Advice about buying home in Kingman Arizona (Phoenix, Tucson: sales, real estate)

[kenco80233]

I am planning on relocating to the Kingman Az.area.What is the best part of town to buy in.I am looking to spend200K or less for a home. We are retired in are 50s.

[rambrush]

I am partial to the Camelback area, Northern City Limits
Out Stockton Hill by the Game and Fish Office.
The Butler area is not as bad as people make it to be. Just a lot of Mobile homes in there. Bird Land I have no comment on that area. You get out South and price will scare you..
We have lots of empty homes sitting now that were built during the rush and never sold.

[shariv]

Originally Posted by kenco80233

I am planning on relocating to the Kingman Az.area.What is the best part of town to buy in.I am looking to spend200K or less for a home. We are retired in are 50s.

I would suggest you rent for a while and get to know the areas you like, a lot of homes only require a 6 month lease. There are hundreds of houses for rent, many brand new. Several of the builders are even renting houses they haven't been able to sell. Prices have been slowly dropping. We are off of Fripps Ranch Road in what's considered a good area of town and this area has dropped about 40,000 since the top and homes still are not selling.

I like camelback, but I haven't seen any stick built homes under 200k in there yet. I wouldn't do Butler or Birdland, although parts of Butler are well kept. There are hundreds of houses east of route 66, they are smaller houses on small lots but prices are dropping and many new ones are under 200k. There are also lots of houses in Valle Vista, but depending on which end you are in, it could be over 20 miles to the grocery store. If you have specific streets or areas you are curious about, just ask.

[LBear]

Originally Posted by shariv

. We are off of Fripps Ranch Road in what's considered a good area of town and this area has dropped about 40,000 since the top and homes still are not selling.

The problem is not the price of the homes as much as it is that the market is REALLY SLOW. People are dropping prices by $50K-$100K+ but they still are NOT selling. The inventory is VERY high and the amount of buyers are VERY low. A bad combination. My advice, RIDE IT OUT. People who are "panic" selling by dropping $100K are shooting themselves in the foot. For the "average" middle class person, $100K would take 20+years to even save. WHen the market comes back, which it will , the supply & demand will equal and the homes will go back to where they were and even go up from there.

It is a BUYERS market BUT Jan-Mar 2007 has been showing an increase in the market.

[shariv]

Originally Posted by Pettrix

The problem is not the price of the homes as much as it is that the market is REALLY SLOW. People are dropping prices by $50K-$100K+ but they still are NOT selling. The inventory is VERY high and the amount of buyers are VERY low. A bad combination.

I disagree with you, prices are the problem. When you price above what the locals can afford, it is not a good thing. Prices doubled and in some cases tripled between 2004 and 2005. Nothing changed during that time, except speculators arrived. They also hit every other small town in the US and they are having the same troubles Kingman is. The only 100k drops I have seen are on houses that are still overpriced.

Originally Posted by Pettrix

My advice, RIDE IT OUT. People who are "panic" selling by dropping $100K are shooting themselves in the foot. For the "average" middle class person, $100K would take 20+years to even save. WHen the market comes back, which it will , the supply & demand will equal and the homes will go back to where they were and even go up from there.

It is a BUYERS market BUT Jan-Mar 2007 has been showing an increase in the market.

That is the exact reason while prices need to fall. Why should someone give 100k extra of their hard earned money to someone who just happened to be lucky enough to have purchased a house the year before. And the only way the seller would benefit is if they actually did not buy another house. If they did, they would have to give that extra money to someone else to buy their house.

The majority of demand was from speculators. They have wrecked havoc, made their money and appear to have left the building for their next city. The locals have been priced the out. Most retirees I know want a house under 200k and don't want 1200 square feet for that price. Since low cost houses were the main reason people moved to Arizona, what is going to be the draw now? And don't say the weather. California has better weather and the midwest folks cannot afford the houses. In fact, per square foot, many areas of California are now cheaper than Kingman. Phoenix and Tucson have always attracted more Californians than Kingman and they are cheaper also.

I am curious why you think prices will go up? Prices are falling across the country, foreclosures are way up and loans that only required that you be breathing are rapidly going away. Who do you think will be buying in the near future in the area? If more houses are selling this spring, are any of them selling to end-users? Several of the ones I have seen sell lately, come right back on the market as rentals.

[LBear]

Originally Posted by shariv

I am curious why you think prices will go up? Prices are falling across the country, foreclosures are way up and loans that only required that you be breathing are rapidly going away. Who do you think will be buying in the near future in the area? If more houses are selling this spring, are any of them selling to end-users? Several of the ones I have seen sell lately, come right back on the market as rentals.

The "market" is always dictated by the people. In other words, people selling homes & land set the price and the consumer buys it at that price. While areas in Arizona such as Kingman had a huge jump in price over the last few years, there was some important reasons for that:

1 - Some areas were "dirt cheap" and they shot-up fast and high in value as people came in to buy. Areas such as Kingman were "dying" due to lack of tax revenue. If a town does not grow, it will die, plain & simple.
2 - SoCals are selling and have sold SMALL lots & homes for $500K-$1MIL +, they drive over a couple of hours and can get 5-10 times MORE bang for their buck. That is what they did.
3 - For the size of AZ, the state has a small population, there is A LOT of land left. Yes, much of that land is desert but cities are expanding and growing out.
4 - Areas like Prescott, AZ only seen a 3% DROP IN PRICE!! Yes, there are areas in the USA that had 20%-30% drop in prices but NOT ARIZONA. I believe Phoenix has only seen a 5% drop in prices. Those are the facts. Prices dropped nationwide BUT AZ did not have a huge drop.
5 - Sales have slowed in AZ, as they have thru the entire USA, but that is due to the interest rates.
6 - We are RIGHT NEXT to California. The housing out there is PLAIN RIDICULOUS. A 1,200 sq.ft home on a 1/16th of an acre lot is $800K+. Now, when they sell, where are they going to go?? The closest state with decent weather and good home pricing. AKA - Arizona. They can get a 1 acre lot, 3000 sq.ft home in Prescott for $600K. To them that is A STEAL. While it may be "high" for folks like us, to them it is not.

I can't speak for Kingman as it is kind of out there on its own, areas such as Phoenix and Prescott are still top choices for SoCals. All the real estate research has shown that the prices are not really the problem right now. It is the lack of buyers. Once the market picks-up in SoCal, they will come, trust me, and the buying will continue...

[rambrush]

Shariv
Pettrix is or must be in the realtor business, no indication if he or she actually lives in Kingman.
Pettrix has taken this topic off track as the original question was which part of town to buy in.
So I would suggest letting Pettrix wind itself down.
Facts and figures don't do a lot of good when ya want to know which part of town to reside in.
We can say Birdland would fit the price requirment but I would not let anyone I know live there.
Butler has potental to be in that price range.
Basically going to have to come down and do some research.

[shariv]

Originally Posted by rambrush

Shariv
Pettrix is or must be in the realtor business, no indication if he or she actually lives in Kingman.
Pettrix has taken this topic off track as the original question was which part of town to buy in.
So I would suggest letting Pettrix wind itself down.
Facts and figures don't do a lot of good when ya want to know which part of town to reside in.
We can say Birdland would fit the price requirment but I would not let anyone I know live there.
Butler has potental to be in that price range.
Basically going to have to come down and do some research.

There are so many things wrong with Pettrix "facts", I wouldn't know where to begin. She/he doesn't actually know Cali prices very well either. But I'll control myself.

There are actually several places where prices are coming down into the under 200k range. The houses are small, but at least they are coming down. Builders especially are reducing to get rid of excess stock. Valle Vista also has some good size reductions in the new builds. Even Wallech Ranch has some homes around 200k.

I still think renting is a good idea while looking at potential areas to live. I have met a few people who jumped into areas based on a realtors claims and are now stuck where they don't want to be. Everyone has their own idea of a perfect area and it may be different from mine.

[rambrush]

I agree rent 1st, find out what the areas about.

The postives out weigh the negatives in Kingman in my opinion.

[shariv]

Originally Posted by rambrush

The postives out weigh the negatives in Kingman in my opinion.

I agree, we actually love Kingman, good and bad. Love the town and the people. Have had nothing but good experiences. Could do without the land and home prices that skyrocketed pricing out locals and young families and the recent graffiti attacks around town.