Despite the system-wide economic collapse, many in Irvine think their houses have not declined in value.
The owners of today’s featured property are asking what the paid at the peak. They like dreamin’…
Asking Price: $1,185,000
Address: 19 Stonebrook, Irvine, CA 92620
{book5}
I Like Dreamin’ — Kenny Nolan 
I like dreamin’ cause dreamin’ can make you mine.
I like dreamin’, closing my eyes and feeling fine.
Did you notice that Irvine real estate is the only asset in our entire financial system that has not declined in value? The people who own these properties are dreaming of 2006 when properties were still appreciating.
Even the realtor propaganda shows there is nearly a three-year supply of high-end homes. The only place these properties have held their values is in the fantasies of the owners.
I wasn’t living in California in the early 90s, so I did not see the slow drip of real estate prices first hand. It must have been a very different time before blogs came along to tell the truth. How did people figure out what was really going on when the media was dominated by the self-serving delusions of local realtors?
There must be some point where the Realtor Who Cried Rally isn’t believed. Whenever I read the drivel these buffoons blanket the media with, I wonder how anyone believes them. The deceptions are so transparent only the most faithful, those who most want to believe, can possibly think these fibbers speak the truth.
I can understand why the OC Register prints this rubbish. Much of their ad revenue comes from the local real estate community. John Lansner has been bearish on our local market for quite some time. I suspect he actually gets a perverse pleasure from allowing these clairvoyants to reveal themselves as frauds and hucksters; although, he isn’t in a position to say so. Thankfully, I am.
Oh, in case you missed it, you can Hear why O.C. may exit housing mess early.
{book1}
It is Friday again, and I want to call your attention to another open house over the weekend. Today’s featured property will be on display on Saturday, March 14, 2009 1:00 PM – 5:00 PM. I don’t know why I am telling you about this as no realtor is paying me. Going to look at nice properties is fun. Wearing your IHB T-shirt while doing it is even more fun.
Asking Price: $1,185,000
Income Requirement: $296,250
Downpayment Needed: $237,000
Monthly Equity Burn: $9,875
Purchase Price: $1,185,000
Purchase Date: 12/23/2006
Address: 19 Stonebrook, Irvine, CA 92620
| Beds: | 5 |
| Baths: | 3 |
| Sq. Ft.: | 3,032 |
| $/Sq. Ft.: | $391 |
| Lot Size: | 6,466
Sq. Ft. |
| Property Type: | Single Family Residence |
| Style: | Other |
| Year Built: | 1996 |
| Stories: | 2 |
| Area: | Northwood |
| County: | Orange |
| MLS#: | P678703 |
| Source: | SoCalMLS |
| Status: | Active |
| On Redfin: | 2 days |
home is located in the Fairmont tract. Well thought out floor plan
boasts a main floor bedroom & bathroom. Dramatic living room boasts
cathedral ceilings and large windows. Entertain in the formal dining
room, family room, & large gourmet kitchen. Family room features a
fireplace & direct access to the backyard. The kitchen is large
with a huge center island, corian counters, walk-in pantry, & much
more. Cheerful master bedroom features a balcony & a large master
bath. Exquisite touches in this home include: spiral staircase,
recessed lighting, designer paint, wood shutters, and lots of large
windows. The backyard is perfect with a gazebo, built in BBQ, lush
grassy area, and plenty of space for gardening. Resort like ammenities
include: pool, spa, tennis courts, trails, and parks. Attend
Northwood’s award winning schools.
These owners are not distressed. This property was purchased on 12/23/2006–near the peak in Northwood–for $1,185,000. The owners used a $417,000 first mortgage and a $768.000 downpayment. This property will not be going into foreclosure any time soon.
These owners are asking to get out at breakeven. Unfortunately, the they bought at the peak, and this property is no longer worth what they paid. The comps are selling at $307/SF which suggests this property is about $250,000 overpriced. I imagine the owners can justify the extra money as theirs is the finest property in the world. Go to the open house and ask them.
I hope you have enjoyed this week at the Irvine Housing Blog. Come back next week as we
continue chronicling ‘the seventh circle of real estate hell.’ Have a great weekend.
🙂
{book6}
I like dreamin’ cause dreamin’ can make you mine.
I like dreamin’, closing my eyes and feeling fine.
When the lights go down, I’m holding you so tight.
Got you in my arms and it’s paradise ’til the morning light.
I see us on the shore beneath the bright sunshine.
We’ve walked along St. Thomas beach a million times.
Hand in hand, two barefoot lovers kissing in the sand.
Side by side, the tide rolls in.
I’m touching you, you’re touching me.
If only it could be.
Through each dream, how our love has grown.
I see us with our children and our happy home.
Little smiles, so warm and tender looking up at us.
Blessed by love, the one we shared
Till I wake, and reach for you,
And you’re just not there.
I like dreamin’ ’cause dreaming can make you mine.
I like holding you close and touching your skin
Even if it’s in my mind.
Oh, sweet dream baby, I love you.
Oh, my sweet dream baby, you’re in my dreams every night.
Oh sweet dreams, I like feelin you
Oh sweet dreams baby, Don’t keep me waiting all my life.
I Like Dreamin’ — Kenny Nolan
It’s not the kool-aid with these folks it the scotch. They have a built-in night-cap bar complete with tons of cabinets in the hallway on the way to the master bedroom. How odd is that?
That DP sounds like the sale price from their previous home (at the top of the bubble).
If I’d made that large of a down payment on that home, I’d simply sit back and pay the mortgage. They must really need that $768K back.
(I think, personally, that even the down payment was too much for this house, but then I’m not impressed by “high end” tract development.)
http://www.bubbleinfo.com/
California Foreclosure Report for February 2009.
>>The average property sold at auction in February of 2009 had $201,052 in negative equity, based upon an average value of $250,030, $422,349 in loans, and an additional $28,733 in negative amortization, interest and fees<< This is the reality every home owner must face after a night of dreaming.
“I wasn’t living in California in the early 90s, so I did not see the slow drip of real estate prices first hand. It must have been a very different time before blogs came along to tell the truth. How did people figure out what was really going on when the media was dominated by the self-serving delusions of local realtors”
In those days you’d find out what your neighbors just paid for their homes after they moved in. Or you’d call your local RE farm/agent and ask how much the house sold when you noticed the sold sign. If you have the same model as the sold one, you’d have a general idea. I am referring to previously-owned homes, of course.
The days of looking up comps online and seeing the monthly appreciations were not present. Putting in a bathroom might give you a price closer to your asking price, but leaving the ugly wall paper on the walls or not keeping the lawn looking healthy made the property a bit suspect if you were buying in ’93. Prices had been softening after a little mini-peak around ’89-’91 in condos newer, starter homes.
Their landscaping looks excellent. It looks like they put quite a bit of money into it, imo.
My wife is a professional jeweler, and she’s been seeing the same exact behavior, over and over, from the same sorts of people. Her store, like just about every jewelry store in the country these days, buys gold, and she has a lot of sympathy for those in such a bad state of affairs that they need every penny they can get by selling their wedding rings or college rings. It’s the utterly deluded that drive her crazy. It’s not just the jackasses who figure that she’ll be able to tell them what a ring is worth over the phone (without an actual assessment, she can’t do anything, but these lazy sods don’t want to get up off the couch and get their stuff appraised unless they know it’s worth their time beforehand), who are the perfect victims for CashForGold.com. No, it’s the ones who are told “I can pay x for this” and keep emphasizing “But I paid y! Why can’t you give me y for it?”
By way of example, the market for diamonds is dead. Many analysts were warning for years that (a) diamonds aren’t particularly valuable or rare, and (b) the market was so badly flooded with mediocre diamonds that things were going to crash hard if enough people tried to sell instead of buy. Well, that crash is going on, and a lot of jewelry stores are going under because they overinvested in diamonds at the beginning of the decade. Most jewelry stores are already overloaded with diamonds, and it’s not worth their time to take more. Rubies and sapphires, yes, but not diamonds. This doesn’t stop sufferers of Cleopatra Syndrome from coming in and going into the elaborate family history behind that diamond engagement ring the seller bought a decade ago. When my wife says “Sorry, but I can only buy it for the gold, and the gold is worth x,” they go ballistic. “But it’s a two-carat diamond! What do you mean it’s only worth x?”
That’s what we’re dealing with here: real estate has finally reached the same level as diamonds, comic books, and CDs, in that it’s only worth what someone’s crazy enough to pay for it. The potential buyers are realizing that they can afford to wait and wait some more for the prices to drop to a sane level. The sellers, though, figure if they just keep hustling, they’ll get someone to pay their price. Keep hustling, kids, because maybe Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny need a new house.
“…real estate has finally reached the same level as diamonds, comic books, and CDs…”
Hmm, that’s a bit of a stretch, no?
Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater – obviously, in a deflationary push like now (or 1931 or 1974), cash is king, emperor and god.
but collectibles have their place in a portfolio, though truly rare stuff like intelligently collected memorabilia, cars, books, art or musical instruments have much more potential upside than jewels, which are really the worst choice of this group IMO.
Great post texas.
The average consumer fails to understand that the price you pay for something retail isn’t the worth of the item second hand. It seems ridiculously simple, but emotional attachment to material items gets in the way of logic. This is exactly why I hate shopping in classifieds like craigslist. Everyone thinks that their diamond-of-a-boat/rv/luxury car/ring/etc is special because its special to them–perhaps because it was a gift, or much like a house, it is a sign of status. Likewise, a lot of sellers like today’s property bought “retail” and are now trying to sell second hand after the market has crashed at retail price. As IR said in his book, sellers will just have to wait until the pain of holding on is too great, then they will lower their prices.
Hmm… How much do you think a simple gold ring solitare with a very clean, white 2 carat diamond goes for now?
Range?
That’d make a nice gift for our anniversary.
Say the price falls $384k from purchase (-33%), the owners would see a 50% loss on their DP. Had they put it in an S&P index fund, they’d have seen an almost 50% drop. Investment losses would be similar.
Now if the price falls further, this home will underperform the S&P, especially because the S&P could be argued to have upside, but this property’s price will continue falling for a while.
In hindsight the only places to put your $ in 06-07 was either in cash equivalents or short investments.
Price range for gold from 06-07 was $550 to $750. In hindsight, if the owners had purchased gold, they would have quite a ROI about now.
The early 90s softening of real estate coincided with the early 90s recession, which hit SoCal early and hard, more so than the rest of the country.
It was no secret that real estate was tanking hard and quickly. As for the lack of blogs or accurate reporting, we still talked about things at work over the water coolers instead of twittering. The LA Times was full of doom and gloom. The Register had not yet become the perpetually chipper paper that can spin anything positively (‘fires destroying homes leaves a refreshing smell of smoke in the air!’) It was still an unabashedly pro capitalistic/libertarian paper that honestly reported this stuff on a daily basis.
The major aerospace companies that employed what seemed like every other person (Rockwell, TRW, McDonnell Douglas, etc..) were laying of 10s of thousands of workers for several years. This was also the first recession where white collar workers were layed off en masse, unlike the early 80s recession which mostly hit blue collar workers in the rust belt.
In short, the media picture then was a lot more accurate and more on the spot than it has been this time around.
Interesting observation. I wonder why that is? I know that newspapers have been suffering since the internet wiped out their business model. I wonder if the lack of hard reporting is a result of financial pressures not to offend the few advertisers they have left?
I think you hit the nail on the head, advertisers have other options, and offending them does nothing given the declining business models for print newspapers.
Interestingly, newspapers had their best period of profitability in the late 90s, just on the cusp of the internet. I can remember the LA times having a plan to massively increase circulation around 1995 with 4 or 5 local editions, it stalled immediately even before the web came in.
Also, and maybe most pertinent to the topic, business news has come to resemble entertainment reporting more than hard news as it was into the 90s. In the early 90s, you’d read about Douglas Aircraft in Long Beach and their troubles getting financing to build the MD12 (which never came to be) or retail chains such as Clothestime, which always seemed to be in the verge of bankruptcy. The news was hard numbers of profit, losses , layoffs, etc.., as opposed to most business news which now is dominated by fluff about tech companies which is more fun to read and write, and I’m sure sells more issues and ads, but may not be representing the state of the economy as well as the stuff that normal people do every day.
I’m a subscriber to the LA Times even though I get a lot of my news online these days. Call me old fashioned but I enjoy the tactile experience of opening a paper and flipping through the pages. But I noticed that my subscription rate had crept up over the last few years, so I called the subscription department and told them that I was thinking of canceling my paper due to the high cost. They immediately offered me an “introductory rate” that was half what I had been paying and thanked me for being a loyal customer. So, if any of you are subscribers to the LA Times (or other papers, I imagine) I’d give this a try! Every bit helps these days……
Chuck likes “kickin’ it old school!”
Yeah!
I dropped it eons ago.
Been reading it online ever since.
In the 90’s it took about 6 years to reach bottom – from 1991 to 1996 with pick-up beginning in 97. There was a bubble from 1988 to 1990 which had people talking how profitable RE is and some selling homes and moving to other states where housing was much less expensive. The drop was about 30% to 35% on average and was due to the end of the Cold War and declining defense spending among other things. The decline in OC now is much more precipitous coming from a much bigger bubble and much direr economic situation due to that bubble. I have to agree that Irvine is still waiting for the other shoe to drop. I have a friend who owns a 2,800 sq-ft house in Irvine who was marveling on how prices are holding up in his W. Irvine neighborhood and how there are no houses for sale nearby (actually there is one short-sale of a smaller house in escrow). I said great because I did not want to ruin his mood especially because he just got laid off. But I did tell him it will only take a few foreclosures and if no foreclosures and no sales in the neighborhood then we will never know.
“…if no foreclosures and no sales in the neighborhood then we will never know…”
Why does he need to know? Does he need to adjust his balance sheet quarterly and mark his house to market? If he spent less than 2.5x his income on the house, and he has sufficient savings to get him through the next 6-12 months, then the value of his house today matters very little.
Well, it’s hard for one not to think about one’s net worth when he/she just got laid off. His selling is unlikely but not too far-fetched. I think he would try to sell and lock-in his profit if it wasn’t for his better half… I’m not fan of the doom/gloom but everybody’s situation is different, and there are many people who are scared right now; especially if they have $4k to $5k monthly mortgage payments which will eat up their savings very quickly if unemployed even for just a few months.
I’m with you. When a couple months have passed and your income is still dramatically reduced, that $5k mortgage payment really hurts and has got to be on your mind constantly. At that point, I guess you weigh your options before making the payment each month.
I just don’t like hearing people obsess about the value of the home they’re in. I was annoyed during the boom hearing friends endlessly talking about their increased equity; and I’m annoyed hearing people fret about their negative equity position. It’s out of your control. If your income and savings decline, then some decisions will have to be made. Until then…
Stock vs House.
Stock: liquidity.
House: Capital that may be pleasurable to live in and low down payment comparied to stocks.
401k reduced to 101k. Same for other “investments” that the market was fixed. See Astute Observation by Texas Triffid Ranch
(above).
The govt essentially forced the common man into stock by the IRA and 401k plans with high reoccurring institutional fees. Housing was viewed as the alternative, but they’re both were house of cards. Too many throughing money at the same product.
This is a nice house but way overpriced. Those have to be the biggest drapes I’ve ever seen on a window.
This Northwood Pointe area is nice but it gets hotter than hell there in the summer.
I was thinking the same thing. Those hugely vaulted ceilings must be absolute hell to heat and cool. Our home in IN has 9 foot ceilings and I bitch about heating empty air all the time. When we lived in KY our house had ceilings like the one in the listing and it was a bitch to keep the indoor temps consistent. Gimme 8 footers any day of the week. You can make the room seem bigger by painting it correctly.
This is from Moneycentral.com
Foreclosure wheel keeps on turning
Posted Mar 12 2009, 08:48 AM by Todd Harrison
“….And while President Obama’s hotly debated $275 billion housing-relief package is barely a month old, its becoming clear that no cleverly worded press release or inspiring oratory can reverse the trend that’s firmly in place: Housing supply remains elevated, with buyers sitting on the sidelines awaiting better deals. Prices, as a result, will keep falling for the foreseeable future.
In fact, Rick Sharga, executive vice president at RealtyTrac, told Bloomberg he believes the country’s biggest lenders have yet to list over 700,000 bank-owned homes.
This “phantom supply,” as its known in the real-estate world, paints a bleak picture for the housing market in the near term. Even though strong sales activity in distressed markets is pushing aggregate inventory data back towards historical norms, phantom supply is patiently waiting to punish those bold enough to prematurely call a bottom…..”
One needs to be delusional to believe that a package that aims to bail out bubble-time buyers at the expense of current buyers (by propping up house prices) will help. It is really unfortunate that keeping house prices high has become out govnt’s goal and it is actively trying to deceive its careful citizens into buying. The bubble-time buyers who bought houses they can not afford are the good citizens and those who currently refuse to overpay and “are sitting on the sidelines” are the villains. If the govnt can not leave the market alone, shouldn’t it be helping for prices to go in the other direction so prices match with fundamentals ? Really what the govnt should have done was to let people sell with current market prices and open a program to pay some portion of their lost equity back (if they had any to begin with). That would have accelerated the price corrections but will not unfairly penalize new buyers.
I’m with you 100%. Being a current renter (was previously a condo owner); I do have my biases of course. The government should let the market (supply and demand) work its magic, and perhaps temporarily help previous owners move into rentals through a social program of some kind – based on need as we definitely do not need homelessness. It’s a double or even triple whammy if you one is a renter. 1) Subsidize home owner’s interest deduction for tax purposes, 2) pay higher taxes for the bail out, and 3) pay higher prices if you do decide to buy. Of course, if you do become a homeowner, then item 1) becomes a benefit not a whammy, but we and our children are all stuck with item 2) the “bail-out”.
Going to look at nice properties is fun. Wearing your IHB T-shirt while doing it is even more fun.
Would be interesting to find out if the realtor knew what the shirt was/ment?
This is a nice house with nicer-than-average appointments and furniture. I don’t believe it’s a million-dollar estate.
“How did people figure out what was really going on when the media was dominated by the self-serving delusions of local realtors?”
I was at UCLA during the rise and had graduated when the bust occurred. You could tell there were problems because of the ads (yes, ads in newspapers and glossy magazines, not on the web). The ads frequently said “back on market”, “reduced”, “short sale”, and then a ton of “bank-owned”. More and more ads said “for sale or lease” rather than just for sale.
I also remember that Fred Sands (a firm which is now gone) did some really really good video ads on a local cable channel. They had professional photographers, nice fades and transitions, always seemed to take pictures and video when it was sunny. They played this video overseas to, trying to get Japanese buyers.
Here is one of the better descriptions of the prior bubble in LA. Pretty extensive. From http://marinrealestatebubble.blogspot.com/2005/09/of-bubbles-past-chronological-listing.html
It’s too long to post here (over 5000 characters). IR, maybe you want to post part or all of it?
We posted a link to that one back in ’07, but it might be a good time to do it again. It is fascinating to see the old headlines are see how they parallel everything we are seeing today.
The below most eloquently states what I believe must happen to real estate. With the recent ‘Stimulus Bill’ passed by Congress, there has been a marked slowdown in response from loan servicers/investors with regard to short sale offers as there is much confusion on everyone’s part about the effect of the bill. (Yes, I’m a Realtor.)
Investors and servicers are hoping to receive some of that money and homeowners are hoping against hope that this is what will save their home (for a very large majority it won’t). The net effect will not be a lessening of foreclosures, but rather brief lull before a surge in short sales/foreclosures, and instead of an orderly market with a manageable number of properties available, we will see a glut of homes, which further depresses prices.
Foreclosure Is Part of the Solution, Not the Problem
As the Obama Administration rushes to prove that it is just as clueless and fiscally irresponsible as the previous administration vis the “credit crisis”, I found this Wall Street Journal article refreshing. Yes, foreclosure is a perfectly acceptable choice for people who find their precious house price is less than their mortgage — that is precisely why the house is held as collateral. There is absolutely nothing wrong with “walking away”, “jingle mail”, or “mailing in the keys”.
The cure for the current economic “illness” is not greater and greater amounts of what got the economy sick in the first place. It’s not effectively 0% interest rates. It is not massively punishing savers. It’s not more lax lending. It is not more artificial asset price inflation. It’s not more housing tax incentives. It is not forcing tax payers to bail out failed businesses that deserve to be weeded out of the business “gene pool”. It’s not the Fed buying bad assets at ridiculously inflated prices or setting up bogus banks to hold the bad assets. And it most certainly is not preventing or delaying foreclosures.
How long will it be before the myopic, short-sighted, entrenched group-think in Washington is finally forced to admit or shamed into admitting this simple truth? How impoverished must our country become, how much crushing debt must we pile on to the younger generations before they understand this?
The cure for the current economic mess is what’s been needed for the last decade or more: to allow the free-market to remove the excesses in the economy and to price assets based on what people earn for themselves. Foreclosure is the free-market in action doing exactly what it should be doing and what needs to be done.
Government and government-sponsored market interventions and manipulations are the exact opposite of what the markets need.
http://marinrealestatebubble.blogspot.com/
I found the other description which I was looking for. Part 1 is at http://www.elliottwave.com/features/default.aspx?cat=mw*aid=3171*time=pm
This house does NOT have a gourmet kitchen!
The cooktop looks run of the mill.
The fridge is not built it.
The layout is wrong: Fridge and ovens and sinks are all on the wrong sides of the island.
Very bland-looking house with unimpressive kitchen. I agree, it is not a gourmet kitchen, and the layout is bad. It really looks as if the house has been kept clean, but not updated. Those massive drapes are horrible.
Also the ratio of land/house size is only slightly over 2. The patio stone may be nice, but you have other houses towering over you. Not a million-dollar home in my book.
You can not use the land/house ratio to determine cost. As you can get towards the ocean the ratio drops like a rock while the cost por square foot skyrockets.
This is true even for Irvine east of the I405 which -although quite far from the ocean- is relatively close when compared with Riverside, Moreno Valley, Phoenix and Denver.
the ocean has magical powers….; P
I arrived in SoCal in 1992. In the UK at that time, you could make more money as a typist than as an engineer or as a programmer. Science jobs were right out. Teaching jobs got paid less than office jobs. So the decision to come over was easy – and I had no clue – none whatsoever, that the US economy, let alone SoCal’s economy, was in the toilet. No sign of it to a newcomer. There seemed to be fabulous wealth everywhere. People dressed well. People had new-new-ish cars. No problem spending more money than we could afford in the stores. Ok, there were vacancies so you could choose your apartment, and there were 2 weeks free rent with 1 year or 6 mth lease deals – but being new we didn’t know that this wasn’t how it was always done. Then the LA riots happened… and we were told that’s just an uncivilized ethnic thing peculiar to south central LA.and then Northridge happened in 94 and really messed up realestate. Lots of complexes went bankrupt. Lots of really crappy properties went onto the market.
We were told “now is a great time to buy” “prices are lower than they’ve ever been in recent memory” “this is the first chance young people have ever had to buy a house” and for some of them that was true and they made out like bandits and became fabulously wealthy as a result of converting stock option money into Del Mar real estate – think Qualcomm in the mid 90s. People spoke of the crash as having happened and being over. People said we don’t have earthquakes near here.
but you know even then, even in 93 and 94, people were paying far more for houses than 3x annual income. Sorry – they weren’t paying – their parents were for them. Even then it never ever made sense to buy. It only started to make sense to buy at the start of the 2000s when the squeeze was put on on rents, when rents sky-rocketed, so did prices. Maybe it should be viewed the other way around, but the housing stock was still old and now it is older. It still showed signs of cracks and water damage – not all of it but this is so cal – its basically Middle-Ages wattle and daub mud hut construction with black bin bags as liners to keep out the moisture.
Back then salaries weren’t great – they didn’t go up much, and certainly didn’t go up anything like as much as house prices did. Whatever bad things there were in the 90s, for most people I think its going to be a lot harder and further down this time. People didn’t buy as much crap in the early 90s. They didn’t have as much credit card debt. I’m almost certain they didn’t go bankrupt as often as they went in for liposuction or botox. … if you wanted to find out what was going on you looked in the newspapers or the realtor store fronts. Getting a mortgage was a mystery. A process that seemed ripe to take advantage of you. Ditto closing. But people went ahead and signed paperwork without reading it because they trust that this is how its done. They get told everyone else signs without reading you should too. I could never get over that – so I never bought. I didn’t have 20% to put down in ’92-95, and property has been overpriced ever since.
I do not like this featured property. It is a strange mix of ostentatious and dated. Who needs a 5 bedroom home ? Octomum? It kind of reminds me of a hotel awaiting renovation of the guest rooms. The layout of the space seems inefficient and hard to use. I suspect this was bought as an investment and as such – they got the use of it rent free for several years. People that pay rent know they’re not making a gain at the year end. Home debtors seem to think they’re entitled to be paid to occupy the place. Maybe these people don’t really want to sell and are just testing the waters.
Agreed on the quality of the home construction in Southern California…I’ve been here nearly 2 years and I’ve yet to see something either live or in photos that I would consider forking over any amount of money for. To a Wisconsin native, it all looks like tar paper shacks.
Regarding today’s featured property, I find the old carpet and the ceramic tile really annoying. For more than a million bucks, at bare minimum the floors should be solid oak.
the only money they spent on this house was the outside—so it looks expensive but cheap inside–
Many people do this—
Do you mean Centex and other builders build better quality, of the same class, homes in Dallas and other areas? Just curious to know.
Great looking place. Too bad it is priced about twice what it is worth, like so many houses in Southern California.
Seriously, people. You know all of that economic pain and chaos that we are going though now? It is not going to ever be over while we see this kind of nonsense all over the place.