grade, junior and high schools. And local private schools cost about $20k+ a year — for grade school. Multiply that by, say, three kids. All of a sudden, a high mortgage (with its attendant tax deductions) begins to look pretty good by comparison…

I went to South Pas. Jr. high and high school - - too intense and competitive for me. I dropped out, took the GED, then went to college and grad school. Every kid is different, you can't stick a highly sensitive child into a cut-throat school and end up with a happy well adjusted little person.

dodgerfanjohn   Tue, 8 Mar 2011, 5:57am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 82

PasadenaNative says

sfvrealestate says


I think the point has already been made in this forum, and not to sound too sell-sell-sell-y, but: homes in L.A. county that are less than 30 years old are considered YOUNG. Most homes built here are at least 60 years old.
The value of schools here can’t be underestimated, and South Pasadena’s public schools are excellent — all the way through high school. Very few other communities have schools anywhere near as good for grade, junior and high schools. And local private schools cost about $20k+ a year — for grade school. Multiply that by, say, three kids. All of a sudden, a high mortgage (with its attendant tax deductions) begins to look pretty good by comparison…

I went to South Pas. Jr. high and high school - - too intense and competitive for me. I dropped out, took the GED, then went to college and grad school. Every kid is different, you can’t stick a highly sensitive child into a cut-throat school and end up with a happy well adjusted little person.

I feel the same way(though I did finish high school with my whopping 2.4 gpa at a craptacular "5" Great Schools high school). Went to 4 year state college, work in the same job and make the same money as UCLA, Berkley, USC, Notre Dame, etc graduates.

LOL.

PasadenaNative   Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 3:19am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 83

The little house now has a SOLD sign, only took a week....I wonder how much?

dodgerfanjohn   Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 9:31am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 84

The thing that is crazy....

Some of the posters here keep pounding in the "schools".

But this home purchase at list in no way reflects a house that someone who has $850K+ would ever want to live in.

By way of nearby comparison, the same amount of money actually buys a larger place in nearby cities with "excellent" public schools...Arcadia, La Canada, etc....and buys truly upscale homes in nearby communitiy with very good, but not excellent public schools....Glendale, Burbank, etc. All the same safey factors etc.

Furthermore, coastal OC, in very upscale large houses within a mile of the water, are the same price....

Then again...if someone wants to spend $850K+ on 1700 sq ft(El Oh El), I guess thats their business.

Mark_LA   Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 9:41am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 85

I have to think that "Carol Majors, Coldwell Banker" cherry picks all her listings in South Pasadena. Almost all her South Pasadena listings sell in less than 2 weeks.

Here's another one that also sold in less than 2 weeks (much nicer, at ~$1.1 million) :
http://www.redfin.com/CA/South-Pasadena/223-Fairview-Ave-91030/home/7005738

I went to the open house and it was so PACKED that I scratched it off my list since I knew they would get list or close to list on it. I haven't seen any open house that packed since 2006...at least 8 couples looking at it simultaneously during the 15 minutes I was there.

No bargains to be found in South Pasadena.

Mark_LA   Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 9:43am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 86

More on the real estate agent from http://www.majorsmarketplace.com/

Carol\'s Listings & Sales Volume
* 2010-$35,000,000+
* 2009-$32,000,000+ *2008-$33,000,000 +
* 2007-$36,000,000+ * 2006-$47,000,000+
* 2005-$40,000,000+ * 2004-$33,000,000+

American in Japan   Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 11:34am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 87

Wow, this woman is raking in the money. Is she the senior broker?

Also I wonder what the incomes are of the people buying these houses are?

toothfairy   Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 11:52am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 88

This is my first time reading this thread

the fact that the house sold in 1 week shows just how out of touch some people are with reality.

Mark_LA   Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 12:08pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 89

toothfairy says

This is my first time reading this thread

the fact that the house sold in 1 week shows just how out of touch some people are with reality.

That's defined as the market price and market activity. Permarenters have no say in this.

Clarence 13X   Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 3:23pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 90

PasadenaNative says

This one is about four blocks from me. Looks like they are asking less than they paid for it in 2006. I’ve always loved this house, it has a beautiful tree in the front.
http://www.redfin.com/CA/South-Pasadena/1511-Marengo-Ave-91030/home/7007773

Without being rude, I want to ask why you think investing in a 1 million dollar, 1500 squarefoot home is such a good deal?

I live in Pasadena as well and agree that South Pasadena is a beautiful place, however, I am having a difficult time seeing how it worth 4 times the amount of a home in Rancho Cucamonga, Sylmar, Monrovia, etc. Again, I would love to live in South Pasadena if it were in one of those 5,000 square foot homes in San Marino. I guess some folks have too much money to burn and are willing to invest in those areas.

Clarence 13X   Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 3:27pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 91

dunnross says

2006 was a the peak of the bubble. They should be asking 1/4 of what they paid for it in 2006.

If you are right, then this cottage should be going for 215K, however, in 1997 it sold for near 400K. People looking in South Pasadena are generally well to do, no business sense, with lots of money to spend so this will probably sell quickly. My wife and I were ready to make that jump to South Pasadena before Patrick groomed me with his good business sense. Homes in South Pasadena are emotional buys for the well to do...its makes us feel like we are a part of the elite.

Except, the real elite live in San Marino in 5,000/Sqft homes.

dodgerfanjohn   Tue, 22 Mar 2011, 5:01am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 92

Clarence 13X says

Without being rude, I want to ask why you think investing in a 1 million dollar, 1500 squarefoot home is such a good deal?

Yeah, thats what I don't get either.

A co-worker and his family rent in So Pas on a family income of ~$150K a year in a 4 bedroom townhome.

No way in the world they could afford to buy the same place.

Clarence 13X   Wed, 23 Mar 2011, 3:28pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 93

Did the PasadenaNative abandon his post?

Clarence 13X   Wed, 23 Mar 2011, 3:31pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 94

dodgerfanjohn says

Clarence 13X says


Without being rude, I want to ask why you think investing in a 1 million dollar, 1500 squarefoot home is such a good deal?

Yeah, thats what I don’t get either.
A co-worker and his family rent in So Pas on a family income of ~$150K a year in a 4 bedroom townhome.
No way in the world they could afford to buy the same place.

What I have found is that new money generally thinks just because you made your first million you automatically make good business decisions. Most of the people who buy in South Pasadena are new to money and have enough to throw at a house regardless of the costs.

dunnross   Fri, 25 Mar 2011, 11:30am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 95

Clarence 13X says

dunnross says

2006 was a the peak of the bubble. They should be asking 1/4 of what they paid for it in 2006.

If you are right, then this cottage should be going for 215K, however, in 1997 it sold for near 400K. People looking in South Pasadena are generally well to do, no business sense, with lots of money to spend so this will probably sell quickly. My wife and I were ready to make that jump to South Pasadena before Patrick groomed me with his good business sense. Homes in South Pasadena are emotional buys for the well to do…its makes us feel like we are a part of the elite.
Except, the real elite live in San Marino in 5,000/Sqft homes.

You just proved my point. The well-to-do want a 5,000/Sqft house in San Marino. These types of houses were not bought by the rich. They were bought by the middle class who stretched their budgets and got in at a teaser rate back in 2006. That buyer doesn't exist any more.

CDon   Fri, 16 Nov 2012, 3:58am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 96

Interesting to go back and read this post. in 2011, Seller (apparently) listed the house at 850K, roughly the same as the 2006 peak bubble price.

Very few here thought the house would sell for anywhere close to 850K - pretty much abject pessimism from the vast majority of commenters. Yet, it sold a few weeks later for 890K. Wow.

epitaph   Fri, 16 Nov 2012, 4:20am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 97

CDon says

it sold a few weeks later for 890K.

Just remember, one every minute.

dodgerfanjohn   Fri, 16 Nov 2012, 4:39am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 98

Yeah, it still doesn't make sense.

I finally found out what that friend of mine is paying on the four bed townhome in South Pasadena is paying in rent...$1800/mo. Yes that's below market(market is probably $2300-2500). Still it puts the price of the home in perspective.

Basically, owning a house in South Pasadena is like flushing money down the toilet.

And a hearty and repeated lol@family of four that can afford nearly a $900k home sharing 1 bathroom.

zzyzzx   Fri, 16 Nov 2012, 4:51am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 99

Is it my imagination, of is there a big tree really close to that house?

« First     « Previous comments    

PasadenaNative is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email

home   top   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net