patrick.net

I think that there are some major differences between Vegas & BA:

BA is built out - Vegas has raw land as far as the eye can see.

Vegas is a single industry town; when the economy tanked the tourism tanked.

Houses were higher priced in BA to begin with. Vegas was reasonable in '95, while BA has always been high priced.

I'm not saying that the high prices are justified, but these are two different areas.

elliemae says

I think that there are some major differences between Vegas & BA:
BA is built out - Vegas has raw land as far as the eye can see.
Vegas is a single industry town; when the economy tanked the tourism tanked.
Houses were higher priced in BA to begin with. Vegas was reasonable in ‘95, while BA has always been high priced.
I’m not saying that the high prices are justified, but these are two different areas.
Eschew Obfuscation

This is exactly exactly the kind of "denial" talk still espoused by the Fortress residents, but eventually history will teach them a "huge" lesson. If Vegas has raw land as far as the eye can see, and Bay Area has none, then Bay Area would have to become another 120% more "attractive" relative to Vegas in the next boom, so that would already be 240%. So, after every boom and bust cycle, Bay Area would just become more and more out-of-step with Vegas. Does that sound logical? No, and history shows that areas where land use is limited only becomes relatively more expensive, while the boom lasts, but when it's over, the prices go back to their original price ratios. So 1995 was the bottom of the cycle for both Vegas and Bay Area. When we reach the bottom of this cycle, the ratio of Vegas/Bay Area will be once again, as it was back in 1995.

I don't know about ratios and all that - but certainly the fact that there are no jobs available in Vegas lends itself to a less attractive environment.

BA has always been and remains out of reach of the average person. Unless you fall onto a pile of money, it's too expensive.

elliemae says

I don’t know about ratios and all that - but certainly the fact that there are no jobs available in Vegas lends itself to a less attractive environment.
BA has always been and remains out of reach of the average person. Unless you fall onto a pile of money, it’s too expensive.
Eschew Obfuscation

Nobody is arguing that Bay Area is more attractive. The question is, why, did it, all of sudden become 120% more attractive in the last 16 years? All you BA deniers keep repeating the obvious, that the Bay Area is more attractive, but can't explain this huge divergence which happened in the last 16 years.

I have a close friend who bought in Los Altos in the 1990s. They get realtors cold-calling them with offers every week.

75 homes in Los Altos:

http://www.redfin.com/homes-for-sale#!lat=37.36796863957636&long=-122.09588308704454&market=sanfrancisco&region_id=11018&region_type=6&sf=1%2C2&v=6&zoomLevel=12

vs. ~3000 listings in W Las Vegas.

75 homes for the creme de la creme. Bidding war.

dunnross says

All you BA deniers keep repeating the obvious, that the Bay Area is more attractive, but can’t explain this huge divergence which happened in the last 16 years.

Supply & demand, and Prop 13 limiting geezer turnover and encouraging rentals by heirs.

The Atherton - Los Gatos axis is a terminal neighborhood, you only leave in the back of an ambulance.

New supply is scarce. They're just filling in the last bit of farmland in MV now:

http://www.bayareazip.com/2011/05/enclave-at-waverly-park-mountain-view.html

50 new homes! After that, this axis is pretty much done. LV can add 50 homes a day, if they had the demand.

Maybe 'cause it's prettier than the desert? Or because there are more jobs? Because the jobs available are more diverse? Because more people live there and wish to continue to do so? Because their families are located there and want to stay?

Because they've written cooler songs about the BA? Because the beaches are closer? Because the pizza is better?

Isn't it also possible that you're comparing apples to oranges? Just because prices are different doesn't mean that "the Fortress become 120% more attractive relative to Vegas in the last 16 years?"

It just Is.

elliemae says

Maybe ’cause it’s prettier than the desert? Or because there are more jobs? Because the jobs available are more diverse? Because more people live there and wish to continue to do so? Because their families are located there and want to stay?
Because they’ve written cooler songs about the BA? Because the beaches are closer? Because the pizza is better?
Isn’t it also possible that you’re comparing apples to oranges? Just because prices are different doesn’t mean that “the Fortress become 120% more attractive relative to Vegas in the last 16 years?”
It just Is.
Eschew Obfuscation

All those things were there 16 years ago. You must think that 16 years ago people were stupid because they didn't see all those things, and now they do, but the fact of the matter is, all those things were already baked into the price 16 years ago. BA was already 2-3x as expensive as LV. Now it's more than 5x more expensive, and Fortress RE is 10-15x more expensive.

dunnross says

You must think that 16 years ago people were stupid

Yes I do.

elliemae says

dunnross says

You must think that 16 years ago people were stupid

Yes I do.
Eschew Obfuscation

No, BA deniers like you are much more myopic, because you never learn from history. You never noticed that RE in more desirable areas of Japan crashed more than in less desirable. You never noticed that land prices in UK, where they had land development laws crashed more in Germany in the 90's where they didn't have those laws. You never notice that in your own California prices dropped much harder during the 90's recession than they did in places in Texas, where land is everywhere the eye can see. Yes, all those examples of history are completely meaningless to you because you chose to barry your head in the sand like an ostrich, and keep repeating like parrot: BA is different, BA is different, BA is different.

dunnross says

No, BA deniers like you...You never notice that in your own California prices dropped...all those examples of history are completely meaningless to you because you chose to barry your head in the sand like an ostrich, and keep repeating like parrot: BA is different, BA is different, BA is different.

Wow, dunnross, you might want to untie them thar panties a bit. And un"barry" your head from whatever orifice it's in, because the echo is making you sound pretty angry...

You asked:
dunnross says

Bay Area prices were already much higher than Vegas back in 1995, but did the Fortress become 120% more attractive relative to Vegas in the last 16 years?

And I answered: elliemae says

I’m not saying that the high prices are justified, but these are two different areas.

And might I add, you've quoted an article written about Vegas and attempting to link it to the Bay Area. Why don't you compare Detroit instead?

12725 Wade StDetroit, MI 48213
For sale $2,450.00
July 2001 zestimate $56k

What does this say about the Bay Area?

By the way, I'm gonna let you in on a teeny secret. I don't live in California. I'm not defending California. I've been to the Bay Area once... but I do know Vegas, and know that you're not an expert on Vegas merely because you read an article about Vegas that was written over a month ago.

elliemae says

but I do know Vegas, and know that you’re not an expert on Vegas merely because you read an article about Vegas that was written over a month ago.

Yes, things have really change a lot in 1 month (NOT). That's the problem with people like you, that you think that 1 month is going to change things all of a sudden. Let's say that most people who lived 16 years ago are already dead and forgotten. But what about the people just 5 years ago, who thought that Vegas was only 2x as cheap as the Bay Area? Were they all stupid too? So, all people 16 years back, 5 years back and even 1 month back were stupid. Well, using your very logic, you will sound just as stupid today when you realize that the BA prices will also go back to 1975 level tomorrow.

Hey, once again, I don't give a shit about the Bay Area prices. I really don't.

I didn't say that things did (or didn't) change in Vegas in a month. I did say, perhaps not clearly enough, that your comparisons between the two areas failed. And the problem with people like me - I'm assuming that you mean my anti-dentite stance - has nothing to do with the cost of land in Vegas as compared to the Bay area.

You're arguing with yourself, which really makes you look like an ass. An angry one.