patrick.net

PeopleUnited says

1. Lack of supply

Supply versus inventory - synonymous?

Yesterday's SJ Mercury News:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/03/15/photos-this-basic-sunnyvale-home-sold-for-close-to-3-million-800000-over-asking/?source=patrick.net

About $30k/yr in property taxes.

Your friendly neighborhood public employee unions thank you.

BayArea says

I also enjoyed reading all the perma-bear content on here then and now. The regret runs deep I’m sure.

Common Sense is not perma-bear: It's Common Sense.

Common Sense is to be willing to pay a reasonable ownership premium for the privilege of "ownership".

What is the point of the privilege of ownership? A measure of control and some stability over our living situation. We're not at the mercy of the whim of a landlord who may not renew the lease. We can predict our future payments with fixed rate mortgages and Proposition 13. These are worth paying a reasonable ownership premium, I suppose. The ownership premiums for recent buyers here in the Cool And Hip (and Smug) Bay Area are not reasonable. Just ask E-man who is an expert on this topic.

Eman says

I’m a real estate investor and flipper in the Bay Area. I live in the trenches. IMO, today’s real estate prices are ridiculous. I’m not smart enough to know when the housing market will drop/crash and how bad it would be. One thing I see is that paying today’s housing prices would make one an indentured servitude on the property taxes alone.

I suppose a reasonable argument can be made to buy a Timeshare. Privilege of ownership. Stability. A measure of control. Buying at recent prices, with the massive ownership premiums, is like overpaying for a Timeshare. (At least, for the time being, one can get out from under their "Bay Area Timeshare" by selling to a Greater Fool). You think a Bay Area home is not like a Timeshare? Try not paying your Maintenance Fees (property tax) and see what happens.

A reasonable ownership premium is probably a Good Value. A large one is ridiculous Sunk Capital.

B.A.C.A.H. says

I suppose a reasonable argument can be made to buy a Timeshare.

Never met anyone who didnt regret buying a timeshare. The costs dont make sense and the fees kill you. Many times I stay at nice hotels for free due to the travel points/credit card points. But even paying full price is still much cheaper than timeshares + you are not tied to any restrictions or hidden fees.

Timeshares are a racket.

I'd like to tell you I timed the market when I bought my first house a decade ago, but in hindsight it was a combination of luck and persistence.

There are rules of thumb that exist for a reason. Don't spend more than 30% of your monthly income on housing, purchase price should not exceed more than 2.5x your annual salary, etc. These metrics have held true for almost a century, irrespective of rates, inflation, lending policy, etc.

At some point, the price becomes too much, houses stop selling and prices drop. Two things I know to be true. First, the upside of any bubble always carries on far longer than a rational person would expect. Normally 1 to 3 years beyond "saturation", that is to say the point at which above rules are exceeded.

Second, the crash starts slow at first then occurs all at once. Cracks appear, you'll see asking prices start to drop as homes stay listed for months, not days or hours. Then something happens in thw markets that cause credit to contract and bang! Avalanche begins and prices plummet. Happened in 2008 and can (and will) happen again. Spring 2023 is my guess for when the bottom starts to drop out.... but it's just a guess.

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

PeopleUnited says

1. Lack of supply

Supply versus inventory - synonymous?

Inventory tells us who wants to sell. It is part of the equation.

But supply also includes houses that could be sold (are underutilized) and there simply is not enough houses built to meet demand, and if prices drop, demand will only go up, unless people start losing their jobs or dying.

I just don't think anyone really understands how much money is "still" made in the bay area. Apple/FB/etc..
I have friends at Apple/FB who make a good salary (but not great) but make 2-3x salary in stock - per year!
All of these engineers get stock options that are worth FAR more than their salary. We are in a localized housing bubble because of that.
I don't see prices dropping as even far left of center cities fight higher density housing and toe the NIMBY line.
I also think that this war in Eur may keep housing high here also as those tech folks immigrate out of the UKR/RUS etc.
and into the bay area. Plus chi-coms keep pouring in and buying assets in the US for protection.

Even outside of the bay area, prices everywhere are high. That is probably more of an easy money situation leading to higher housing prices.

I heard Moscow RE is a good hedge against RE collapse in the US.

PeopleUnited says

Inventory tells us who wants to sell. It is part of the equation.

But supply also includes houses that could be sold (are underutilized) and there simply is not enough houses built to meet demand, and if prices drop, demand will only go up, unless people start losing their jobs or dying.

Absolutely. But there could be adequate supply, just too many homes in the hands of second, third home buyers, hedge funds buying up RE to rent out, etc.

SunnyvaleCA says

BayArea says

The landlord made $500-600k in home equity during the time I was renting his home. That stung.

It really depends on the time frame. I bought my shack in early 2004 and am up about 3.3x in those 18 years. But the S&P 500 is up about 4x during that time. Many things to consider when comparing the two. I'm guessing the house was a better "investment," but not but much. One problem with selling the house is that you wind up with an enormous capital gain all in one year — not good with progressive capital gains rates and extra addons in taxes in that bonanza year.

Unless you paid cash. If you put 20% down, times that 3.3x by 5 or so. Also, you fixed your housing cost while rent kept going up during this time period.

My little brother got his Sunnyvale home in 2010. I believe it has 4x since. Right timing helps bigly. Sunnyvale, Mountain View and Cupertino have paid huge dividends for those who bought there. Congrats!

krc says

I just don't think anyone really understands how much money is "still" made in the bay area. Apple/FB/etc..
I have friends at Apple/FB who make a good salary (but not great) but make 2-3x salary in stock - per year!
All of these engineers get stock options that are worth FAR more than their salary. We are in a localized housing bubble because of that.
I don't see prices dropping as even far left of center cities fight higher density housing and toe the NIMBY line.
I also think that this war in Eur may keep housing high here also as those tech folks immigrate out of the UKR/RUS etc.
and into the bay area. Plus chi-coms keep pouring in and buying assets in the US for protection.

Even outside of the bay area, prices everywhere are high. That is probably more of an easy money situation leading to higher housing prices.

Options at FB granted at around May 2018 and later are out of the money.

I’m part of a real estate investing group for 12 years. It’s simply amazing looking back. In 2012, someone on the board predicted the housing market would peak in 2021-2023. 👏 👏 👏

If one knew this info and was willing to bet the farm on it, one would have been quite set now.

PeopleUnited says

there simply is not enough houses built to meet demand

Demand for what?

For housing, or for owning?

According to a ®eal Estate website, the house at 1668 Hummingbird Lane in Sunnyvale would rent for about $4200 per month, but the monthly cost to own about $13,500 per month. It's an ownership premium of about $9k per month or $110k per year.

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

Options at FB granted at around May 2018 and later are out of the money.

Yes.

I was one of those for at tech companies for decades. Lots of hyperbole and BS when discussing it from the sidelines.

Eman says

I’m a real estate investor and flipper in the Bay Area. I live in the trenches. IMO, today’s real estate prices are ridiculous. I’m not smart enough to know when the housing market will drop/crash and how bad it would be. One thing I see is that paying today’s housing prices would make one an indentured servitude on the property taxes alone.

Fed hiked interest rate quarter percent. I was hoping they would hike it a lot more to deal with inflation so we can stabilize everything.

Everything is insane lately.

Fortwaynemobile says

Eman says

I’m a real estate investor and flipper in the Bay Area. I live in the trenches. IMO, today’s real estate prices are ridiculous. I’m not smart enough to know when the housing market will drop/crash and how bad it would be. One thing I see is that paying today’s housing prices would make one an indentured servitude on the property taxes alone.

Fed hiked interest rate quarter percent. I was hoping they would hike it a lot more to deal with inflation so we can stabilize everything.

Everything is insane lately.

The general consensus of the Federal Reserve board is 7 rate hikes this year. There’s no rush for a big hike now as the entire world is unstable at the moment.

BayArea says

I rented a small 2bd house in San Carlos for 5yrs. The landlord made $500-600k in home equity during the time I was renting his home. That stung.

The question is what you would have made in an index fund over that time period.

I know for a fact I've done better in the stock market than I would have in housing.

BayArea says

Did you buy your house in full in the same way you bought your SP500 shares in full? Or do we need to adjust your 3.3x figure?

Most people put down 20% or less for a 5x or more lever.

That's why, after stating the house went up 3.3x and the S&P went up 4.0x I stated that the house was probably the better investment. I had originally written out another paragraph about 20% down creating 5x leverage whereas I would have been buying the S&P every month with the money saved from not paying the mortgage, taxes, upkeep, etc. Plus the mortgage rates are somewhat subsidized by the federal government with Freddie and Fannie.

Actually, I did pay off the house after about 15 years rather than dealing with getting another refinancing. I figured my investment portfolio was 100% stocks and no bonds... not paying on a 4% or 5% mortgage is as good as having a 2% or 3% bond.

An additional consideration with an expensive house is that selling it is all-or-nothing. That's going to be one heck of a capital gain! Here in California capital gains are progressively taxed, so better to spread them out over a few years. I think there's also a 3.8% Obamacare™ tax on large capital gains. Oh.... my stock broker charge $7/trade commission, but I'm pretty sure I can't get the real estate cartel down that low!

Patrick says

BayArea says

I rented a small 2bd house in San Carlos for 5yrs. The landlord made $500-600k in home equity during the time I was renting his home. That stung.

The question is what you would have made in an index fund over that time period.

I know for a fact I've done better in the stock market than I would have in housing.

The ownership premium over rent that recent buyers are paying for mortgage interest and property taxes is money they are neither saving nor investing.

They are not investing it for their retirement nor their kids' college fund.

Nor are they spending it.

They are not spending it for childcare, private K-12 tuition or private lessons.

They are not spending it for Status Symbols like Teslas, and they are not spending it for $6 per gallon gasoline for driving to work.

They are not spending it for vacations.

They are not spending it for food which is going up a lot with inflation.

Nor are they saving it to spend on those things, and they are not saving it for a period of unemployment.

They are spending it, Sunk Capital, pissed away for an excessive ownership premium. Like a Timeshare.

B.A.C.A.H. says

They are not investing it for their kids' college fund.

Does a primary residence count as "net worth" when applying for financial aid? Sinking all your spare money into your house might be the perfect way to look poor to the college.

SunnyvaleCA says

BayArea says

Did you buy your house in full in the same way you bought your SP500 shares in full? Or do we need to adjust your 3.3x figure?

Most people put down 20% or less for a 5x or more lever.

That's why, after stating the house went up 3.3x and the S&P went up 4.0x I stated that the house was probably the better investment. I had originally written out another paragraph about 20% down creating 5x leverage whereas I would have been buying the S&P every month with the money saved from not paying the mortgage, taxes, upkeep, etc. Plus the mortgage rates are somewhat subsidized by the federal government with Freddie and Fannie.

Actually, I did pay off the house after about 15 years rather than dealing with getting another refinancing. I figured my investment portfolio was 100% stocks and no bonds... not paying on a 4% or 5% mortgage is as good as having a 2% or 3% bond.
...

Stock trading should be done by the individual and always for free. If you must invest in funds for your 401k or otherwise have zero time or knowledge, then choose those funds carefully. Many constantly underperform. It's true that with a house/mortgage you can get much better leverage, but even with stocks you easily get 2:1 which is a good starter leverage as it works both ways. If you get to live in your house that leverage is worth it as you can walk away in the rare event there is a housing bust or other monetary issues and you saved the rent. For investment properties the math is not that rosy imo and highly depends on interest rates. I could pay off the primary residence but at 3% interest I make more money in the market. Now that rates are rising I expect a slowdown, but with these small hikes it will take a while to have any significant effect. At least this year I predict high growth in the double digits fueled by inflation and a run on securing fixed mortgages.

Investing in stocks vs real estate:
Only idiots leave equity in real estate.
You refinance and take all your money back out, as well as tax-free profits as soon as equity is high enough to do so.
Then you re-invest all that money into either more real estate or stocks, if you go with more real estate you repeat this process over and over.

In case you can’t hang in there financially when the market nosedives, just send the keys to the bank, they will eat the loss for you (try that with stocks, lol).

If you rent, 100% of your money is LOST forever, you have to deal with huge annual rent increases and get kicked to the curb when your Lord wants to sell to cash out his huge profit after you paid off his house for him.

JimSpatzenfeld says

If you rent, 100% of your money is LOST forever

But it's less money that I would have lost by owning.

Try the NY Times rent-vs-buy calculator:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/upshot/buy-rent-calculator.html?source=patrick.net

Takes leverage into account as well.

So, rates finally go up after 3 years. And will be raised 6 times this year.

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/federal-reserve-raises-rates-for-first-time-in-3-years/?source=patrick.net

Nothing a few more million illegals can't cure.

Patrick says

WillyWanker says

I am now living between homes in Spain and Andorra.

That sounds interesting. How are prices and rents compared to here? Do you own or rent there?

Do you have Spanish or other EU citizenship?

I'm currently renting while my main residence is being remodeled to my specifications. I had been hoping to purchase some rental units but I don't think I will be going that route. I lease an 1800 square foot apartment in Barcelona's best street, Paseig de Gracia, for 3000k euros per month. I'm sure I'm paying total gringo prices but it's fully equipped with everything so I just needed my suitcase and carry-on while my stuff is coming in a container later this year. This apartment would probably sell for 2.5M euros so that should give you an idea of what you get if one thought of it as an investment. I have Spanish and Andorran citizenship through descent.

RE Prices in Europe are even more ridiculous than in the US. Higher density and low rates. In Germany their mortgage rate is 1.5%.
Great discounts on Ukrainian Real Estate though.

WillyWanker says

This apartment would probably sell for 2.5M euros so that should give you an idea of what you get if one thought of it as an investment.

This is called cap rate compression. All the money floating out there is looking for a home (yield). All assets are competing for the same pool of money. This is why prime real estate will always command a premium price (low yield/return).

Using the NY calculator is the wrong approach. Palo Alto assets will never trade for the same cap rate as Stockton or Modesto.

Patrick says

Try the NY Times rent-vs-buy calculator:

I can't tell, does NYTimes include the SALT caps these days?

EBGuy says

Patrick says

Try the NY Times rent-vs-buy calculator:

I can't tell, does NYTimes include the SALT caps these days?

No. They handle taxes by just a marginal tax rate box. I'm not really sure how its used (i.e. is it used just for computing cap gains upon the sale, or possibly on other calculations?)

They have separate fields for property tax, and the 250k cap gains deduction. But no SALT or other tax specifics.

IMO tax implications are a very underrated / underutilized factor when comparing investments. They can significantly alter the "which is better" calculus, and especially on RE where you tend to have massive cap gains in a single year, making you an "evil rich fuck who needs to pay their damn fair share of taxes" for that 1 year. Of course, sometimes those cap gains are really just 30 years of 3% annual inflation, looking impressive, but little growth in real value, but youre still an evil rich fuck for the year.

Eman says

Using the NY calculator is the wrong approach. Palo Alto assets will never trade for the same cap rate as Stockton or Modesto.

Could you elaborate why the calc isnt suitable? The calc allows inputs for many fields, including rent and home price growth annual %.

The main drawback I see to their calc is lack of ability to personalize tax implications. Not that I blame them for omitting it. But otherwise it's the best calc I've seen.

JimSpatzenfeld says

Investing in stocks vs real estate:
Only idiots leave equity in real estate.
You refinance and take all your money back out, as well as tax-free profits as soon as equity is high enough to do so.
Then you re-invest all that money into either more real estate or stocks, if you go with more real estate you repeat this process over and over.

In case you can’t hang in there financially when the market nosedives, just send the keys to the bank, they will eat the loss for you (try that with stocks, lol).

If you rent, 100% of your money is LOST forever, you have to deal with huge annual rent increases and get kicked to the curb when your Lord wants to sell to cash out his huge profit after you paid off his house for him.

Why take equity out vs just getting a loan? I’ve never done equity, so don’t know the difference.

We bought a house in Idaho. Not sure yet what to do with CA one. Can rent it out, or sell it and not have a mortgage on the new purchase.

Hircus says

Could you elaborate why the calc isnt suitable?

It’s just garbage in, garbage out IMO. I’d rather use local market parameters. If Palo Alto is trading at 2.8 cap, anything above 2.8 cap is a bargain. Thus, if one is buying at 3.5 cap, one is getting a 20% discount. I don’t care what the buy/rent calculator says.

As a real estate flipper, if I can buy an asset for $1M, put $150-$200k into rehab and resell it for $1.5-$1.6M, do I care if it can only rent for $3.8-$4k/mo?

The same goes with buy-and-hold apartments. If I can buy and asset at $1.3M, put $200k into rehab and get an ARV of $2M, then I’ll keep doing it and scaling up the portfolio. The market dictates the cap rate. I don’t have any say in that. I can only buy “right” and force appreciate the value of the asset, do a cash out refinance, take my equity out of the deal, play with house money, rinse and repeat.

Fortwaynemobile says

Why take equity out vs just getting a loan?

Take equity out = do a cash out refinance aka getting a new loan with cash (equity) out.

With single units, like a condo or SFH, the rent/price ratio is not favorable. Duplex to 4plex get a little better ratio. To get more favorable ratio, one has to look at 5+ unit apartment. In fact, the more units/building, the better the ratio. I’m looking to scale up to 20 units rather than staying at 6-12 units.

Congrats on the house in Idaho. 🚀🚀

JimSpatzenfeld says

You refinance and take all your money back out, as well as tax-free profits as soon as equity is high enough to do so.
Then you re-invest all that money into either more real estate or stocks, if you go with more real estate you repeat this process over and over.

Sounds exactly like someone I knew in 2008. Defaulted on his 3 rental single-family homes in 2009 as well as the home he was living in. We hear mostly from the success of that sort of high-stakes gambling, so have a biased perspective. It's the kind of information bias that leads people to think athletics and acting are a better way to riches than buying lottery tickets. (Yes, as bad a deal as lottery tickets are, athletics and acting are even worse!)

It is historically true that real estate is one means to build wealth. Whether it performs better or worse than other investment options, from stocks to bonds to gold to bitcoin, depends on several factors, some that can be controlled others that cannot. Everyone has their own risk tolerance, investing objectives and time horizon that influences whether or not real estate is a "good" investment. For me personally the price of entry has always been too high for me to dip my toe into the waters of real estate investing. Markets have been good to me and a stock never needs a new roof or heating oil.

What drives me crazy is that people started seeing their primary residence as an investment, rather than simply a place to live. Eventually greed trumped common sense and for many it didn't end well once the first bubble popped.

So, is it going to pop again any time soon? I can't understand where all this money is coming from over the last 3-4 years. Did everyone's income double in the last 3-4 years? I don't know a single person whose income has doubled.

I don't see how the answer can be low rates. We've had low rated for quite a while now.

WineHorror1 says

So, is it going to pop again any time soon? I can't understand where all this money is coming from over the last 3-4 years. Did everyone's income double in the last 3-4 years? I don't know a single person whose income has doubled.

I don't see how the answer can be low rates. We've had low rated for quite a while now.

9 trillion dollars were created over the last few years. That money isn’t gone, it got funneled to the top like always, and the rich are busy trying to hedge it against predictable inflation by buying up real estate. Most of the activity is in big trusts and hedge funds. They aren’t buying most of the houses but they are putting a floor underneath prices in many areas. It isn’t going to crash. Not this time. It might not even crash if the vax kills 50% of the population! Real estate is sticky because inflation is really high. I think it was almost 10% last year and will top 15% when the numbers from 2022 are crunched sometime next year. This is 1970s style inflation and seems completely out of control. The Federal Reserve can’t control it anymore. All they can do is stop printing money. They can’t raise rates significantly enough to control inflation. There’s too much money out there buying up things. And the national debt is 30 trillion. Every point of interest on that money is going to cost us in the budget.

WineHorror1 says

So, is it going to pop again any time soon? I can't understand where all this money is coming from over the last 3-4 years. Did everyone's income double in the last 3-4 years? I don't know a single person whose income has doubled.

WineHorror, have you spent some time in Fremont, or working in the office cubicles of Silicon Valley? For an idea of scale, the middle class of India is bigger than the entire population of our country. The elite in that country aspire to live in the SF Bay Area, not Flyover Country. These are mostly not middle class kids: they are the elite Rich Kids of the 1% of their billion people, whose parents can buy them the Best Education Money Can Buy. Why do you suppose the IIT (Indian Institute of Technology) has class reunions in Silicon Valley? With the IIT degree the parents can buy their kids into the top grad schools in the US. For them, the H-1 visa is just a detail to immigrate. Downpayment money is not an issue.

Housing tracts of Cupertino and Fremont Union High School District (not in Fremont, - mostly in Cupertino and some parts of Sunnyvale and San Jose)? That's same sort of thing with Rich Kids immigrating from "Greater" China.

To these sorts of folks, the Bay Area is not crowded/congested: it is uncrowded, spacious, like The Wide Open Prairie. And it is not expensive: it is Bargain Prices.

The Bay Area is a tiny place to shoehorn in those Rich Kids. The ill-liquid Bay Area housing market is an even tinier place.

Small numbers of these folks, and the small number of others with huge stock option/RSU gains, will swamp out the few homes for sale in those zip codes, pushing out other prospective "middle class" buyers to less expensive neighborhoods like my working class neighborhood in East SJ that not so long ago were strictly blue collar.

When those non-immigrant folks who are comfortable living in Flyover Country leave the Bay Area (like some who have posted here), the Asian Contagion on the house prices trickles down to those places, like Boise or Austin or wherever, causing some resentment among those locals.

The steady increase in the house prices has partly depended on the steady flow of demand from the steady flow of those Rich Kids. We shall see if recent changes like work from home, etc., change this equilibrium.

GreaterNYCDude says

What drives me crazy is that people started seeing their primary residence as an investment, rather than simply a place to live

That's Bay Area Smug.