Comments 1 - 20 of 20 Search these comments
This one looks interesting. Only been on the market 7 days though. Wait and it will come down.
http://www.redfin.com/CA/Monterey/1079-W-Franklin-St-93940/home/14961707
As long as you don't mind the traffic grinding up that long hill to the Presidio's Franklin Gate just outside your front door.
At 400k, you'd probably be better looking along Salinas Highway, especially if space is important.
Prices have dropped a fair bit in the area, but you still don't get much for your money.
Funny, I wouldn't have considered that area in Pacific Grove - more like Monterey...
This one looks interesting. Only been on the market 7 days though. Wait and it will come down.
http://www.redfin.com/CA/Monterey/1079-W-Franklin-St-93940/home/14961707
Sold in 1996 for 243K. Now asking 404K? On average housing tracks inflation. So, people have been extremely lucky these last 15 years that we have beaten inflation, by a lot considering this house appreciation. However, if you are numbers person, it is completely conceivable that this house could on day revert back to the 243K range for price. If you plug that number into the prices from 1809 to today it would be perfectly reasonable. Will it, probably not, but just saying it could.
Rather than thinking 404K like that was nothing think of how many years of your savings it would take to reach that value. How many hours of working, how many good stock trades, how many nights home instead of eating out, how many skipped trips to see the family, etc. Then take a good look at the construction of the house, the lot, the neighborhood and ask yourself if it is worth your sacrifices. If the realtor starts pressuring you, then ask them if they would like to take an equity ownership with you. If it is such a slam dunk deal then they should be more than happy to get a piece. ;)
Weren't the mid-90s a low point in that decade's housing prices? Anyway, 400k for that is pretty good for Monterey, though I don't know what it's like inside. If it tracked inflation it would be about 350k from a low point in the 90s. Doesn't seem that bad a deal.
Weren't the mid-90s a low point in that decade's housing prices?
Not a low point, just a normal steady market without all the slurries of subsidies and incentives. The mid-nineties were a BOOM time for the middle class, even if it was only wealth effect for many.
Well they certainly took a big dip from the boom in the 80s. I think that's important when people look back and compare house prices from then to now. I presume a lot of people just assume houses were cheaper in the 80s than in the mid-90s say, when they often weren't.
Well they certainly took a big dip from the boom in the 80s. I think that's important when people look back and compare house prices from then to now. I presume a lot of people just assume houses were cheaper in the 80s than in the mid-90s say, when they often weren't.
Depends, though; as I recall, the boom was toward the latter part of the eighties and by the time the mid-nineties rolled around, things had normalized on that front. Meanwhile, the general economy was on a tear, so for all intents, we should have had another leg-up in 1996, but we really didn't until after 2001.
I thought all booms over corrected.
Yes, bubbles always do, all throughout history, but as I know you know, a speculative bubble is different from a boom. The credit bubble we had that fed into this latest housing mania is really what took housing into the stratosphere, unlike the boom in the eighties.
Monterey, Pacific Grove or Carmel Valley, 2 baths, a nice yard, garage. We would like to have it in good shape, not in need of major repairs and some curb appeal.