patrick.net

Good school district in San Jose

255K in 1996 with a very generous 4% per year appreciation brings it in a 424K. 3% would be 374K

Of course I can rent houses like that all day for 1800-2200 a month, which would suggest the 370-400K range is about right.

CrazyMan,

But have you considered it sold in 1998 for $315K. At $60K per year appreciation, this house must be worth $975K in 2009. So, it's a steal for $625K. Did you stop drinking the Kool-Aid? :-)

:)

sold for 670K . checked the records.

realestatebug says

sold for 670K . checked the records.

Then someone is a sucker.

I hope they're happy regardless.

Baaaad neighborhood. Wait till they start hearing the guns pop. Suckers big time. But then again, PT Barnum said it best...AND...A fool and his money (in this case, someone else's) are soon parted. And taxpayers pay! Jolly good business, this real estate madness.

I find it hard to believe a neighborhood with so many built-in pools (see map) could be really bad. Not unless the pools were all green and scummy.

chrisborden says

Baaaad neighborhood. Wait till they start hearing the guns pop. Suckers big time. But then again, PT Barnum said it best…AND…A fool and his money (in this case, someone else’s) are soon parted. And taxpayers pay! Jolly good business, this real estate madness.

No, this is actually decent part of neighborhood and great schools(atleast elem and middle). I have a friend who lives in the area and honestly I like the area myself, except for commute, if you ever work in north of Mt.View, you are so screwed.

I cant believe that the listing price was 620k and less than a month it sold for 675K. Unbelievable. But the owner made a ton of money, buying at 315,000 at 1998 and selling for 675K, they just made sh*T load of money. Things like this are discouraging sign for potential buyer.

It doesn't discourage me to be honest. These people are going to regret it when this house falls back down to 400K and there's no doubt in my mind that it will.

Some people can see the obvious, some can't. It's a discouraging sign about our society really.

The area has very good elementary and middle school. high school is decent. people who live there are mostly prefessionals.the home was underpriced ( based on comps ). walking distance to evergreen village square.Most of the homes in good school areas in evergreen have been selling for more than listing and with atleast 10 bids ( sometimes as high at 20 offers)
I think a mini bubble is brewing due to the 3.5 % ARMS. prices in one of the neighbourhoods in evergreen ( carolyn clark elementary) have jumped from 680K to 740K in last 6 month for similar homes.

dont_getit says

I cant believe that the listing price was 620k and less than a month it sold for 675K. Unbelievable. But the owner made a ton of money, buying at 315,000 at 1998 and selling for 675K, they just made sh*T load of money. Things like this are discouraging sign for potential buyer.

I view this as the same as if buyer today that would have bought say a $600K home in 1998 now is pitching for smaller home but still at inflated prices. Had buyer waited they would have bought a much bigger or better home elsewhere for same amount. Back before the bubble $600-700K was exclusive homes in Saratoga and Los Gatos mountains.

Look down the same street...
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/3053-Beckley-Dr-95135/home/1587459

Sales price history
1998 $170K...

yes boys and girls, prices were that much and very close to the medians of the region $200K.

http://www.housingbubblebust.com/OFHEO/Major/NorCal.html

That OFHEO chart gets posted a lot here, but it's seriously out of date - first quarter 2009.

pfdv says

but it’s seriously out of date

Yes, not updated but,

The chart has something to say.. recent declines, but also the enormous rise in prices.
Some would say the bubble stated back in 2002-2003, but as we can see prices
in the Bay Area have risen much higher, faster and earlier than 2003. It also shows that
SF Bay Area prices among the different counties ( and cities) were not that wide apart.

The real issues today, are many parties who keep saying, SF prices have always been high,
one region higher than another, or other nonsense are wrong. The historical data proves that.