[olecapt]

Originally Posted by dynimagelv

I thought you were wrong once.....in 1955......when you thought you were wrong......but you were wrong.

I thought it was in 63? Hmm could I be wrong twice in the same day?

Nahhh.

[TerpsandHorns]

People who bought their homes in 2004 & 2005 might be okay...Although I doubt 2005ers are sitting on much equity right now..

That assumes that they did not refinance cash out in 2005-2006!

If you opened your mailbox or picked up your phone sometime between 2002-2006 you were bombarded with refinance offers.

I think half of all internet ad revenue was mortgage refinance offers.

Who wouldn't take the opportunity to get 50K in cash and pay less than before??

I am willing to bet that at least a third of all those "safe 2004" homeowners cashed out some equity at least once in 2006. That makes them technically 2006 screwed not 2004 safe.

And as a skeptic, I seriously doubt all those cash-out borrowers invested those funds in safe productive profit investments. They most likely bought a car or took a vacation...or they bought expensive fad style of granite/stainless type upgrades that will be outdated in 2 years..

[dano]

This has been a fun thread to monitor. The bottom line is that those of us who bought in the late '90s or early turn of the century and held without re-leveraging are still sitting pretty and beginning to have the last laugh. I remember my peers looking down on me around 2005 when I told them I was still in the same house I bought in 2001. I remember actualy saying it with pride, aware that I hadn't followed all the sheep off of the "keep up with the Jones'" cliff. They just staired back as if I was from another planet. It's actually unfortunate that this all happened. I would have been happy with 4% annual appreciation and not writing this post. Any reasonable observer should have been suspicous of unprecedented 100% appreciation over several years and at least waited it out to see if it was going to stick like it has in California, or if it was a bubble driven by greed, low interest rates, and undisciplined lending practices. It reminds me of what an old mentor of mine once said. "Dan, one thing you need to remember, the world revolves around greed and lust". I believe greed and lust has prevailed.

[AnthonyB]

Originally Posted by TerpsandHorns

Who wouldn't take the opportunity to get 50K in cash and pay less than before??

Me.
But that is because I am a cheap, suspicious S.O.B. who believes there is not such thing as a free lunch.

[dynimagelv]

And some of us just plodded along on our 2001 5% loan and paid our $850 mortgage with a grin

[AnthonyB]

On median priced house:

As an individual indicator it can be useless, but percentage able to buy median home is a helpful indicator of a markets health.

A healthy market would be around 50% of people in the area able to afford the median home (give or take a few percentage points).
If 70% and up can afford the median home, that would indicate a pretty weak market, I would take a good look at inventory and underlying fundementals.
In Long Island in 2005 only around 11% could afford the median home which I would take as an indicator of an overheated market due to drop. Why?
1. Too many people priced out. Yes, they could go lower than median, but everyone can't buy the same low priced house, that would mean high demand at the low end and low demand at the high end, leading to downward price pressure on the upper levels cascading downwards.
2. People like to buy commensurate with status. Low affordability would mean that those with banked money and/or high incomes would only be able to afford lesser homes. In my experience these people prefer to buy something that reflects their income and social standing. They either don't buy or move out of the area taking their money and buying power with them.

[dude66]

Originally Posted by AnthonyB

On median priced house:

As an individual indicator it can be useless, but percentage able to buy median home is a helpful indicator of a markets health.

[Positiveone]

How accurate is Zillow.com when trying to get an idea of the exact value of your existing home?

Do realtors use that site for reference?

[TerpsandHorns]

Zillow is completely useless for true fair market value when selling a home.

Sales values are what the selle is willing to take and the buyer is willing to pay that particular day.

It is guideline only. Let your agent determine your sales point.


....ON THE PLUS SIDE

It will however let you know if a potential refinance transaction is anywhere within reason.

Nothing is worse than wasting $350 on an appraisal that it too low.


Take the zillow numbers and dump about 10%. If that number can still get the refinance done, you can feel more comfortable about your appraisal money not being wasted.

[Oneway]

I have been watching this thread since the beginning to watch the RE market. I found out the house price is getting lower and lower. I am monitoring several houses in 89052 and they have dropped the price for about 10-20% (new and used houses). I am getting nervous now to buy a house since I am not sure what is going on in the future. What would be consider a low price? This is for standard house with no pool and standard upgrade. I know it would be hard to answer. Any Estimate per sqft in 89052 area below St rose pkwy? Thanks