 tacomaBleeding Dodger BluePremium
join:2001-05-18
Rancho Cucamonga, CA | reply to dogma
Re: Home Values going down the toliet? The down closed down 546.02, 4.3%. 'Massive' sell off would be overstating.
Think globally!
Wall Street succumbed to a global market plunge sparked by growing concerns that the U.S. and Chinese economies are cooling and that equities prices have become overinflated.
The housing market isn't much news, as there were tons of warnings over the past few years that this would happen. |
|
 dogmaXYZPremium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
kudos:1 | said by tacoma:The down closed down 546.02, 4.3%. 'Massive' sell off would be overstating. I don't think I am overstating (perhaps sensationalizing), as it relates to real estate.
Isn't it historically true when stocks go down, interest rates go up. If this is a trend over the next 2 quarters, we will see adjustable rates rise. If that happens, those subprime folks who are already hanging on by a thread will have their rates automatically trigger up to the max allowed.
All those trillions of dollars of "re-adjustments" is what everyone has been cautious of. If there is a flood of foreclosures, then values will sink.
said by 81399672:said by HappyBunny:I am just biding my time and then will buy my first home... Never going see 40% drop, prices are actually going up very slowly but are going up. While prices may have dropped around the country that's not the case here in socal If you think you going to see a house in 400k range any time soon in a good location then you will be waiting for long time Ylen, you have simply not been here long enough to remember the last time people said: "SoCal real estate will never go down!" Some areas ... those "good" areas went down over 40%. This was just 16 short years ago.
Frankly, the environment seems exponentially worse to me now. |
|
|
|
1 edit | said by dogma: Ylen, you have simply not been here long enough to remember the last time people said: "SoCal real estate will never go down!" Some areas ... those "good" areas went down over 40%. This was just 16 short years ago. Frankly, the environment seems exponentially worse to me now. Truth. People couldn't give homes away 15 years ago...
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that always come in legions." John Callari .:|:. Say no to the IRS Yes to the Fair Tax |
|
 81399672Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:2 | said by aztecnology:said by dogma: Ylen, you have simply not been here long enough to remember the last time people said: "SoCal real estate will never go down!" Some areas ... those "good" areas went down over 40%. This was just 16 short years ago. Frankly, the environment seems exponentially worse to me now. Truth. People couldn't give homes away 15 years ago... population has increase since then. We are no longer in 1989, 1993. February housing report should give good indication of housing market
--
i am not a lawyer but I do play one on tv |
|
| said by 81399672:said by aztecnology:said by dogma: Ylen, you have simply not been here long enough to remember the last time people said: "SoCal real estate will never go down!" Some areas ... those "good" areas went down over 40%. This was just 16 short years ago. Frankly, the environment seems exponentially worse to me now. Truth. People couldn't give homes away 15 years ago... population has increase since then. We are no longer in 1989, 1993. February housing report should give good indication of housing market It's worse this time, much worse. People can only live off of MEW for so long. Incomes do not support housing prices.
Loose lending + Fraud + Speculation + any wild variable = Recipe for disaster...
I'll use the OC as an example:
The median income for a household in the county was $61,899
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Cou···lifornia
The current median house price $605,000
»blogs.ocregister.com/lansner/
Lending use to require a down payment, use to require mortgage obligations to be no more than 28%-36% of income, use to require house affordability at 3-4 times annual income...
$62,000 x 4 = $250,000
$62,000 /12 = $5,166
$600,000 @ 5% for 30 years = $3,220 with generous terms
$480,000 @ 5% for 30 years = $2,576 with a 20% downpayment
$3,220 / $5,166 = 62%
$2,576 / $5,166 = 50%
This doesn't even factor in property taxes and other credit obligations
The #'s speak for themselves...
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that always come in legions." John Callari .:|:. Say no to the IRS Yes to the Fair Tax |
|
81399672Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:2 | Like i said lets wait for february #'s to come out. All of those that are hopping that prices will drop and you can get in to the market can dream but you will most likely will have to dream for long time before it happens
--
i am not a lawyer but I do play one on tv |
|
| The day Los Angeles's bubble burst - By Mr. Ben Stein, a must read.
It happened in the 80's, it happened again in the 90's, and it's happening again in the 2000's...
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that always come in legions." John Callari .:|:. Say no to the IRS Yes to the Fair Tax |
|
| reply to 81399672
said by 81399672:Like i said lets wait for february #'s to come out. New-home sales plunge 16.6% to 937,000
Commerce Department reports biggest percentage drop in 13 years.
»www.marketwatch.com/news/story/n···BD8C9%7D
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that always come in legions." John Callari .:|:. Say no to the IRS Yes to the Fair Tax |
|
 jamez818please hold during the silence
join:2000-09-18
Sunland, CA | reply to aztecnology
I read the article and its sounds exaggerated. Its too pro new york. one thing is right though everyone wants to move to LA.
--
just whiners and complainers... |
|
| said by jamez818:I read the article and its sounds exaggerated. Its too pro new york. one thing is right though everyone wants to move to LA. That article is from 1984. It serves to illustrate the point that people are stupid, and that history repeats itself...
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that always come in legions." John Callari .:|:. Say no to the IRS Yes to the Fair Tax |
|
dogmaXYZPremium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
kudos:1
1 edit | If you want to read a horror story:
»www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article307.html
US Recession in 2007 - Third Leg of the Bear Market Likely
"As our clients know, we have been forecasting a very hard recession over the next few years. At the beginning of 2006, our analysis was viewed with skepticism, but as more data comes in from the recent performance of the economy, our forecast is becoming more probable."
(edit): ...This just came across;
NEW YORK (Fortune) -- When a certain $126,000 subprime loan on a $696,000 house on the West Coast failed to produce a single mortgage payment, alarm bells went off at Clayton Holdings, a company that monitors credit risk.
Closer scrutiny revealed other red flags. The borrower's previous rent payment had been $1,000, compared to the $4,482 she was supposed to be shelling out for both the primary loan and the $126,000 piggyback. And her stated income was $84,000 even though she was an hourly worker at Target.
»money.cnn.com/2007/02/28/magazin···?cnn=yes |
|
 jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA | reply to aztecnology
this particular article is doing it's best to incite fear... look at the vertical scale of the graph, it doesn't go to zero, but makes it look like sales have dropped off a cliff. if anything, they should have measured the drop against a running average, not a recent peak.
i'm not saying we aren't heading for a correction, but this article sucks.
--
A man compounded of law and gospel is able to cheat a whole country with his religion and then destroy them under color of law. -Ben Franklin |
|
| 
Draw your own conclusions.... |
said by jig:this particular article is doing it's best to incite fear... O rly...?
look at the vertical scale of the graph, it doesn't go to zero, but makes it look like sales have dropped off a cliff.
That's housing over the last year, and the chart is in millions...
if anything, they should have measured the drop against a running average, not a recent peak. When you do that it actually looks a lot worse...
i'm not saying we aren't heading for a correction, but this article sucks.
Not thinking about it or not talking about it will prevent reversion to the mean...
This article gets it's data from the commerce department, feel free to dismiss the bias, and provide us with a more balanced view of the data - »www.census.gov/const/www/newress···dex.html
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that always come in legions." John Callari .:|:. Say no to the IRS Yes to the Fair Tax |
|
jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA | Ok, here is the chart as it should be. The black bars are the average of the data as given. Notice that the dip in January is about 10% off the average, while the peak is about 8% above the average.
And these are just sales, AND they left off one of the most important pieces of data, the past December-January data. How many homes do you think normally switch hands around Christmas?. My bet is that seasonally, it's USUALLY the lowest sales time of the year, if for nothing else than the banks/sales staff are all on vacation.
The article is worse than useless, it's misleading.
--
A man compounded of law and gospel is able to cheat a whole country with his religion and then destroy them under color of law. -Ben Franklin |
|
 coxtaUltramundanePremium
join:2000-07-15
LALALALALALA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
1 edit | You could loess all the data for the last ten years and it would look like a smooth line. I don't have a problem with the data presentation, it's a way to give an idea of the relative change, not the absolute. The issue, is how it's interpreted.
I work around the real estate business, and the prevailing observation is that home prices are steady to increasing, but sales are fewer. Also, keep in mind that presented data is lagging by about six months.
--
cum hoc ergo propter hoc |
|
