823 Ophir Peak just listed in Incline Village for $617,900. Take a look at the pictures on the MLS – the place is a dump. But this little dump is costing Bank of America (and you and I) over $750,000. Here’s the story:
The house was purchased in May 2005 for $1,035,000. Well sort of. The actual sales price was $1,150,000 and included $115,000 in "personal property". The personal property was counted as the down payment, and BofA gave the owner a $835,000 Option ARM 1st and a $150,000 HELOC 2nd for the recorded sales price. Could this place possibly have been worth over a million, even back then?
In October 2006, BofA enabled a refi – $937,500 OA 1st and a $187,000 HELOC ($1,124,500). In January 2008 the HELOC was replaced with a new one with a $416,000 limit ($1,353,000). Five months later, the owner stopped paying and the NOD was filed in October. BofA bought the house back at the trustee’s sale in February for $835,397. The amount due on the first loan was $1,045,498 at that time, and the HELOC was written off.
I’m not allowed to speculate that fraud might have been involved in the transactions I profile on this blog – there are liability issues. You are not under the same constraint in your comments.
Reno Ignoramus
Another bank, another borrower, and another symbiotic journey down the path to hell wrought full with greed, arrogance, incompetence and deceit.
Once again, what more can we say about these situations that hasn’t already been said a hundred times?
As I have said before, Mike, 40 men could spend 40 days and 40 nights searching the records and they would not have enough time to uncover all the nonsense and the crap that was known as the real estate market between 2002 and 2007.
Martin
It appears that one of SkrapGuy’s trash loans has left the 89436 zipcode and taken up in the high end doo daa zipcode.
SkrapGuy
B of A took the personal property as a down payment? How in hell can that comport with ANY underwriting standards? Oh wait, I’m sorry, I forgot that this deal happened in May of ’05, and there weren’t any underwriting standards.
Lurch
I want to know who the appraiser was that said this was a million dollar property EVER. I want to know who approved a household of crap furniture being valued at EXACTLY 10% of the property’s value. I want to know if the if the loan agent or broker for BOA was the same for all these transactions. I want to know who approved a $229K increase in a HELOC in January, 2008 when EVERYONE knew the market had already tanked. And I’d like to know where Tina actually lives so I could pay her a visit and ask a few questions about if it was fulfilling STEALING $350,000 and dumping a $750,000 loss on us to deal with.
Marla
Nah, there didn’t need to be any underwriting standards. Because everybody knew that Lake Tahoe property never loses value, because everybody wants to live there, and they aern’t making any more Lake Tahoe, and Lake Tahoe property has never in history gone down in value. (Just ask any Lake Tahoe realtor). And after the property appreciated 15% a year for 5 years, the borrower could just refi into a new loan and all would be well.
doofus
Marla, you are starting to sound suspiciously like our dearly departed Lindie. Welcome home, if it’s you. Maybe we can ask RI for confirmation?
Carleton
What was the “personal property” exactly, do we know? Was it things like the furniture that was in the house? How could a bank possibly take that as a down payment? Doesn’t a downpayment by definition have to be money? I don’t understand.
DownButNotOut
How could banks/loan officer/RE agents do this? OMG!
BanteringBear
Hideous house, decent sized lot. I’d go $149k if I was feeling generous.
BanteringBear
Oh, I forgot to hit on the fraud thing. Bigtime fraud- the whole thing. Mortgage broker, appraiser, borrower, and likely others. Pure, unabashed fraudulent behavior. Bankers suck.
inclinejj
http://listings.listhub.net/pages/NNRMLS/90004183/?channel=yahoo
Judging by the photos the house looks pretty 1970’s inside..115k of personal property??
Tear down..only pretty much worth lot value..
smarten
I will have more to report on this property within the next week or so. But for now I would submit that none of us can simply look at a picture of a home in a vacuum and come up with a fmv. The lowest sales price for ANY Incline Village SFR since 2007 or before [my data doesn’t go back any farther] in ANY neighborhood is $470K, and that was for a 1,200 square foot 2 bedroom REO this month [yes, prices have been dropping here as everywhere]. Am I saying this property is worth anywhere near $1M? No. Am I saying it’s worth more than $149K [or $470K]? Yes.
Make no mistake about it. I’m not condoning the fraud that took place here, but here’s a little more to the story.
One of my least favorite delusional Incline Village agents [a managing broker no less], and there are a number of them, had this property listed for sale [until several months ago] at a $1.4M sales price. When the NOS was recorded, the agent begrudgedly dropped the asking price to $1.2M and advertised it as a short sale. Obviously the agent’s sales efforts were too little too late, but to see this property back on the market for roughly half of what it could presumably have been purchased for barely a month ago, IMO, is pretty remarkable.
One more fact – just to get the record straight. The lender to whom title reverted after the trustee’s sale was IndyMac. Now maybe this asset has been taken over by BofA, but let’s not blame all of the fraud on BofA.
As I said there’s more news to report on the sale of this property [assuming anyone’s interested], but you’re going to have to wait. Sorry.
Missy
Hey Folks…like it or not this is a Best Buy…For those of you that know the Lakeview Subdivision, lot value and even recent at market or below market sales, someone will be very happy!
BanteringBear
Smarten-
I’ve never seen a picture of a home in a vacuum. Was it like a Shop-Vac, or maybe a Rainbow Vac because of the clear canister?
Anyway, I wasn’t suggesting that the FMV of the house was $149k. That’s just what I’d pay, today. But I’ve a bad tendency to project way into the future. This house will likely sell for well more than twice what I’d offer. But, they’ll overpay in dramatic fashion- like everyone does in Incline Village.
Unfortunately for some, our wealthy little Tahoe enclave doesn’t have such a bright future in terms of price stability. You see, some fairly encouraging (to me) numbers came out the other day which illustrated the ever decreasing numbers of billionaires, and millionaires. There is a serious culling going on.
As their numbers shrink and net worth vaporizes before their very little eyes (most can’t escape it), they are forced to downsize and simplify their lives. Some of the first things to go are the vacation homes. Tahoe is mostly vacation homes. UH-OHH!
I haven’t even checked, but I’d be curious what this home sold for back in the early 90’s. I suspect that’s where things are headed, and that’s being optimistic.
inclinejj
Missy said, in March 20th, 2009 at 8:24 am Hey Folks…like it or not this is a Best Buy…For those of you that know the Lakeview Subdivision, lot value and even recent at market or below market sales, someone will be very happy!
Missy, If this is such a great buy how come none of the local General Contractors or Developers or spec builders haven’t jumped on the property yet???????????????????????????????
DowntownMakeoverDude
“Located on a beautiful tree lined street in Incline Village” – haha what street is not tree-lined in Incline? The interior is very Smithridge Condo.
DonC
smarten – Did you mean 2007 “or later”? (You said earlier but that makes no sense. Or were you saying something else?)
It will be interesting to hear what you find.
BB – It’s equally a mistake to be irrationally depressive as it is to be irrationally exuberant. It wasn’t hard to see that when $75K/year salespeople were quitting their jobs to make $250K a year as mortgage brokers, and when other salespeople making maybe $100K a year were buying $2M and $3M homes, that things weren’t sustainable. On the other hand, when housing affordability is at an all time high and and when household formation is running 30% below its historic trendline, its also not hard to see that the downward price trend cannot continue indefinitely (absent a financial meltdown which now seems remote).
In this regard, the impact of the deleveraging may not have had as pronounced an impact on the wealthy as one may think. If you had $100M and now “only” have $70M, does this really affect your life? Or if you had $10M and now have $7M? In truth it makes little difference as a practical matter. Doubtless spending on the big family vacation and so forth is down, but that seems to be about it.
This is particularly true in the real estate area since this is not a “mark to market” product. My guess is that the lack of price cuts in the upper tiers of the real estate market reflects the decisions of people who don’t need to sell that they will wait until the market comes back up. This is not a decision I’d make given the alternatives but it’s how most people have traditionally approached the situation.
The more interesting trend which you’ve identified, which actually started before the meltdown, is the trend towards an overtly less ostentatious lifestyle. A lot of folks who previously drove Mercedes are now driving a Prius, and those who owned a 4000 square foot home now want a much smaller one. In my view this has more to do with a changed Zeitgeist rather than money issues.
I only bring this up because it may not bode well for the McMansion subdivisions like the mid-level Somersett or the upper-level St. James.
Sully
Don, although I agree with your statement about depressive/exuberant, I’m not inclined to believe a financial meltdown is remote.
Apparently you did not own any financial stocks in the last six months. AIG,FNE,FRM and C are penny stocks now. The rest are down anywhere from 50 – 80%.
What exactly is a meltdown in your opinion? The only reason these companies are still in business is because of a generous Congress, that still has yet to answer to the people it is supposed to be serving. So, in summary, there is still time for a meltdown.
BanteringBear
Donc-
I’ve refrained, somewhat, from responding to your posts- mainly because you’re blind to facts. As has been put to you before on numerous occasions- housing “affordability” is NOT, I repeat NOT at an all time high. I’m not sure what is preventing your brain from comprehending this, but that you refuse to put down the Kool-Aid to accept this FACT is why I cannot give much credibility to anything you say period.
Also lost on you is the fact that somebody with $100 million wouldn’t pay even the slightest attention to this house we are talking about. But, in your world, they’ll just buy up ALL Tahoe properties to prevent a price collapse, right? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! But shill on, DonC, shill on… and on, and on, and on…
CommercialLender
DonC, BB, others:
Just a poll: how many of you know anyone (selves included) who think they will make in 2009 anywhere close to what they made in 2008, 07, 06? Maybe healthcare execs, maybe politicos, maybe lawyers/accountants specialized in distressed r.e. or workouts.
I know of exactly no-one, not my frieds at google or other silly-con valley companies, no one in my business self included (down perhaps a factor of 5x-10x, btw, yes ‘x’). Therefore, what on earth do high-end homes’ owners think will happen to values in their ‘hoods?
And now how about 2nd home areas in IV, Tahoe, etc.?
3niner
DonC you make some good points, but when you said “On the other hand, when housing affordability is at an all time high…” and “…(absent a financial meltdown which now seems remote)” you lost a lot of credibility.
“Housing affordability is at an all time high” only if you believe the NAR, and people who believed the NAR have had their a$$e$ handed to them in the last couple of years. I don’t buy it.
I certainly hope there won’t be a financial meltdown, but our idiot President and Congress have been spending money that we don’t have, and they’ve reached the point where they can’t even borrow it anymore.
The Federal Reserve just printed an extra Trillion dollars to buy Treasury Bonds, because there wasn’t a market for them. Of course, this makes every dollar worth a bit less (about 4% less, it seems).
We can’t do much more of this without triggering hyperinflation, and if you thought it would be bad to let a lot of banks and other badly run companies fail, you’ll be shocked when you experience hyperinflation.
I hope it doesn’t occur, but our government has been taking the worst possible steps to deal with a problem that they mostly caused in the first place, and if they keep it up much longer, things will get much worse.
smarten
DonC –
What I meant to say is that before March of this year, I don’t know when the last time a SFR sold in Incline Village for under $470K. I know it wasn’t in 2008 and given the bubble that existed since 2004, it probably wasn’t in 2004, 2005, 2006 or 2007 [I just don’t have the data].
And for those of you asking why hasn’t this property sold if it’s such a good deal, remember Mike only posted ONE DAY after it was listed on the Reno [and not the Incline Village] MLS. At least wait until next Wednesday or so before you start jumping to conclusions.
DonC
The fact of the matter is that the NAR Housing Affordability Index is not biased. It is what it is, namely, a measure of housing affordability which has been precisely maintained over a long period of time (which is what makes it a useful series). Economists use it all the time. Even the Federal Reserve Board uses it. If you’re interested, here’s a Federal Reserve Board Q&A that explains what it is and why it’s important.
http://www.frbsf.org/education/activities/drecon/answerxml.cfm?selectedurl=/2003/0312.html
My sense is that the number is being rejected because it doesn’t fit with preconceptions. Denial is effective but not necessarily useful. I understand the index is not per se predictive, by which I mean housing can be very affordable but if you can’t get a loan or are afraid of losing your job, then that’s a meaningless fact. But it’s a piece of the puzzle and it’s senseless to ignore it just because you believe the NAR is generally a group of useless shills.
The other fact is that the HAI is at an all time high. You can check that out for yourself. Again, denial is not a useful tool. It wasn’t useful on the way up, and it’s equally so on the way down.
DonC
CL – Interesting point. Personally that would be wealth down! LOL Overall the people I know are generally flat. Maybe down a bit or up a bit but no huge changes. (Keep in mind that their business may be down but their income may be up).
On the other hand: (1) my wife has gotten a lot of calls from people from her past looking for help getting jobs because they’ve lost theirs; and (2) most people I know have taken quite a knock to their wealth — that has made a difference in spending even if their income has not been affected.
BanteringBear
A few things, DonC. First, you keep parroting “the Housing Affordability Index is at an alltime high”. Are you talking nationally, or specifically Reno/Sparks? My argument is that Reno/Sparks housing affordability is NOT at an all time high. I seem to remember you stating in a past post that your HAI data went back to 1970. Is my memory correct? If so, 1970 DOES NOT constitute ALL TIME.
Reno/Sparks house prices still remain higher than they were pre-bubble when adjusted for inflation- something I’ve illustrated previously with the inflation calculator. Furthermore, and as I’ve also mentioned before, the stock of housing which makes up today’s median is inferior to the stock which made up the median pre-bubble. Back then, it was a balanced market, and you had a healthy mix of houses in ALL price ranges selling. Right now, it’s skewed towards the lower end. This means that people are paying more for lower quality than they were pre-bubble. Like I’ve said time and again, today’s $200k houses are yesterdays/tomorrow’s $100k houses.
While there is much argument about when prices became detached from fundamentals, my belief is around the turn of the century. While we didn’t see the outrageous price inflation at that time, one could argue that they should have declined due to stagnant to declining wages, which brings me to the most important part of the equation- wages. I do NOT know where they are coming up with the median income numbers for the HAI, but I think they must be bogus. I’ve found at least 3 different sources for the median for Reno/Sparks, and they vary wildly. Why is this? Which ones do they use? At any rate, I believe that may be part of the problem with the HAI. The number is only as good as the data going in. All of this ignores the fact that way back when my parents bought their first house, median income was largely supported by one wage earner. I fail to see how housing affordability is at an “all time high” when it now takes two incomes to pay for the same house that one income afforded 40 years ago.
Just because the HAI is produced by the NAR, and accepted by a government agency, DOES NOT mean that it has to be accepted by myself, or any other skeptic. You can throw around “denial” all you want- I call it healthy skepticism. Any organization fronted by a sham of an economist like Lawrence Yun should NOT be taken seriously.
Lastly, playing devils advocate and assuming the HAI is at an all time high, housing is only getting cheaper, and this correction has a LONG way to go. You talk about “if there’s a financial meltdown”, and I’m watching it unfold every day, DonC. This is a slow motion train wreck.
BTW, have you looked at the increasing unemployment numbers these past few months? On a graph, they are nearly vertical. My county is at 14% unemployment, and will likely eclipse the all time high of 14.3% this month. That’s the highest in the HISTORY of the county. And, it seems that things may just be warming up. I shudder to think of what these next few years hold on the economic front.
Paul
BB and others – How do you maintain that housing prices are going to return to something like 1980 levels (I don’t think you have said anything this specific, but for example 149k for Ophir Peak might roughly be a 1980 valuation) when monetary aggregates (M2, M3 measures of all short and long term bank deposits) are roughly 5X 1980 levels. http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2005/11/changes_in_m1_m.html
In 1980, Median Household Income for the Western US was $19,009. In 2006 it was $52,249.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h06ar.html
Certainly real estate is returning from unsustainable valuation levels, however long term inflation (today the fed just monetized something like a trillion of debt) puts a floor under hard assetts like real estate.
Reno Ignoramus
“It’s not like the yellow flag is out, but the decline in affordability is a growing concern. Nationwide, mortgage rates would have to rise above 7% for the Affordability Index to drop below 100”.
David Lereah
Chief economist for the NAR
The Wall Street Journal online. com
December 23, 2005
So even at the absolute height of the bubble, all the NAR had to say about affordability was that it was a “growing concern.”
In fact, the NAR has NEVER, at any time, ever said that houses had become unaffordable. Not ever.
So if in December of 2005, the NAR said houses were still affordable, is it any surprise at all that now it says that houses are the most affordable that they have ever been?
Carleton
That’s a good point, RI.
DonC, can you tell us if the NAR’s affordability index has ever, at any point in time, indicated that houses had become unaffordable?
Raymond
According to the NAR, houses have always been the greatest buy anybody could make, and have always been affordable, and today, they are even a greater buy, and even more affordable.
According to the NAR, it’s always a great time to buy.
In California, when it got to the point that 70% of all buyers had to use a nothing down i/o adjustable liar loan to get into a house, the CAR had to change the way it “computed” affordability to assume that the purchaser was using an ARM with a teaser rate, and then CAR used that rate to calculate affordability.
The CAR is the identical twin of the NAR. They are interchangeable.
Sully
BB, just one small correction: the FED is not a government agency.
It is a group of private bankers that control the interest rate of the country, without Congressional approval.
Only the chairman is appointed by the President.
So, in a sense, it is nothing more than another shill group trying to screw over the average ‘Joe’.
Monsoon
Are you kidding?
Just google “NAR” and “credibility” and spend the next 4 or 5 hours reading.
Coralyn
Old Real Estate Proverb:
“He who reliath upon credibility of NAR loseth his own credibility”.
BanteringBear
RI- Thanks for digging up that gem. It very well illustrates what a piece of garbage the HAI can be.
To be fair, Sully, the Fed is quasi-public- a government entity with private components.
3niner
DonC –
If you really believe the NAR, I suggest you go out and buy something, with 20% down, right now. Then get back to us in a couple of years and let us know if you have any equity left.
It will be interesting to hear how “affordable” you think it turned out to be, after you do this.
seal
First time poster here, long time reader. First I want to say how much I enjoy this blog and have learned so much from it. For a long time, we thought we would retire to the area, probably Galena or Carson Valley, but no longer. Now we have our sights on the Southwest of Rocky Mountains instead.
Anyway, I would like to comment on affordability. Most of you are viewing all real estate through the prism of the areas affected by the bubble, as makes sense since this blog is about the Reno area. However, any regions of this country are still affordable. I currently live in the Houston area, where a house like the one this thread is about would probably cost less than $100,000, and five years ago would maybe go for $95,000. That is how little prices have changed here, and how affordable homes have remained. I am not defending anyone at NAR, but they are not only talking about the coasts.
PursuitAce
After reading the many comments for the last few months it would seem that there are two questions still to answer. What is the proper historical valuation of Truckee Meadows real estate at this point in time? And…in breaking this current housing bubble how far if any will we go below that number?
Depending on your start point we are either there or have 10-15% to go. A start point of 1994 gives you roughly 190-200K of median home value. To get to BBs 100K you have to start at 1973 or so. As I recall new homes were being offered in Sparks at 30-35K at that time. So it’s BB’s contention that we are not only going to take out this bubble, but also take out a couple of others going back to the early 70’s. Again as I recall people at the time were complaining about the big price jumps in recent years. So you were probably buying into a bubble even in 1973.
So in summation; if the 100K area becomes the new historical value, this would mean that not only did buyers badly overpay in the 2002-2008/9? time frame but if you bought a home even as early as 1994 you overpaid by 100%.
Whether BB and others are right only time will tell.
The bottom line is that contrary to conventional wisdom your home is first and foremost an investment. Anyone that says otherwise is selling something.
BanteringBear
I never said that I expected the median to drop to $100k, PursuitAce. Where it’ll finally settle is anyone’s guess. I maintained it would drop below $200k, and we’re already there. I would honestly be surprised, myself, to see the median drop to $100k. However, we are in extraordinary times, and houses will be the least of our concerns moving forward.
You can parrot primary residences as “investments” all you want, but in such context the same would go for the food you buy at the store, the clothing you wear, the car you drive- they are all consumables, and there are costs associated. Housing is no different. As has been illustrated time and again, it is, at best, a forced savings plan. What are you selling?
SmartMoney
Who cares how far prices drop. What matters is if you can buy a house for less on a monthly basis than it costs to rent. With some of the under $200K house that is the case right now. In those situations it makes sense to be a buyer. I would argue that the $400k + houses still have a ways to fall in price, however.
PursuitAce
BB, I was simply taking your “today’s $200k houses are yesterdays/tomorrow’s $100k houses” statement and running the numbers. The more I hear and read the more I think we can get there.
One of the potential nightmares on the horizon of housing is the incredible number of people ready to walk away from their homes. I personally know 4 people who are on the verge. They can make their payments and their future employment prospects remain good, but they are ready to go.
So a primary residence is a consumable? Even more reason not to pay 200-300% over value. We will disagree on housing as an investment I guess. Whatever works for you. As long as no one ends up overpaying. I consider an investment anywhere you park your assets and expect them to retain or grow their value. If someone wants to put their money into a house without regard for it’s future worth then that would be equivalent to creating a “forced savings plan” into a bad bank without the FDIC getting your back.
I would certainly agree that food is normally a consumable; however in these chaotic times, non-perishable food, water, ammo, and firearms might be a hell of an investment. Who knows what they might be worth in the potential breakdown and inflation up ahead.
Hey, this blog has had quite a bit of doom and gloom on it. Thought I would just take it to the next level.
What am I selling? Just trying to sell a little common sense with a smile.
3niner
PA, you said: “The bottom line is that contrary to conventional wisdom your home is first and foremost an investment.”
It is exactly this attitude that caused the bubble, and the current financial crisis. Over many years, after adjusting for inflation, houses do not appreciate. The inflation adjusted price simply fluctuates a bit, or in the case of the recent bubble, it fluctuated a lot.
You need to be able to predict market fluctuations to make money from this, and we are seeing how well that works out.
The only sensible way to buy for your own residence, is to calculate how much it will cost you, and determine if the lifestyle improvement is worth the cost.
Real estate investing should involve income property, and that property should generate a reasonable cash flow.
3niner
SM makes a good point. There appear to be bargains out there, if you shop very carefully.
I believe that the market as a whole has a long way to go before it finishes correcting, but you don’t buy the market as a whole, you buy individual properties.
PursuitAce
3niner you have absolutely nailed the party line. You have it exactly right. If people would have just understood what you have stated we would probably have been OK.
The problem is they don’t understand it and so we are here. There is a lot more I could say, but it wouldn’t go over well. It seems I have a Cassandra complex…it’s a Trojan war reference. I will enjoy reading this blog in the future, but won’t be adding to the discussion
…happy home consuming.
RenoRetiree
>The bottom line is that contrary to conventional wisdom your home is first and foremost an investment.”
If you count imputed rent (the market rent an owner-occupied house would generate), then most owner-occupied houses DO constitute investments, even if the price does nothing but keep up with inflation. Suppose you buy a house for $150K whose market rent, and thus imputed rent, would be $1000K. Insurance, property tax, maintenance, true depreciation and amortized buying/selling costs on an owner-occupied $150K house is perhaps $500/month. Subtract this from the $1000/month imputed rent and the you get a savings of $500/month for buying versus renting. These savings are not subject to taxes and keep up with inflation, so your real return would be 4%/year on the $150K investment. (Financing won’t change the situation, since with a 6% fixed rate mortgage and 2% inflation, the real interest rate is also 4%. That is, your return on equity would always be 4% in this example, regardless of how much equity you had.)
4%, after taxes and inflation, is far better than what the average investor gets from stocks and better than anyone subject to taxes gets from investment grade bonds. Also, the imputed rent return is much less volatile than the return on stocks, and so would be attractive even for those who can get a long-term after-taxes and inflation return of 4% on stocks.
Bottom line, housing is more than just a forced savings plan with the possibility of a speculative return due to price appreciation. Because of the imputed rent, housing is also usually a sound investment, provided you don’t overpay.
MikeZ
RE: PA, you said: “The bottom line is that contrary to conventional wisdom your home is first and foremost an investment.”
It is exactly this attitude that caused the bubble
Oh, how silly.
That’s not what caused the bubble.
DownButNotOut
Interesting comments recently. There’s a few new thoughts on the blog and it’s refreshing.
PursuitAce – don’t let the regulars stop you from commenting. I’ve learned a lot from them. Just distill as necessary.
It’s good the blog conversation got back to your home being/not being an investment. Unless you have absolutely no skills and live in a vacuum, and can’t shop for a decent deal, than yes it’s not an investment, and it should be directly compared to rental costs, tax benefits, etc. But if your remotely savvy, would rather spend your money buying than renting, can perform even rudimentary improvements that make your place more attractive of a home it’s a fabulous investment. I’m living proof of it as much of my net worth has come from RE purchases. Yes even in these times. A well researched purchase allows you to leverage a minimal principal outlay and take advantage of others need to cash out.
And before you come back with ‘your what caused this problem’ crap get a grip, people have been taking opportunity to make money in Real Estate since time began. Nothing immoral about it. BTW, many of the richest people in the world have made their money in Real Estate.
I’d be interested to know how many of the regulars here actually own RE, and if they put their money where their blogging mouth is and invest in proportion to what they write. or do they short Development Companies?
BB, whats your story? As the 800lb gorilla in the room you’re certainly willing to comment about everyone. Own anything or does that cut too close to home?
SkrapGuy
Down, BB needs nobody, including me, to speak on his behalf. But let me just point out that everything you ask for has been disclosed on this blog long before you got here. BB has talked about his acquisition of property in Washington. I have discussed my real estate holdings here in Washoe County. RI has put up at least 4 or 5 comments that I can remember about his real estate holdings also. Smarten has talked about his ownership in California before he came to Nevada and his current search for a house to buy in Incline. Mike/Green has talked about his house in Caughlin Ranch/Juniper Trail and his lot for sale on Mayberry. MikeZ is an astute observer of the market who is a renter now waiting for the bottom and ready to buy. Stjoe owns a house in Reno who is under contract to buy in Montage but now has second thoughts. Grand Wazoo has an interest in buying a downtown condo but thinks prices are still too high. Tom is a LA lawyer with an interest in buying in Reno but can’t find what he’s looking for. I could go on and on about the “regulars here.” And we all are well familiar with the real estate situation of Diane who founded this blog.
The problem isn’t that the “regulars here” haven’t provided the info you ask for. The problem is you haven’t been around long enough to know what has been discussed here, sometimes ad nauseum. This blog didn’t begin when you arrived. I suggest that perhaps you spend some time in the archives of the blog, rather than asking the “regulars here” to say for the 6th time what they have said 5 times before.
In fact, the home as an investment v. not an investment is one of those topics that has been ground up into small pieces of ad nauseum over the history of this blog. Maybe there are only a finite numbers of topics that can be raised here, but this one is hardly new here. These are “new thoughts”? Hardly.
Reno Ignoramus
No doubt that by now there have been literally thousands of comments posted on this blog since it began over 3 years ago. SkrapGuy is right about one thing, that there probably are a limited number of topics that can come up on a real estate blog. In a very real sense, it may well be that there is little new under the sun on this blog now, and a truly “new” topic is rare these days. Maybe it’s just time for the more recent arrivals to the blog to recreate the conversations all over again. I don’t know. What do some of the old timers think?
Raymond
Talking about realtors is certainly not a new topic on this blog. But sometimes realtors provide such good things to talk about. Did you see the article in the online edition of the RGJ by Mr. Capurro today? Mr. Capurro, former President of the Board of Realtors right here in Reno suggests that underwater homeowners ought to consider just walking away from their mortgage. Yes, the former realtor President talking about how maybe the wise thing for a person to do is just mail in the keys. I don’t know about everybody, but I find it somewhat remarkable that the former realtor President is saying to people think about just walking.
Reno Ignoramus
Thanks, Raymond, for the comment. Hence, my point. Lord knows we have talked about the “walking away” issue here before. Why, I believe it was just a day or two ago that BB suggested to Diane that she ought to consider it. And now, it appears that BB has been joined by no less a distinguished real estate expert as the former President of the Board of Realtors. So have at it, newcomers.
I will sit out this one. But allow me to close with a quote I used to append to my comments back in 2006:
“A modern equivalent of peonage, a lifetime spent working to pay off debt on an asset of dwindling value.”
“A real estate boom that began with the promise of ‘economic freedom’ will certainly end with a growing number of workers locked into a lifetime of debt service that absorbs every single spare penny.”
“The New Road to Serfdom”
Harpers Magazine
May edition, 2006
DownButNotOut
Thanks SkrapGuy. Your point is well taken. Rather than read it here in real time I’ll go back in the archives. After all it sounds like it’s all been said before right?