Colorado Springs Home prices (renter, countertops, condo)

[SQL]

Originally Posted by JohnCurtisEstes

And unlike rent that you throw away every month you actually have an asset you can sell down the road.


I always think about people who lease cars too. You pay a lot of money each month for the car but then at the end give it back to the dealer. No asset to sell!

Cars are a depreciating asset and, in many cases, it makes more sense to lease than to buy given high maintenance costs on older, used vehicles. Also, people can also buy out their leased vehicle at the end of the lease. In some instances, the car's value may be worth more than what would be owed at the end of the term depending on how much you drive it.

Investing in a home only makes sense if you're in it for the long term. If you plan on moving in less than five years, moving and closing costs will begin to eat into your investment/equity. With the extreme volatility of the job market, it makes sense for a lot of people to hold off on buying a place. You never know where your career will take you.

[amerifree]

Housing prices will skyrocket in September.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by SQL

Cars are a depreciating asset and, in many cases, it makes more sense to lease than to buy given high maintenance costs on older, used vehicles. Also, people can also buy out their leased vehicle at the end of the lease. In some instances, the car's value may be worth more than what would be owed at the end of the term depending on how much you drive it.

Investing in a home only makes sense if you're in it for the long term. If you plan on moving in less than five years, moving and closing costs will begin to eat into your investment/equity. With the extreme volatility of the job market, it makes sense for a lot of people to hold off on buying a place. You never know where your career will take you.

If we're only talking dollars and cents here, leasing a vehicle is only cheaper if you're the sort of person who buys a brand new car every two to three years. If you're the type who buys a slightly used car every four or five years, which is probably a larger portion of the population, that will certainly end up cheaper on average than leasing.

My wife and I typically buy cars that are five or six years old but have low mileage. I usually get good deals, but we almost always average about $1,000 or less in depreciation per year of car ownership. Leasing can't match that. Not even close.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by JohnCurtisEstes

And unlike rent that you throw away every month you actually have an asset you can sell down the road.


I always think about people who lease cars too. You pay a lot of money each month for the car but then at the end give it back to the dealer. No asset to sell!

Rent vs. buy is a complex question. In general, the cheaper the house, the more buying makes sense. However, if we're strictly talking about financial outcomes here, there is a case to be made that buying a house over a certain price point almost never makes sense. A $200,000 house might rent for $1500, but a $600,000 house will not rent for $4500. A million dollar house certainly won't rent for $7500. This diminishing return on assets means that a prospective renter is getting a better deal at each subsequently higher price point than the buyer is. At some point, this tips the scales in favor of the renter. Remember, a renter saves a down payment that can be invested elsewhere and avoids repairs and renovations over the life of the property. Property appreciation rates are typically offset (and usually more than offset) by mortgage interest rates.

That isn't to say that people should never buy expensive houses, but it does mean that doing so is sometimes more a purchase driven by personal reasons rather than financial reasons.

[lovecrowds]

Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost

Rent vs. buy is a complex question. In general, the cheaper the house, the more buying makes sense. However, if we're strictly talking about financial outcomes here, there is a case to be made that buying a house over a certain price point almost never makes sense. A $200,000 house might rent for $1500, but a $600,000 house will not rent for $4500. A million dollar house certainly won't rent for $7500. This diminishing return on assets means that a prospective renter is getting a better deal at each subsequently higher price point than the buyer is. At some point, this tips the scales in favor of the renter. Remember, a renter saves a down payment that can be invested elsewhere and avoids repairs and renovations over the life of the property. Property appreciation rates are typically offset (and usually more than offset) by mortgage interest rates.

That isn't to say that people should never buy expensive houses, but it does mean that doing so is sometimes more a purchase driven by personal reasons rather than financial reasons.

Excellent Post.

In General, I would say that Colorado Springs is very competitive for the lower price ranges of homes. I would not consider Southeast Colorado Springs or the Central part of the city a good bargain.

Colorado Springs housing bargain comes mainly from large houses going for really low prices per square foot.

For example, I just saw a 840 square foot home for sale in NW Denver advertising for $450,000.

While, recently there was a 4,800 square foot home in NW Colorado Springs with an asking price of $399,000

Another example is a 3,900 square foot home in a decent area for $325,000.

In general, Colorado Springs has way too many McMansion's for the low-overall income levels of the city, so there seems to be a lot of turnover in the nicer areas and they tend to sit for a long time when they go for sell.

Colorado Springs in general is far more competitive for apartments and lower-priced homes then for higher-priced homes.

For example, I was in the Citadel area and it is very rare to see a for sale sign. However, In the Northern part of the city there was many, many for sale signs.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by lovecrowds

Excellent Post.

In General, I would say that Colorado Springs is very competitive for the lower price ranges of homes. I would not consider Southeast Colorado Springs or the Central part of the city a good bargain.

Colorado Springs housing bargain comes mainly from large houses going for really low prices per square foot.

For example, I just saw a 840 square foot home for sale in NW Denver advertising for $450,000.

While, recently there was a 4,800 square foot home in NW Colorado Springs with an asking price of $399,000

Another example is a 3,900 square foot home in a decent area for $325,000.

In general, Colorado Springs has way too many McMansion's for the low-overall income levels of the city, so there seems to be a lot of turnover in the nicer areas and they tend to sit for a long time when they go for sell.

Colorado Springs in general is far more competitive for apartments and lower-priced homes then for higher-priced homes.

For example, I was in the Citadel area and it is very rare to see a for sale sign. However, In the Northern part of the city there was many, many for sale signs.

My wife and I were driving through doing some house hunting last weekend and we noticed the same thing. Even in some very nice parts of southwest COS, the price per square foot is actually somewhat reasonable. We saw a lot of very nice houses on pretty lots in nice parts of town for $150 per square foot. Now, these houses were all $600,000+ (way out of our price range) because they were huge, but $150 per square foot to be in a really desirable part of town in a nice house is a relative bargain compared to many cities. In some still nice yet not crazy posh parts of town, we saw what you described -- big houses that are closer to $100 per square foot.

If only there were some 1500 square foot houses in some of these neighborhoods! I don't think we would ever choose to have 4,000 square feet.

[Jobster]

Originally Posted by amerifree

Housing prices will skyrocket in September.

Under what premise?

[amerifree]

Under the premise housing is depleting faster than the 800 people a day who are moving to Colorado.

[otowi]

Originally Posted by amerifree

Under the premise housing is depleting faster than the 800 people a day who are moving to Colorado.

Many people do their moving in summer to avoid interfering with school, etc., and a lot of people take their homes off the market once the first snow falls.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by amerifree

Under the premise housing is depleting faster than the 800 people a day who are moving to Colorado.

Colorado Springs isn't netting new residents at a rate of 800 per day. Not even close. That would 292,000 per year! COS may be growing, but it isn't growing that fast.