Show Comments That Contain...
  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    indigenous says

    Austin and the oil patch do well. Do you have some numbers?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_locations_by_per_capita_income

    Texas is the thirty-second richest state in the United States of America, with a per capita income of $19,617 (2000).

    http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48000.html

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    curious2 says

    New Renter says

    ts not the lack of restrictions.

    It is, actually. TX can build out or up or both. Look at Houston, or Austin. You have your choice of skyscrapers or SFH. Housing prices remain within the normal 2x-5x annual income range, usually nearer 2x, because supply is allowed to meet demand. In SF, you could still build up, but it's prohibited, and likewise there are limits to building out due to park land and bay protection etc.

    Let me rephrase that

    Its not just the lack of restrictions....

    Edmonton Canada and North Dakota have few building restrictions as well yet prices there are high because demand outstrips supply.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    indigenous says

    The reason Texas RE prices do not go up is because there is very few restrictions on building.

    Its not the lack of restrictions. Jobs in Texas are on average harder to come by and don't pay as much.

    There are also few if any geographical restrictions.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    indigenous says

    wow that is fucked up.

    That's one way to put it.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    curious2 says

    i.e. many people want to live in these places.

    Well in the case of Berkley its the straight shot proximity to Oakland.

    I remember standing on Shattuck Ave at sunset watching the hoards of people walking up from Oakland.

    And it that's not enough for you its close to Richmond too!

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    indigenous says

    New Renter says

    No I'm pretty sure Berkeley takes that prize.

    I'm gunna have to go with Pelosi's district.

    I take it you've never been to Berkeley. You probably know West Hollywood though.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    iwog says

    New Renter says

    Friend of mine told me how his parents lost their shirts buying an investment property in Santa Cruz in the 90's.

    How much did they pay? How leveraged were they? Did they have squatters, evictions, and damage to pay for? Did they get horrible terms on their loan? Did they get stuck in a declining neighborhood?

    When I have these discussions, I'm thinking about national real estate trends and what the typical American will experience. Not someone trying to own rental property in the freakiest town in California.

    Wish I knew, unfortunately they moved away many years ago.

    It's stories like that (and mine) which put the V in YMMV.

    iwog says

    freakiest town in California

    No I'm pretty sure Berkeley takes that prize. West Hollywood is the runner up.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    iwog says

    Why don't you put up a chart of ever climbing rents?

    And Detroit property values for the past 50 years.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    iwog says

    Call it Crazy says

    I'm sure the people who bought in 2005 and owned for 6 years or so would agree with you...

    Congratulations on finding the only period in oh what.......70 years? that shows a very clear losing trend on a real estate investment. You really make a strong case!

    Friend of mine told me how his parents lost their shirts buying an investment property in Santa Cruz in the 90's.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    iwog says

    New Renter says

    I was an owner for a while. I watched thousands of dollars disappear into the vaults of my bank. Landlord or bank, the end result was the same - or in my case worse than renting.

    This is absolutely false and I can't believe you actually think this is true.

    Well our 2007-11 ITI mortgage payment was over $4k/mo even after factoring out the cost of insurance. After we bought I found out my neighbor was paying just under $2k to rent the slightly larger place next door. Even factoring in our interest deduction her rent was considerably less than our nonrecoverable mortgage costs.

    Oh wait, what about refinancing? Couldn't we have refi'd at a sweet lower rate?

    In a word, NO.

    The house was well underwater AND our family income was severely curtailed. No longer able to make the payments we did a short sale. In doing so we also lost the down payment. Buying for us was a disaster.

    Palace or prison - YMMV.

    We now rent a nicer, larger, more livable place a few miles from the old house for a bit under $2.5k/mo, still quite a bit less than the interest and tax we paid on our old mortgage.

    So tell me, how is my math wrong?

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in The 25-Year Great Depression, New Renter said:

    iwog says

    The United States is not in a depression today in the most populated coastal cities. It's ridiculous to assert that a place like San Francisco or San Jose or for that matter even Los Angeles is in a depression with the level of economic activity going on.

    Sure if you happen to be a social media programmer. Other people ain't doing so well.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in Is ADHD a real disorder?, New Renter said:

    APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

    Had a bunch of Brits approach me after an event I pulled together in Pennsylvania asking about all the wiggly leg drug ads.

    wiggly leg... is that some kind of code for this?

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    iwog says

    You can make an unlimited number of cars. You cannot build an unlimited number of housing units nor can you get financing for anything and everything you want to build. These are $100 million and up projects.

    Bringing a new car to market ain't cheap either. How easy do you think it is for anyone who isn't Elon Musk to get funding towards a new car startup?

    Regardless you don't need to build an unlimited number of anything. You only need to build enough to meet demand. Can SFBA housing demand be met with existing resources? I'd venture absolutely if the political will were there.

    iwog says

    I have been a renter for more of my life than I have been an owner. I've watched thousands of dollars disappear into the pockets of my landlords.

    I was an owner for a while. I watched thousands of dollars disappear into the vaults of my bank. Landlord or bank, the end result was the same - or in my case worse than renting.

    iwog says

    Most people most of the time lack one single thing to become owners: Financing. The prices aren't too high, there isn't a severe shortage of properties, and usually they have decent credit from renting all those years.

    Because giving out $700k loans to strawberry pickers worked out so well the last time.

    iwog says

    You forget that every renter that eventually buys a home also reduces the demand for rentals. While home ownership spreads, rent seeking becomes less profitable and has fewer customers. You're only looking at one side of the equation.

    Nope.

    If a family renting a property buys that property then both the renters and the rental are off the market. So both demand and supply go down by the same amount.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in Patrick wants to open a competitive wine bar, New Renter said:

    The Original Bankster says

    APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

    FACE!

    It's what's for dinner.

    smoked and cured face with rosemary and a side of Chianti

    Don't forget the fava beans.

    The Original Bankster says

    If he got tranny hookers it would be huge with the middle-calss white set, just dont tell anyone they have penises.

    Remember, Patrick s talking about setting up shop in SF.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in Housing Stumbling in Slowest Season for U.S., New Renter said:

    Strategist says

    New Renter says

    Strategist says

    bubblesitter says

    Strategist says

    At these prices it's never.

    OK, we will defer the talk until the next pullback. :)

    Pullbacks always come. They make higher highs and higher lows.

    The next severe pull back could go down to a level at twice the prices of today, and then that will be a once in a lifetime buying opportunity.

    Only if take home wages are triple what they are today.

    Minimum wages are coming close to tripling. That should do it.

    Not even close.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in Patrick wants to open a competitive wine bar, New Renter said:

    Last month BevMo had an 80% off sale. Would have been a good time to stock up.

    Of course you can also buy a large volume of Bronco wines and relabel them with fancy (and expensive) labels. I'd bet 95% of your clientelle wouldn't know the difference.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    iwog says

    New Renter says

    But supply did not keep up with demand and prices went up.

    That's fine but don't blame low interest rates and government guaranteed loans for high home prices.

    So you're saying the increased demand from people who could not otherwise afford housing otherwise had no effect on the low end of the market/ That that increased demand pressure on prices did not help the sellers of said properties afford to upscale into new homes and THAT increased demand did not put upward pressure on upscale homes?

    iwog says

    2. Developers know damn well that they can make far more money charging $1 million for a 3000 sq. ft. condo than they could make charging $250,000 for a 1200 sq. ft. condo.

    Automobile manufacturers take it one step further. For decades they have sold the (more or less) same car under very different price structures. It's called badge engineering:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnfingleton/2013/07/04/same-car-different-brand-hugely-higher-price-why-pay-an-extra-30000-for-fake-prestige/

    Its about equivalent to putting in Wolf/Subzero/Grohe fixtures into a kitchen instead of lower end Admiral/IKEA/Price Pfister and charging an extra $50k on top of the extra price of materials.

    So then the question becomes why do Toyota, Chevy, and the rest of the plebeian car lines still exist if the same car can be sold for far more money just by adding some wood trim and leather and up charging $40k?

    Because there is only so much of a market for those luxury cars, just as there is only so much of a market for those $1M/3000 sqft condos.

    Builders can make plenty of money building homes for the masses too.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in That was a big earthquake!, New Renter said:

    dublin hillz says

    Earthquakes are fun when nothing falls. Now if the flat screen would have broken, that would have sucked.

    Are you kidding? That's your justification to the wife to buy a much bigger/better one!

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in Lawnmowers-what kind do you use?, New Renter said:

    zzyzzx says

    errc says

    How well does this work around obstacles

    Doesit cut well in small tight spaces

    It's MUCH easier to work around obstacles. Push reel movers are the lightest mowers that you can use. It cuts the same in tight spaces. There is a technique that you need to learn to do depending upon how thick the grass is and how tall. If you let the grass get too tall it won't work at all.

    How often do you sharpen the blades?

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in New Mexico REALTOR Admits Paying 13-year-old Girl on Several Occasions, New Renter said:

    HydroCabron says

    New Renter says

    Would the state be so keen to prosecute or would the court just give the boys high fives?

    The boys would need long counseling sessions: "Keep in mind that, for the rest of your life, it will never be this easy."

    A bitter pill to swallow indeed.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in Housing Stumbling in Slowest Season for U.S., New Renter said:

    Strategist says

    bubblesitter says

    Strategist says

    At these prices it's never.

    OK, we will defer the talk until the next pullback. :)

    Pullbacks always come. They make higher highs and higher lows.

    The next severe pull back could go down to a level at twice the prices of today, and then that will be a once in a lifetime buying opportunity.

    Only if take home wages are triple what they are today.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    iwog says

    New Renter says

    You know as well as I when demand increases faster than supply prices go up.

    That is EXACTLY what the desired result was. As long as real estate is distributed into more hands, the good guys win. When more real estate is concentrated into fewer hands, the bad guys win.

    But supply did not keep up with demand and prices went up.

    I'm not saying supply side housing is a cure all, clearly in Detroit and other rust belt cities it would be a disaster; however in the Bay Area more housing supply is clearly needed.

    There are still open areas in Fremont, East San Jose foothills, Morgan Hill and Gilroy. If more industry can be coaxed to relocate into those areas that would take some pressure off the rest of the Bay Area.

    I'd bet if there were incentives for companies to encourage telecommuting you'd see a lot more of it. That could help the housing shortage enormously

    Heck just getting retired people to relocate would help.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    iwog says

    How exactly do you think you put more houses in the hands of more people without increasing demand?

    You know as well as I when demand increases faster than supply prices go up. That's exactly what happened when interest rates dropped and loan standards were relaxed. As long as the monthly ownership nut is lower than rents there will be sufficient demand.
    iwog says

    The government can't do that. "Reality" types would go to war. Literally.

    They're already at war. So what? Reality has at best an AK47 or an AR15. Government has B52s and M1As, the Patriot Act and the NSA.

    My money's on the government.

    Reality says

    LOL. Do you think the government bureaucrats can manage the houses that you currently own for your tenants better than you can? It takes entrepreneurs like yourself to provide housing to tenants efficiently.

    Try reading. I said BUILD, not manage. And if you think private industry would do a better job I refer you exhibit A:

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970204556804574260324092312130

    Exhibit B:

    http://wtvr.com/2012/10/03/vistas-on-the-james-lawsuit-richmond/

    Exhibit C:

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970203872404574258531574049434

    ....

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in My first real estate bear thread (ever), New Renter said:

    iwog says

    The opposite is true. The fed and government work to prevent it. How else is someone who works 40-hours a week for $25 an hour supposed to buy a home worth 6 figures when all his money is going into the pockets of a rich landlord? Low interest rates and government guaranteed mortgages is the only hope that many people have.

    Until the prices of the houses go up due to the increased demand. Which is exactly what we've seen over the past 30 years.

    Now if Joe paycheck wants to buy he has to borrow more, much much more. He also has no chance of benefiting from refinancing at lower interest rates and were he to get a raise the extra money takes less of a bite out of the larger principle.

    If the government REALLY wants housing to be affordable it should build more quality housing and make it available one to a customer, especially in high demand areas.

    It should also institute a progressive (per unit) rental profit tax to make landlording less profitable.

  • On 1 Sep 2014 in There's hope for you yet!!, New Renter said:

    iwog says

    Actually my first thought was about the women who probably find value beyond superficial appearance.

    True, looks aren't everything:

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

Page took 580 milliseconds to create.