Saturday, August 23, 2008

Sacramento Real Estate Market - August 2008 Water Cooler

Post off-topic links, observations, and stories about the Sacramento real estate market here. Please read the comment policy before posting.

83 comments:

campbeln said...

Hello all,

Well, I've had a question for a while and since this thread is burning up I figured I'd finally ask...

What are the resources everyone is using to watch your favored Sacramento neighborhood house prices? I know people on other sites/blogs/etc. talk about watching the tax rolls, foreclose filings and the like but I'm not sure where that information is!? I've simply been looking Realtor.com as well as a personalized list from a realtor (in addition to reading the copious amounts of information off blogs, such as this).

I know what a "good" price is (100-120x rent, or 2-3x household income, etc.) but how is everyone else keeping tabs on their areas of choice?

Many thanks in advance!

Cn

Jennifer said...

campbeln,

I watch sacbee.com for the mls listings, and the sacbee.com homes sales database for sales prices. They are a little slow on releasing prices-maybe others have a better method.

campbeln said...

Well, just ran across this site on CR:

http://hotpads.com/main.htm

This is nice as it includes rents -vs- home prices, this is very useful for those value calculations =)

Cn

campbeln said...

Thanks Jennifer! I haven't been to the sacbee.com stuff in a while, but I guess there was additional info there that wasn't important to me at the time.

paranoid renter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
paranoid renter said...

I just get listings from ziprealty. If you go by the rent numbers - 100 to 120 times - then we would have to wait for home prices to drop another 30-40%! I don't think that is likely to happen with homes. With condos we are almost there...but I'm not sure if that number includes mello roos and HOA dues because those add up, especially in the newer ones. You could "own" the condo free and clear and still be paying 300-400/mo for property tax, mello roos, and HOA dues, and the cost of maintenance!

As an example, in Rocklin it is possible to find a 2Bd/2Ba condo for ~140K. Such a unit would probably rent for ~1200-1300. The HOA dues for that place are $220/mo. The property tax would be $120 or so. There's probably a mello roos, not listed, but likely around $100.

campbeln said...

paranoid renter: Holy crap!

At what point do those condos become liabilities as opposed to assets? I've read about some condo projects in Phoenix and Florida where the home owners dues are astronomical (1-2k+/mo!?) on what used to be million+ condos. 'Course this doesn't rise to that occasion, but I wouldn't buy into a condo with those carrying costs hanging over my head unless the thing was given to me (and even then I'd need to find another sucker to "give" it to when I wanted out).

As for rents (100-120x) and medium income (2-3x) I still believe that they are valid measures of "value" long term. Not sure if you saw the Meredith Whitney interview from a few days ago (http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/2008/08/debt-rattle-august-1-2008-bad-math.html), but she makes a good points (remember, these numbers are nationwide):

-----
While, as Whitney says, the Case/Shiller index predicts a 33% drop in residential real estate prices, and most other predictions claim an even - often much- smaller decline, she is sure it will be worse than 33%. She doesn’t say how much worse, but calls lesser claims "bad math".

Her reasoning is as follows:

* Since 2000, 85% of the liquidity in the US housing market has come from securitization. From 2005-2007, $2.5 trilllion worth of mortgages was securitized.
* Today, obviously, mortgage backed securities hardly find buyers. That is, except for Fannie and Freddie.
* A 33% drop in home prices would lead us back to the price level of 2002-2003. However, homeownership was higher then, and the securities trade was blooming.
* Today, banks have less capital, since their shares have lost 50% or more of their value. This will inevitable lead to less lending, which leads to less buyers, which results in lower housing prices.

Whitney therefore states that a drop in prices of 33% or less is not just unlikely, it is mathematically impossible.
-----

Add to this the fact that during the next decade, 45 percent of the work force, or 75 million baby boomers, will retire. They're primary "savings" is their homes, they'll be looking to cash out and down size. That will further help to throw off the "supply" part of the equation.

Cn

campbeln said...

"during the next decade, 45 percent of the work force, or 75 million baby boomers, will retire"

Some disagree with the number of boomers (as well as the year boundries), but here's one definition I found:

http://www.bbhq.com/whatsabm.htm
-----
Stated very simply, the demographers, sociologists and the media define baby boomers as those born between (and including) 1946 and 1964. (There is no law or constitutional amendment so stating; and other boundaries have been suggested. But this is the time frame most commonly used.) In 2007, that would make us between 43 and 61 years old. There are about 75 million boomers in the U.S.; we currently represent about 29% of the U.S. population.
-----

Is date range is more then a decade, but the retiring has also already started. Anyway, the "next decade" claim is a bit inaccurate. Suffice it to say there's a huge number of older individuals that will be looking to sell/downsize/die off putting their homes on the market at a not so good time.

paranoid renter said...

campbeln,

I had visited the Aura project in downtown Sac (which I believe subsequently got canceled). The average HOA dues there were running around $700. It would probably rent for much more than an apartment somewhere else, but then again it would cost a lot more.

Anyway, the reason I don't think prices will fall another 30-40% is because that equation (price = 100 to 120 times rent) tends to hold only in less populated areas. It has never held true in big cities (like SF, NY) and it hasn't held true in places like the Bay Area (the last time prices fell around the 9/11 attacks, rents fell with it). So maybe Sac is just "growing up".

Of course, I have been proven wrong. My paranoia has been put to rest with the magnitude at which prices have already fallen. I didn't expect them to fall so much so quickly. There's probably still room for falling until the banks find another creative way to hide their losses from this.

campbeln said...

paranoid renter:

I think we pretty much agree when it comes down to it (with some variations to the degree, maybe). Personally, I feel that the price per sq/ft in Rocklin will be in the neighborhood of $100/sqft near the bottom. Not certain what year this bring prices back down to, and this won't be in all areas necessary.

'Course, the wife and I nearly offered $330,000 on a 4/3/2163sqft place in Antelope about 20 months ago. At the time it was listed at $365,000 and one down the road sold 9-12 months prior for $435,000. At the time I figured anything over $300,000 was at risk. Thankfully, we never made an offer. The home finally sold 12 months later for $285,000. And 2-3 months ago another 2163sqft'r around the corner closed at $240,000. My point - I too have been wrong!

If this were a college course, I'd be happy with a 90% on the final test, so if we can "time" the "bottom" within 10% I think I'll be pretty happy with that. And I'd much prefer to catch the 10% on the way back up, not on the way down. So I think puts us on the sidelines for a few years AT LEAST =)

Cn

campbeln said...

Oh, re: the 100-120x calc. not necessary applying outside of rural... thanks for that! I've hear it as a global rule of thumb, so I'll take a closer look at that calc.

Cn

campbeln said...

[Mental note: Reread posts before posting... Me no sound like native speaking English ;) Add in a "that" and replace a "hear" with "heard" as necessary! ]

campbeln said...

Heh... I guess all I needed to do was ask and I'd find the answers that day!

http://www.placercountyhomesandland.net/2008/08/updated-list-of.html
-----
Upcoming trustee's sales can now be found on-line at www.fidelityasap.com, which is free to register with and allows you to search by county, city, zip-code and even by individual accessors parcel numbers.
-----

Cn

Jacob said...

I mainly use ziprealty for looking at homes. I have recently come across a few useful sites I will share, might be useful to others.

I have been checking out a few open houses, found a good site that lists them.

http://www.movoto.com/openhouses.aspx?flag=1

Plug in your cities and other criteria, pick saturday and / or sunday and get a list. It has been really accurate so far.

I am looking in Roseville / Rocklin, so anyone looking in Placer county may like there.

If you want to lookup tax info you can do it here:

http://www.placer.ca.gov/Departments/Assessor/Assessment%20Inquiry/Assessment%20Inquiry%20Iframe.aspx

You will need a parcel number, and you can look that up from here:

http://lis.placer.ca.gov/gis.asp?s=1332&h2=875

I use that to also confirm the recorded square footage for a house. Still may not be 100% but at least it can confirm if there is an "error" in a listing.

I think $100 / ft2 sounds about right. Add in a premium if the lot is large. We are getting close. I am seeing some for $120-$150 / ft2.

I'm not worried about timing the bottom, I will have several years to buy once we get there.

James said...

"* Since 2000, 85% of the liquidity in the US housing market has come from securitization. From 2005-2007, $2.5 trilllion worth of mortgages was securitized."

Those smart investment bankers at Goldman will soon find a new way to sell debt backed by mortgages.

"* Today, banks have less capital, since their shares have lost 50% or more of their value. This will inevitable lead to less lending, which leads to less buyers, which results in lower housing prices."

Just a minor point... it is not the falling share prices of a bank's stock which impacts its ability or willingness to lend. The markdowns of assets has caused them to increase cash reserves, thus reducing the amount of loans they can carry on the books. If loans cannot be sold, it leaves them with two choices: not lend, or sell the bad loans to free up cash held in reserve. Since there are not many buyers for the loans, it leaves you with only one choice.
Now that we are starting to see a little more visibility on the housing front, a few buyers of debt are actually stepping up to the plate. My guess is the credit markets will be significantly looser a year from now.

campbeln said...

James:
Those smart investment bankers at Goldman will soon find a new way to sell debt backed by mortgages.
Oh, no doubt there (have you read about "covered bonds"?), the real question is: "Who's gonna be dumb enough to buy them?"

Share price impacting lending...
Yep, I agree here as well, I was just excerpting from the linked article. But the low share price impacts their ability to raise additional capitol that would/could in turn be used for lending (as opposed to writedowns/offs), which I think is the point they were making.

Recent buyers of MBSs...
Those sales are happening at 10c on the dollar (Australia's NAB overall, lower tranches were written to 0) or 5.5c on the dollar in the case of M.Lynch (22c on the dollar, but 75% was financed with the only backing being the sold MBSs, so they suffer any losses over 5.5c on the dollar).

One good thing about this economy, I'll earn an honorary econ degree!

Cn

campbeln said...

James: Thanks for the links, by the way!!

Cn

James said...

"As an example, in Rocklin it is possible to find a 2Bd/2Ba condo for ~140K. Such a unit would probably rent for ~1200-1300. The HOA dues for that place are $220/mo. The property tax would be $120 or so. There's probably a mello roos, not listed, but likely around $100."

I personally do not think this is a bad deal....

$140M purchase price. 75% LTV gives a loan of $105M. With a 5/1 interest only arm, you will be looking at payments of about $550. Add $220 HOA and $120 for property tax and you have minimum monthly outflows of $890.
The HOA fees cover landscaping and exterior maintenance, and even cable at some developments. Tack on another $200/mo for vacancies and other expenses and you are at about $1100/mo expenses.
Now that still leaves $100-200 per month net cash, or about 6% yield.
Now here is where the accounting fun comes in. You will be reducing your taxable income by the mortgage interest, depreciation, taxes, insurance, repairs, accounting, and every other BS expense you can fudge into it. Now that 6% yield suddenly turns into about a 20-24% yield.
You could come in and rent the place for $50-100 below market and get a tenant in quickly. This will temporarily further erode the value, but that is not important, it is the tax savings you will realize over the next 5-10 years.

James said...

As far as price to rents, or P/E ratio, the old established neighborhoods are doing just fine. This is a post for a couple of months ago, but still pretty current data.

James said...

So I just went to wisler land company and sacrentals.com and took all the recently rented homes in 95819 and 95818, then looked up the price of the house on Zillow. The formatting is a little messed up, but you can see it shows the address, monthly rent, home price, then price to annual rent ratio.

I did this because I saw this article showing this ratio for most major markets in the US. Sacramento in 2007 was 28.7 and has a 15 year average of 19.4. With this small sample size it is not statistically significant, but pretty good.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/price_rent_ratios/

For all the renters out there, look at your home price and divide it by what you are paying in annual rent to see if you are getting a good deal or not--historically.

Address, Rent, Zillow Price Home Price/Annual Rent
260 36th Way, 1895, 458000 20.1407212
5228 G - Street, 1950, 375000 16.02564103
849 Bear Flag Way, 1565 305000 16.24068158
1114 Castro Way, 2395 349000 12.14335421
90 Aiken Way, 1795 379500 17.6183844
1635 50th Street, 1649 294000 14.85748939
90 43rd Street, 1925 413000 17.87878788
361 Messina Drive, 3279 849000 21.57670021
1470 52nd Street, 2795 610500 18.20214669
1950 5th Ave, 2195 528000 20.04555809
529 38th Street, 2695 591000 18.27458256
1536 41st Street, 2200 459000 17.38636364
1136 Teneighth, 2085 410000 16.38689049
5300 S Street, 1600 296000 15.41666667

Average price to rent 17.29956914

This is below the 15 year average for Sacramento. As a measure of value, this indicates this market is in line with historical norms.

James said...

"Now that 6% yield suddenly turns into about a 20-24% yield."

Sorry, I mistyped on the 20-24% yield, it should read 8-12%.

norcaljeff said...

I think I know what condos you're talking about in Rocklin. I don't think you can get that kind of rent. You could rent an apt down the street for a few hundred less a month, have better neighbors and live in a newer property. You might want to be 100% certain on those rents before you commit.

Patient Renter said...

if we can "time" the "bottom" within 10% I think I'll be pretty happy with that

Ahh, the 'ole timing the bottom myth. The housing market is not the stock market, and it doesn't behave like it.

http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/7254/shillerqk7.png

[Sacramento] has a 15 year average of 19.4

It's worth pointing out that the latter half of those 15 years were bubble territory.

This is below the 15 year average for Sacramento.

Those rents seem pretty high for those prices. $2395/mo to rent something that costs 349000? Sure... These numbers might work for some areas, but certainly not everywhere.

James said...

"Those rents seem pretty high for those prices. $2395/mo to rent something that costs 349000?"

Those are true actual numbers for rented properties, not those available to rent. Verify any one of them.

"Sure... These numbers might work for some areas, but certainly not everywhere."

That is exactly the point. Buying real estate is all about location. There are neighborhoods int he bay area which continue to appreciate, while neighborhoods a mile down the road are down 10%.
I think people are getting too generalized on where prices will go, ie $100 sq ft in Rocklin. There are streets in Rocklin which will probably sell for this, but there are also streets which were selling for $100 sq ft in 1991. Bottom line, buy the best you can afford for your situation. In the long run you will be happier. You may not have as big of a house, but you will have good neighbors, less price disruption, and an overall better qualify of life.

Deflationary Jane said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deflationary Jane said...

I agree PR. James pulls those numbers out from time to time but they make no sense. All cherry picked in prime areas (we covered that before ad nausem).

I'm working on a Sacramento Stress Model. Just need to plot Roubani, Whitney, and Thornberg appearing in the MSM in a 24 hr period against the number of James, Luca, and sacramentalia's posts during the same 24 hr period >; )

Can you have a contraindicator of a contraindicator?

James said...

"I agree PR. James pulls those numbers out from time to time but they make no sense. All cherry picked in prime areas (we covered that before ad nausem)."

Jane, I don't think we have covered this ad nausem. You replied back once saying you didn't believe they were real.
These numbers represented the entire rented inventory from SacRentals.com on that date for two neighborhoods. No Cherry picking. Like it or not, those are accurate representations of the rental market in East Sac. Why don't you go and gather some cherry picked ones to prove me wrong?
The best and most desirable areas are not over priced.

Before your departure you were quite the prolific poster as well Jane. In fact, I see you all over the internet posting "facts" about the dire and hapless state of our housing market and economy and all the conspiracy theory's behind every number.

I hope you are enjoying your move to St. Louis with it 99 deg high and 74% humidity today. You really showed the city of Davis, didn't you?

James said...

Well, this is my last post.

This blog has been my only experience with blogging and will be my last.

Jane, I am taking my ball and going home. I am going to go concentrate on widening the income/wealth gap between your type and mine. I hope misery finds comfort in Missouri.

smf said...

"The best and most desirable areas are not over priced."

Would you consider Gold River to be a good and desirable area?

Would my recently purchased home (once purchased in 1999 for $415K) give me enough of an opinion to your liking?

Would our combined well over $100K income give us more clout?

Would my 19 years in the construction industry give me a good insight to what is going on?

Yes, the market sucks and will continue to suck for a while. The higher end areas are just starting to feel the pain.

Jacob said...

I think that you being in construction and still having a realistic outlook on things says a lot. Most people opinions are based more one what is in their best interests than what is really happening.

campbeln said...

Patient Renter, the timing myth:

Heh... hence "timing" the "bottom", not to mention wanting to catch it on the upside. RE tanks over years, stays flat for some time then creeps back up. Not a myth, just history. And of course history may not repeat, but it does rhyme.

I find it very funny that people are willing to drive to an "outlet" mall to save a few duckets, but then justify why it's ok to overspend on a home by 50k =) Maybe the terms "timing" the "bottom" is your issue, which is fine - I use it to mean watching the market for a known observable pricing pattern and leveraging that accordingly. Will we "overspend" in some people's eyes? Probably, but not by a hell of a lot if we consume the available data well.

And no, the housing market isn't like the stock market at all... in the stock market you can have completely worthless companies trading high (Pets.com) while 8 years out of 10 the housing market is bound by real incomes and fundamentals. You can't have homes disconnected from incomes for that long. Stocks can be disconnected for as long as the CEO can play hide the pickle.

Cn

Patient Renter said...

It sounds like we agree on how the bottom will play out. I was just making sure.

I find it very funny that people are willing to drive to an "outlet" mall to save a few duckets, but then justify why it's ok to overspend on a home by 50k =)

Well said :)

paranoid renter said...

>>>>
Yes, the market sucks and will continue to suck for a while. The higher end areas are just starting to feel the pain.
>>>>

That's how it always is...the people with the deep pockets keep the high end up a lot longer, but eventually that must fall too, because people buying those homes would eventually get affected by the slowing economy. It took a lot longer for the network equipment manufactures to get affected after the dot com bust...almost a year.

I suspect the same will be true now. With the failures of all the construction & mortgage related businesses, there will be loss of jobs and less business purchases and eventually less consumption. But it takes a long time to work its way through the economy.

So far tech has been untouched by this, but that doesn't mean it's immune...the biggest consumers of technology are banks and big companies and when they start cutting costs (or going out of business), then even those expensive homes will start dropping.

Patient Renter said...

MSN article projects equity in 2012 for Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville

6% loan: -107k
7% loan: -110k
8% loan: -113k

http://realestate.msn.com/rentals/Article2.aspx?cp-documentid=8377648&vv=600

norcaljeff said...

Lander,

There seems to be a lack of posts of late. Vacations? Disinterest in the same news everyday? What's the site traffic look like in the past 30 days?

Where have the bulls gone? Are you guys throwing in the towel yet? I wanna know because I want to be able to find the bottom LOL.

norcaljeff said...

James = Sippin? No? LOL

paranoid renter said...

norcaljeff,

It's time to stop reading and go out and buy a home! That's what everyone else is doing, so no time to post comments.

(Just kidding.)

Patient Renter said...

Lander - I've been curious too. What are you up to lately? You used to post a bit more personal commentary, now it's all about the facts. What kind of journalism is that?

Cmyst said...

Well, the whole mess kind of rose up and started smacking people I actually cared about down, so I stopped posting for a few months.
Now, I'm getting back into it because I'm tired of the amount of time we spend on this rental and I'm not getting any younger. I'd like to "own" a place while I can still enjoy it and have the energy to work on it.
There's a point where individual circumstances and declining housing values cross, and I guess I'm at that point.

Patient Renter said...

the whole mess kind of rose up and started smacking people I actually cared about down

I'm sure that's true with most of us. I have one family member who lost their house and other family expecting to lose theirs soon. But they all recognize it was of their own doing, and that we'll all be better off in the future with affordable prices and normalized lending. Overall, I think they've been humbled.

paranoid renter said...

>>>>
There's a point where individual circumstances and declining housing values cross, and I guess I'm at that point.
>>>>

I'm beyond that point...I've reconciled with myself that's it's OK to be a renter for life. (Actually, I had convinced myself about that once I decided not to buy in 2004 because there was a good chance I was going to be priced out forever. Now that I can afford it again, I simply don't think it's worth the hassle...a friend of mine who bought a new home found some mice and ended up signing up for a pest control service that costs $70/month. Think of all the other hidden costs and headaches that come with owning, and renting seems a whole lot cooler.)

Shayne said...

I find it hard to believe anybody who trolls housing blogs daily is really "satisfied" with renting for the rest of their lives.

HOUSE2008 said...

It's time to stop reading and go out and buy a home!

I did just that! Whoot Whoot! Just in time for the Governator to smack yours truly with a $6.55 an hour pay. Nothing like geting paid $6.55 an hour on a $320K home eh? LIVE DANGEROUSLY I TELL YA! Ach. (Luckily I have that safe in my wall with a spare 100K to pay the mortgage.. minus the silk robe.)Right!

Anyhow, I'd like to thank everyone for their masterful contribution & insight to this housing market mess over the past two years. I'm not one to time the bottom and as such am not caring ONE atom what my house cost a year or ten years from now. I'm just going to enjoy it. Can't wait for diaper bottoms to start crawling around & tearing the house up:) Lately I've been tearing up the front yard & realized I'm not 24 anymore. Ha, I'm getting up a tad bit slower. Not much! But justa tad.

Any recommendation on a good tree to plant? Any botanists here? I'm leaning more towards Japanese style trees or such. Thanks!

paranoid renter said...

Shayne,

I wouldn't necessarily be satisfied renting for life, but I'd be OK with it if that is what it came down to. I'll consider buying if I think that financials support such a decision. At this point, things are still way in favor of renting.

Recently my awareness has increased with respect to the building materials used in new construction. The chemicals used cause much off-gassing (yes, that's part of the "new house smell") that's considered harmful for one's health.

Patient Renter said...

HOUSE2k8 - congrats!

Sold in '05 said...

Stop the presses!

You all MUST read Sacrealstats latest post on the MLS vs. Shadow Inventory as seen by Deutsche Bank research team. Mind blowing number.

http://sacrealstats.blogspot.com/2008/08/insight-into-shadow-inventory.html

anon1137 said...

First they were the home of strip malls, chain stores & restaurants, and fat married white folks who shopped at Costco and drove SUVs, then they were ground zero for the foreclosure crisis, now they're the new site of Section 8 housing. Very interesting story on the continued deterioration of the suburbs.

From the LA Land blog:

From The New York Times via Patrick.net: The government's Section 8 housing program, combined with the housing downturn, is allowing more poor, inner-city renters to move into vacant suburban houses, causing "cultural shock waves" that include "social and racial tensions."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/09/us/09housing.html?_r=1&ref=patrick.net&oref=slogin

HOUSE2008 said...

HOUSE2k8 - congrats!

Thanks! Best of luck to ALL in their search of the perfect house.

anon1137 said...

House2008, the best neighborhoods in Sac are defined by their trees. Go and look at what's planted on the curb in Midtown, East Sac, and Land Park. Plant deciduous trees on the south and west sides, conifers on the north. Don't be shy, choose the biggest and healthiest species.

LA Land blog has a "tree of the week" feature.

Good luck with those diapers.

Megan said...

Hello All:

My little brother is getting married in a few months and wants to purchase his first home. He as asked me about the following home in Roseville. I do not know anything about Roseville and was hoping somebody could give a little guidance on what should be offered. The house sold for $180,000 new in 2000 and $425,000 in 2005. It is a BofA repo with a $435,000 loan. The bank has it listed for $249,000--over a 60% decline. I suggested he go in at $200,000 and see what happens.

109 Arabian Way, Roseville, CA
95678

Megan said...

Sorry, I mean a 40% decline.

waiting_for_the_fall said...

Wait three years and he'll be able to get it for 175.

Rich said...

Did someone say $100/sf in Rocklin?

2135 Arnold Dr, 2864sf for $299K

sacramentia said...

Megan- Time is on your brother's side so be patient and negotiate well. Putting offer prices on the internet doesn't help because people always want what others have but don't like what they don't know about.

Patient Renter said...

Megan - seems like a pretty good price cut from the peak. The value of any home will certainly decline more from where it is right now though, so just make sure that your brother is aware of this if he decides to buy, and that he isn't planning on selling in the next few years since the home may very well be worth less. If he's okay with waiting some more, I'm sure it'll be worth his while.

Jacob said...

Yea, I would say wait it out for now, but if he does offer, dont expect the bank to accept. that offer is 20% below what the bank wants, I think you would be lucky if they accept 5% below.

So you have to wait for them to slowly lower the price.

Last weekend I saw a nice home in Lincoln, was 88/ft2 and the only thing that seemed wrong was it needed to be painted. Small yard, but the home was around 3000ft2, price was $275K I belive. But the HOA and Mello Roos were over $400...

So I am back to focussing on Roseville and Rocklin.

I saw a really nice home in Roseville - 80044272. The yard was perfect and the home itself was just about perfect.

Problem was they are asking $850k and in 04 it sold for even less than that, $790. Homes in the area are around $150/ft2 and they wanted $222/ft2.

So I just have to be patient. At $150/ft2 it would have been really tempting.

Patient Renter said...

Jeez Jacob, that one in Roseville is a whole lotta house!

Cmyst said...

Grats, House2008.
Good luck with your tree planting, too! Consider sun and shade. Shade can keep your house cooler and your outdoor space way more pleasant. I had a Japanese Maple in front of a bay window in a house once. It wasn't very big. It added color and texture, but the humongous fruitless mulberry and pine tree were what kept the yard shady and pleasant.

Jacob said...

yea I know, probably 1000 ft2 or so more than I am looking for (tho at the right price...).

The backyard was really nice, very well done. Gave me some ideas for my eventual backyard.

anon1137 said...

Flip gone from bad to worse in Midtown:

MLS # 80068593, 4 BR. 3 BA, 1373 ft2
Last sale on 5/15/07 for $620,000
Listed on 7/8/08 for $450,000
Price reduced on 08/13/08 to $325,000

Deflationary Jane said...

Grats on the house 2008.

My girlfriend is still waiting to hear back on Reo she bid on 2 weeks ago. In the meantime, I help her watch inventory for a distance. Did the market seize up in late July and August? That's what it looks like from out here.

paranoid renter said...

>>>
Did the market seize up in late July and August?
>>>

You mean a pause in the free fall? :-)

Deflationary Jane said...

I was thinking it more from the banks perspective: credit and time to market and maintain the junk they have.

I think what's happening is that houses are going pending and falling out of escrow because of lending problems but the banks are so distracted and flooded that they don't realize they need to get a new listing agent (they sat that long) and get the homes out there again. How else do you explain a house listed as pending for 9 mos but it's still vacant with zero work being done to it?

norcaljeff said...

Meagan, no reason he needs to get a home just because he got married. There's no rule for that. I know a lot of married people living in apts and condos, and you can get a nice condo for a steal now, and trade up once the economy turns. That's a very business street where the home is and tons of foreclosed properties in that area so he's neighbors will continue to put downward pressure on those home prices. I'm sure you can hear freeway noise from that location too. I would try and get it as close to $100/sqft as you can, but waiting is the best option.

Rich, good catch, I saw that one as well. My buddy lives around the corner and said that street and area is starting to look a lot like Rio Linda. Lots of couples trying to keep up with the Jones' in that neck of the woods and now they are all paying the piper.

Jeremiah said...

I can tell you that in July we tried to buy a house. Went in to escrow and the whole nine yards. Thank you banks for pushing us out of escrow. I feel sorry for the family trying to sell this home. We were the second set of buyers that fell thru due to financing. It has turned out to be a good thing, another 10-15ku off homes.

paranoid renter said...

What do you guys think about eco-friendly housing?
http://www.ljurban.com/projects/good-projects/

They claim they use all kinds of environmentally friendly building materials that are also healthier. Makes me wonder if it ever makes sense to buy a conventional new home...everything from counter tops to paint to flooring to furnishings give off toxic fumes!

Or am I just being paranoid? :-)

Nathan said...

Request to re-appraise house for property tax.

Hello all,

In a previous posting in this blog, it mentions San Francisco county has an informal request and a formal appeal to re-appraise house value for property tax purpose.

Does anyone know Sacramento County has something similar to that, and how do I start the process. There is no way I am going to pay the same tax amount like last year with the declining house value.

Nathan

sacramentia said...

call the sacramento county assessor so that you can figure out the process. http://www.assessor.saccounty.net/SAC_ASR_DF_DeclineValue08-09 It looks like they have already reassessed 85,000 properties.

For El Dorado County, requests are filed at the end of the calendar year and new values are sent out in May or so based on the value of the home on Jan 1.

anon1137 said...

There's a mini, late-summer surge of houses coming on the market in Midtown/East Sac, all at bubblicious prices. Maybe the owners sense that the good times are coming to an end, maybe they see better values in the burbs, or maybe their ARMs are resetting.

Cmyst said...

PR asked "What do you guys think about eco-friendly housing?
http://www.ljurban.com/projects/good-projects/"

As you might guess, I'm all for it. I'm also pleased at energy-efficiency built into houses, solar roof tiles and water heaters, etc.
It's not worth an extra 100K to me, though -- I'd rather retrofit a used house with a bigger lot. But if you put two new houses on similar sized lots in similar neighborhoods, I'd be more inclined to the energy-efficient, green built one even if it were smaller OR cost 20K more or so.

cole said...

Anybody who thinks they're "good" and then calls a two bit cheapo apartment complex in west sac "good" has graduated from the Barnum and Bailey Carney School...and anybody, but anybody who buys into that con and then pays home owner association fees for that scam needs to contact me about shares I am selling on the Brooklyn Bridge...The guy pushing that project made some money on the phony baloney real estate hustle that is now called the Sacramento Real Estate Bust based on nothing more than real estate/mortgage huster's hype, lies and BS...

wannabuy said...

paranoid renter said...

>>>
Did the market seize up in late July and August?
>>>

You mean a pause in the free fall? :-)


I'm hearing rumors in other places too... Are we running out of qualified knife catchers whom have a sufficient down payment?

Tisk tisk. It wouldn't be like that was predicted. I thought we'd be able to go until the spring in California. So is this California? The national credit crunch? Or Sacramento taking lead dog position?

While we won't know for certain without a few more months of data, that's ok. 2008 is a silly time to buy unless you can get a lowball REO. I still see 2009 being the big dropoff.

Got Popcorn?
Neil

cole said...

"good" in west sac is just a hype job to sell cheapo apartments...that DO NOT respond to the environment...

http://environmentallysensitivedesign.blogspot.com/

Jacob said...

I'm hearing rumors in other places too... Are we running out of qualified knife catchers whom have a sufficient down payment?


Was bound to happen, we are way overbuilt, eventually you run out of people to rent or buy all the homes. Once banks start to realize that the last few exits are slamming shut, panic will set in.

And there is still that tsunami of Alt-A loans getting ready to drown everyone.

paranoid renter said...

>>>
"good" in west sac is just a hype job to sell cheapo apartments...that DO NOT respond to the environment...
>>>>

Why do you say that? Are their claims about being eco-conscious not genuine?

cole said...

is the "good" project a fraud?

Tell me it ain't so joe...lol...

the basics of environmental design were given to you already...

http://environmentallysensitivedesign.blogspot.com/

the properties of silicon have been known for almost 50 years...the "green" movement and especially LEED is only a front for EXXON and large companies and their scam artists locally to rip you off and make you believe you are actually doing "good"...

go buy a place where you can plant a tree in your front yard and plant a small orchard in your backyard and pick the oranges or peaches...and really do some good...

Yes, the "good" project is a scam...Education in physics and mathematics is the best cure for the scam real estate artists such as "good"...

but do what you want, it's a free country and we still have plenty of share to sell in the Bridge in Brooklyn

cole said...

almost everything in "good" has been required by the California Energy Code and is nothing new...they only conform to established criteria...

one has to look at orientation and then question how one wants to live in a suburban environment in Sacramento, for contrary to the hype, Sacramento is a suburban environment, even downtown...Sacramento is not Chicago, New York or even Sacramento Street in SF...not even close...

so in the Sacramento environment one must look to what makes Sacramento liveable...mainly exterior shaded spaces, trees, and tree lined streets...if that does not exist in your contemplated living space or can not be created (in good, it can not for those are only cheapo apartments with no environmental amenities) then one must look elsewhere to live...

smf said...

Just heard on the radio that C.C. Myers has declared bankruptcy over the Winchester Country Club project!

http://www.sacbee.com/749/story/1184047.html

(High end immune?)

smf said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
anon1137 said...

Wait, it gets better, the FDIC is nearly bankrupt now (from WSJ story):

. . . With a rise in the number of troubled banks, the FDIC's Deposit Insurance Fund used to repay insured deposits at failed banks has been drained. . . . In a bid to replenish the $45.2 billion fund . . . FDIC might have to borrow money from the Treasury Department to see it through an expected wave of bank failures . . . The last time the FDIC had borrowed funds from the Treasury was at nearly the tail end of the savings-and-loan crisis in the early 1990s after thousands of banks were shuttered. The fact that the agency is considering the option again, after the collapse of just nine banks this year, illustrates the concern among Washington regulators about the weakness of the U.S. banking system in the wake of the credit crisis . . .

watchingthebubble said...

Wow, I feel like I'm living in a parallel universe. My husband and I have officially hopped off the fence, but whenever we find anything remotely in our price range in Rocklin, it's been bid up and snapped up. I know that house on Arnold in Rocklin didn't go for $299K. The realtors are purposefully underpricing REOs to start bidding wars. And it's working.

I even went to one home in Rocklin which was still on the market at $319K when I walked in. When I walked out ten minutes later, it had an accepted offer above asking. It had been on the market a little more than a week. One house in Roseville that I went to visit that had been on the market a day and was priced at $299,000 had an accepted offer on it at $343,000 by the time I walked out of it.

At the low end in Rocklin or Roseville, I don't think it's a buyer's market. That is, of course, unless I really am living in a parallel universe

Deflationary Jane said...

So what if they bid over? I have 3 houses on my list that were bought last year, after being priced low to encourage bidding wars, and guess what? They went straight back into foreclosure.

Plus think of the coming declines from Alt A hitting and the disappearance of the DPAs. This is far from over. Set your price and stick to it. Let someone else be the idiot.

watchingthebubble said...

DJ,

Thank you. My husband pretty much reached the same conclusion, but for different reasons.

Patient Renter said...

The realtors are purposefully underpricing REOs to start bidding wars. And it's working.

It's working now, but this crap won't go on forever. Just don't get sucked into it.