There was a crooked man and he walked a crooked mile,
He found a crooked sixpence upon a crooked stile.
He bought a crooked cat, which caught a crooked mouse.
And they all lived together in a little crooked house
Asking Price: $679,900
Address: 4 Del Italia, Irvine, CA 92614
Follow her down to a bridge by a fountain,
Where rocking horse people eat marshmallow pies.
Everyone smiles as you drift past the flowers,
That grow so incredibly high.
Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds — The Beatles
I saw a story on MSN recently that the inspiration for John Lennon’s song was gravely ill. Of course, most people believe the Beatles were writing about drug induced hallucinations, but wherever the song came from, it is etched in the minds of our collective consciousness.
So where do crooked little houses on crooked little lots come from? Are the planners and designers high? In land planning, there is a tradeoff between the width of a lot (which translates into development costs) and the attractiveness of the street scene. Narrow lots are most cost effective, but they make for garage-dominated elevations and an unattractive street appearance.
Alley-loaded products are one possible solution, but the additional alleys eliminate back yards and drive up development costs. Many different solutions have been implemented to improve the street appearance while keeping lots narrow and cost effective. One such attempt at innovation is represented by the angled lots of the neighborhood where today’s featured property is located.
When you drive down the streets in these neighborhoods, on one side you will see garage doors, but on the other side, you will see the side of the garage that has often been dressed up with windows or other architectural features. Since the house fronts are at an angle to the street, the lines along the front elevations are broken, and the street takes on a more varied and attractive appearance.
Unfortunately, this kind of neighborhood is a nightmare for planners and surveyors because the lot lines have so many corners and crooked lines (A typical lot is a rectangle with four straight lines). Compare a normal rectangular lot to the lot outlined in red above. These neighborhoods are also difficult to build because the moving lot lines creates confusion on the construction site. The architecture has to be tailored to the lot as well.
It you drive around this neighborhood (or look at Google Street View), you can see the results of what the land planners intended. Some may consider it successful, and others may not. Developers for the most part are not impressed with the concept as evidenced by the fact you no longer see subdivisions designed in this way.
{book7}
As if on cue, the realtor has managed to take a series of crooked photographs to go with this crooked house on its crooked lot. Perhaps these fish-eye lenses are not a panacea for interior photography.
Asking Price: $679,900
Income Requirement: $169,975
Downpayment Needed: $135,980
Purchase Price: $327,000
Purchase Date: 5/31/2000
Address: 4 Del Italia, Irvine, CA 92614
| Beds: | 3 |
| Baths: | 3 |
| Sq. Ft.: | 1,430 |
| $/Sq. Ft.: | $475 |
| Lot Size: | 5,138
Sq. Ft. |
| Property Type: | Single Family Residence |
| Style: | Mediterranean |
| Stories: | 2 |
| Year Built: | 1987 |
| Community: | Westpark |
| County: | Orange |
| MLS#: | S577287 |
| Source: | SoCalMLS |
| Status: | Active |
| On Redfin: | 4 days |
floors, French doors, plantation shutters throughout, vaulted ceilings
recessed lighting, huge private yard with gazebo, state of the art fire
and burglar alarm system, built in wall to wall garage cabinets,
breakfast nook, newer appliances, newer paint. Beautiful association
parks, pools and tennis courts. Close to great schools, shopping,
entertainment and more!
This property was purchased on 5/31/2000 for $327,000. These owners have paid down their mortgage since purchasing, and the current debt is only $250,000! Perhaps you think I am crazy for making a big deal of this, but it is so rare, that I have to celebrate it when I see it.
If this property sells for its current asking price, the owners stand to make a fortune. At $475/SF, I don’t give it much chance, but at least with some IHB exposure, people will know it is there.
The tilted house picture reminds me of Batman’s nemesis’ lairs from the old Batman TV shows. At $475/sq ft this must be the Joker’s lair.
As with the caps lock key, so we find with the the wide-angle lens: a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. This is particularly true with realtors.
http://www.confusionhill.com/pictures/gravityhouse01.jpg
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/18556722.jpg
http://i3.photoblog.com/photos7/108577-1243794944-3-l.jpg
The answer to this problem.
Thank you. That trick will come in handy.
Photographing interior architecture is very difficult because you don’t have a wide field of vision. The fisheye lens solves that problem, but obviously it creates its own. Photoshop to the rescue….
There is another simple solution. Both my HP and Panasonic cameras have a panorama mode. You take two or more pictures from left to right, and they are automatically consolidated into one.
If you can take the pictures with the camera level, this is trivial. Even if you screw that up, you can easily correct it in software. You can make arbitrarily wide photos. I have gotten outdoor 360 degree landscapes into a single, wide, stunning photo.
The HP software is so good that I’ve taken photos of completely unrelated things with panorama on, and it looked reasonably convincing most of the time.
Do you get distortion from having multiple vanishing points using this method?
For an extreme application of this, check out the gigapan photos. Particularly, this one http://www.gigapan.org/viewGigapan.php?id=15374&window_height=701&window_width=991
I haven’t noticed perspective problems when holding the camera level. This might happen if taking pictures with the camera tilted up or down.
The key is not to move to different perspective points.
Hilarious. The pictures for this house look like they were taken by Vincent Van Gogh.
Check out the post below from Mish. Apparently, Paul Krugman and Paul McCulley of Pimco foresaw the possibility of a housing bubble in 2002.
Krugman and McCulley, Déjà Vu All Over Again
Dubya’s Double Dip?
“To fight this recession (2001) the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble.”
The law of unintended consequences is on display for all to see. Krugman and McCulley saw that lowing interest rates in 2002 would inflate a housing bubble, and yet they both supported the lowering of interest rates to “stimulate the economy.” That an McCulley wanted to line his own pockets at Pimco.
Whenever I see Pimco, I read it as “Pimpco”. They must be the “Authority on Hoes”.
Again, Mish blows it. Krugman did not ever once claim you should replace the punchbowl with a firehose, which is exactly what happened.
Plus, when the Fed attempted to take the punchbowl away, “free market forces” (aka Chinese dollars stacked in pallets at the order desks of all the trading houses buying mortgage CDO’s) had subverted the Feds power to move markets and it was all downhill from there.
I like Mish, but he only gives enough data to support his argument and doesn’t tell you the part that unwinds it. Like his position on Farm Subsidies.
Krugman can be a bit revisionist
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/its-getting-darker/
For consistancy of prediction, Roubini has been telling the same story, and has been mostly right
http://www.rgemonitor.com/blog/roubini/
Enough pictures. I’m getting a headache. :sick:
Oh yeah..way to go owners!
Yeah, actually paying down the mortgage like you are supposed to is impressive. Overpricing the house by $150k or more is much less so.
Yeah, I have a friend that was in a very similar position. I really admired the fact that he was able to resist everything going around him and he never took out a HELOC, he never extracted the equity, nor refinanced with an exotic product, he did not renovate the house or anything, he just kept paying the mortgage. He did refinance into a 5 yr fixed, then variable loan which lowered his payment for 5 years. Then when the reset came, with interest rates so low, his payment was going to reset LOWER to around just under $1,400. You cannot rent anything here in Irvine that low, much less buy anything. I was really jealous, especially because the place he bought I sold to him when I moved to a different state for 1 year.
Guess what? He just sold the place and bought a place worth over $700k. The amount of his debt just doubled, although he can still handle it. I’m guessing the responsible owner of this house is about to do the same thing 🙂 My friend is very conservative, still, he confessed to me that if he had known how the “California Real Estate market worked, he would’ve bought much bigger house to start with”. So see, even responsible people have been intoxicated. And they have been helped tremendously by interest rates (yet they don’t realize it).
We looked at this house as a potential rental about a year ago, and met the owners. At the time they were still debating on whether to rent it long term or try to sell — I guess they ultimately opted to sell. It was a very nice young couple with a toddler and another on the way. We thought the rental asking price was a bit high ($2,750 I believe) — but we almost wanted to rent it anyway, just because they appeared to be such nice, responsible people. Thanks for confirming our impression.
Although the lot was oddly shaped, it made for a very nice backyard — but unfortunately it backed to Main.
…and one more thing — I’d take this odd shaped lot with a real backyard in a heartbeat over the alley loaded detached condo-houses you see in places like Woodbury…
I agree. I actually like this neighborhood. This kind of planning and design does have advantages.
To whoever wants to answer….why do you suppose houses and condos in Irvine still sell at these high prices? As an Irvine owner I’m glad, but when you look at what is in escrow and has sold many prices are high. Sure some are lower, but people are paying 6, 7, $8K.
The foreclosure moratoria have created a shortage of available inventory at price levels people can afford under the new lending standards. People are buying what is available, which isn’t much, at prices the lenders are demanding (REO is the market). The sellers like today’s that are holding out for peak valuations are simply not selling because people cannot arrange financing to pay those prices, nor will they be able to do so any time soon. When the foreclosures move through the system, and supply increases, prices will move lower.
Incredibly low interest rates have also contributed to high prices. The median priced in Irvine has dropped much more than the actual homes. Most homes I follow have dropped around 30%. I’m sure you can find many examples, and IrvineRenter highlights them here often, where prices have dropped way more.
But I am amazed at the resiliency in prices. But the median price reflects what people are affording to pay (with these extreme low rates). If interest rates normalize (to say 7 or 8%) the median will drop further. The average home will catch up to the median price. What is happening now is that people are able to afford the lowest priced homes in Irvine and some move up buyers (like the one in the blog) take all their equity and buy a bigger home with a big down payment. But because inventory is not a problem in Irvine (price is more of an issue than inventory), it takes time for things to adjust.
People are still intoxicated. Bernanke was “correct” (that is if you want to keep home prices inflated) in saying that he had to act and move fast before a “negative reinforcement feedback loop” developed. Most of my friends I know do not seem that concerned with home prices and believe “right now is a good time to buy”.
So, foreclosure moratoria, loan mods and other government programs, FHA loans, very low interest rates, Realtors propaganda, etc. All have a role in keeping prices so high. Of course, market forces are huge in areas like Riverside, so all those things I mentioned have had not as much impact as here in Irvine.
IR,
I’m curious about the future housing dynamics in higher priced region like Irvine.
Could banks and goverment work together to limit the supply from foreclosures for a vary,vary long time? Wouldn’t practice like morotoria hurt some morgate-backed security holders’ benifit and end up pushing up the morgage interest rate? What could be the positive or negative impacts on banks delaying
the process of foreclosures?
My parents live down the street from this place and I believe this part of Westpark is called the Promenade section. Generally, the lots are a little smaller than the other Westpark tract across the street but it’s a nice neighborhood and the values seem to be holding up relative to some other parts of Irvine. It’s central and close to job centers.
So, anyway, when you see a home like this one profiled with a larger lot it usually creates some interest but this one is overpriced and like others have said backs to Main which sucks.
From Calculated Risk:
U.S. Rejects California Aid Request
Calif. Aid Request Spurned By U.S.
“The Obama administration has turned back pleas for emergency aid from one of the biggest remaining threats to the economy — the state of California.
Top state officials have gone hat in hand to the administration, armed with dire warnings of a fast-approaching “fiscal meltdown” caused by a budget shortfall. Concern has grown inside the White House in recent weeks as California’s fiscal condition has worsened, leading to high-level administration meetings. But federal officials are worried that a bailout of California would set off a cascade of demands from other states”
That moral hazard thing is not appealing to the Obama Administration. Hmmmm….
So what would be the fair quid-pro-quo sacrifice that Californians should offer up to those of us in the other 49 states for aid? I recall reading somewhere that a suggestion was that part of it is taking hard steps to get financial house in order and that eliminating supermajority for budget and eliminating Prop 13 were places to start. I get too big to fail and all that and realize something will get done at the end of the day but there is a reason CA is having this problem 1st and the denizens of the other 49 states have concerns.
“Despite Proposition 13, California ranks in the middle of the pack when the states are ranked on combined state/local property tax collections.”
To get California’s financial house in order we need to stop spending like drunken sailors.
Besides our property taxes are easily made up with the following:
“Estimated at 10.5% of income, California’s state/local tax burden percentage stands at 6th highest nationally, above the national average of 9.7%. Californians pay $5,028 per capita in state and local taxes.”
source: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/15.html
Where does California get off stating its the best state in the union, jacking up cost-of-living through taxation and speculation, and then begging for money to cover their excess from the fly-over states it so recently condescended?
4th largest economy in the world? Only if you count all the debt you managed to rack up. I think a few earnings re-statements are in order.
I’ve been reading thehousingbubbleblog a lot lately; they had a recent post titled after a quote from one of the pieces
A memo to California from the rest of the world
“Memo to Californians from everyone else in the world: You folks out there in sunshine land caused this historic global recession, and it’s time for you to mend your ways.”
..
Man, this housing bubble has made me bitter.
Meh. I feel your pain as far as California’s fiscal stupidity is concerned, but the flyover states should keep their mouths shut. California always pays out way more in federal tax money than it receives. The excess is directed to the flyover states.
It will be interesting to see the effect of falling federal income tax receipts on Alabama, Alaska (gets 2x from the feds what it sends in), and several other states who pull more out of the federal coffers than they send in.
California will pull a lot of non-Californians down with it. I am not looking forward to seeing any of this.
Somehow, the IMF deals with countries with laws and policies even worse than California’s.
Perhaps Obama’s team needs to find a former IMF regulator – and let him use the usual IMF sticks and carrots to get any bailout money …
Geithner WAS at the IMF. Remember that tax issue about the IMF from his confirmation hearing?
I’ve read a number of articles analyzing how California created its own mess: Prop 13, local funds diverted to state use with attempted correction by Mello-Roos (but without M-R being tax deductible), initiative process creating endless new ways to spend but no new income, gerrymandering of election districts, etc., etc. I’m slowly beginning to believe that a constitutional convention will ultimately be the only way out of the mess. Everything for decades to date is patchwork.
“Despite Proposition 13, California ranks in the middle of the pack when the states are ranked on combined state/local property tax collections.”
Funny how this whole blame prop 13 is being repeated when it is completely not true.
source: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/15.html
Yet who was it who got your “2/3 majority required to raise taxes” bit? No hints BTW, you have to read it if you wanna know –
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/06/man-who-destroyed-california-by-digby.html
Regan pushing the passing of a 2/3 requirement was the greatest gift he gave the electorate as this has limited the already heavily tax burdened citizens, unless you can provide evidence suggesting California is not one of the top 4 taxed states in the union.
For example in your little blog story it states “The personal income tax rate would be set at a probable maximum of 8.75%—the average rate that people in the state now pay. Then there would be a rollback: Each year the rate would drop one-tenth of 1% until a ceiling of 7.5% was reached in 1989.”
The current income tax rate is substantially higher than 7.5% in fact it is estimated at above 10.5% and is currently the 6th highest in the nation. Sadly I think you will find it hard to blame the 2/3 majority in limiting taxes as this clearly has not happened in the state of California.
The problem is that in CA it’s too east for people to carve out their little kingdoms. There are *four* agencies in charge of air quality in Southern California. It’s just a lot easier for Arnie to say, “You didn’t pass my propositions letting me raise taxes, so I’m going to kill all the stray puppies,” than it is to consolidate those agencies and have the deposed heads of three of them bent on murderous revenge.
“too easy” CA is certainly not too east 🙂
“too easy” CA is certainly not too east. 😆
Arnie is an idiot. If he wanted to request things like this, he shouldn’t have campaigned for McCain out of state a month before the election, when it was already clear that Obama was going to win.
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/4-hm-debt-0907-01.jpg
Odd shaped lots allow the developers to pack a few more houses in the subdivisions. Slice the lots too thin and you’ll get bent houses which are lot better than crooked bankers, lenders, RE, borrowers, politicians, judges, etc.
City planners think crooked streets are wonderful.
Pure democracy is mob rule. That’s why most democracies crumb from within.
Great cartoon, IR. Did you make it yourself?
Stupidity is there: Is that for the bankers or investors. I don’t think WS bankers were stupid. Possible the investors, but not the lead bankers, that got their bonus in cash.
IR,
475$/sf is high, however, Westpark hasn’t gone down much during the last couple of years.
Realtors are pretty exclusive there (“FRED” and “MARIO”) and I wonder if they are able to maintain a high price in westpark where you had some but few foreclosures.
So eventually, considering how slow the price erosion has been in westpart, I really don’t know if we can see a rental parity in Westpark any time soon.
All the houses I have seen being sold in the same area went out for arround 40% above rental parity. Even foreclosure one (like 5 finisterra at ~650k$ for 4bd/2000sf)
More good news for our local beach communities~
June 16 (Bloomberg) — Prices for the most expensive U.S. homes may not reach bottom for another few years, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co. analysts.
The CHART OF THE DAY shows the supply of unsold homes by price in California, data that the mortgage-bond analysts including John Sim and Matthew Jozoff used in a June 12 report to illustrate the weakening market for the most-expensive residential properties. The supply of homes priced $750,000 to $1 million held steady while the supply of more expensive properties increased.
“Tighter lending standards and the lack of cheap financing for these borrowers continue to be key issues,” the New York- based analysts wrote, referring to “jumbo” mortgages. That’s after so-called interest-only and option adjustable-rate loans were a “major driver” of soaring values, they said. <<>>
The government’s moves to aid the housing market include the Federal Reserve’s mortgage-bond purchases to drive down interest rates; President Barack Obama’s “Home Affordable” loan modification and refinancing programs; and new tax credits for some first-time buyers. None of the U.S. initiatives “directly focused on helping the sales of these so-called millionaire homes,” the analysts wrote. <<>>
“Currently, we have national home prices bottoming in 2011,” they said. “However, prices for more expensive homes may not bottom out until 2012, and ultimately result in peak-to- trough declines in excess of 60 percent.” <<>>
“California is probably worse than other states, but higher-priced homes in general are going to be a problem,” Sim said in a telephone interview today. The state’s median sales price for existing single-family homes fell 37 percent in April from a year earlier, to $256,700, according to California’s Association of Realtors. Nationwide, the price fell 15 percent to $169,800, according to the National Association of Realtors.
————————————————-
As I said before, there is probably no place in the entire country (outside of Manhattan), that will lose more in dollar value, than the coastal communities of Orange County.
Dunno. Cupertino and Palo Alto come to mind.
I am linking to that article in tomorrow’s post as well. I thought it was a good time to remind everyone that I agree with their bearish assessment.
Believe it or not, I think the OC real estate bears are still the contrarians. All you have to do is ask the typical homeowner or realtor if they think now is a good time to buy an OC home, to see what I’m talking about.
What about Napa, LaJolla, San Jose, silica vallery in bay area, esp. traditional blue collar area as Union City. Many electronic high tech’ers cashed out on teh options in the late 90’s and paid cash for the house. They can hold on.
Blue collar area with new white collar such as Union City 1.2 million have dropped to ~0.7-0.8 million with no buyers in sight. Also the ones with good schools have held up better than poorer schools disticts.
So, I go to street view like suggested… Front lens is dirty! 🙂 Man… Can’t catch a break.
MAKE MONEY ONLINE EASY
copy and paste or click this site below .
http://www.AWSurveys.com/HomeMain.cfm?RefID=jfn99
create free account follow instruction in this site
when your credit reach $75, redeem your paypal account.
GOOD LUCK!!
Hi Guys! Wow, my property is on IHB! Yes, I am the owner of the property being profiled. I did not go on a HELOC rampage as many have noted even though I did do a lot of upgrades in the house compared to when we bought it.
We love the house a lot but are selling due to the need to move up due to the family continuing to grow. Someone noted the area is very convienent which is true. If I did not have to drive to work, I would not need a car. restaurants, grocery store, cleaners, drug store, Blockbuster, Target, haircut place, movie theater, etc. are all walking distance. But hey, the family needs a bigger place.
I see some complain about Main. Well, we are a few blocks from where Main dead ends so traffic is nothing like it is at Main and Jamboree. A perk we have is NONE of the bedrooms face the back of the house so it is dead quiet at night when sleeping. Actually, Main in that section at night and during the day is not busy like some may think. But there are people that don’t like backing to a street regardless which is fine.
I also see people hacking on the price. Well hey, we can ask anything and it does not mean it will go for that much or that is the number we are expecting (I do understand the market trends of real estate today). We chose that asking price because I have some aquaintances that have sold their house in Irvine in the last couple of months and I was amazed at the number of multiple offers and the final price their homes ended up selling for.
I see someone that we were going to rent to last year is on the site as well. How are you! Everyone that came to see our house when we were going to rent was very nice.
Either way, our house is for sale and we are in a good position. If we sell it, great. If not, it is not a big deal since we are not financially strapped and can add on for space if we need since we do have actual land to build out on unlike some developments.
Have a good day everyone!
What is it that makes you feel entitled to a 350K profit for having done nothing but sit in a house?
Could you afford to buy your own house? Would you want to sell your house to your children and make them take on that kind of debt to pay for your windfall? That’s pretty selfish and pigheaded.
It’s all interconnected, my friend. There is no free lunch.
When prices in your area drop back down to late 90’s levels, you aren’t going to feel so confident in your wonderfulness.
Ahh the bitterness seeps through on every post. Does it sting to see so many successful people living lives you have such utter contempt for?
I wish you happiness sitting in your small apt. in 120 degree weather.
Well said 26; Rush Limbaugh could not have put it any better.
That’s right – success is all about buying a house and watching it catch a bubble rally. The rest of society are losers. Yup, makes perfect sense – MMhmmm.
AZDavidPhx:
Did you mention elsewhere that you are a “glass is half full” kind of individual? Not sounding like it.
As I see it, the owners exhibited exactly the kind of behavior that would have kept us out of this r.e. mess if everyone had done likewise. And they’ve committed several years of their lives to that end. And if they don’t sell, they’ve prepared for that contingency.
And you’re suggesting that one’s family should be treated simply and only as a willing buyer?!
Exactly what would you have done (and be doing) differently, AZ…?
I understand the incentive to find a schmuck to buy overpriced house before the value plummets. I was just asking property owner from a philisophical perspective.
If he can sell – good for him. Hopefully the bank lending out the money to the fool buying his house won’t later come to the community coffers for bailout cash when their bet goes bad.
Hi AZDavidPhx,
You seem to be on a tear with me in this post and the other.
I will try to answer your questions above.
Q) What is it that makes you feel entitled to a 350K profit for having done nothing but sit in a house?
A) I am not responsible for the run up so don’t beat me over the head for it. It was dumb luck in timing when I bought my house. Instead of wanting to take my ‘profit’ and responsibly putting it into another home which will give someone else a nice ‘profit’ or take another FC house off the Government till I could have done what countless others have done. I could have treated my house like an ATM and spent it all and then ask for the taxpayers to bail me out. Which do you think is better?
Q) “Could you afford to buy your own house?”
A) Since most people generally don’t like to publicly disclose what their personal financial situation is (I don’t either), I will not answer this. But just to let you know, I am not up to my eyeballs in other types of debt.
Q) “Would you want to sell your house to your children and make them take on that kind of debt to pay for your windfall? That’s pretty selfish and pigheaded.”
A) Well none of us know what the future holds so many years in the future. My father-in-law paid under $40K for his first house. If I could have paid that much I would have jumped for joy. Instead, I paid several hundred percent more than him when I bought my house for $327K.
If history repeats itself, and taking the example I listed above as a reference, my children will pay several hundred percent more than I paid for my house which is quite a bit more than what I am asking for now. So if they can get my house for what I am asking when they grow up, they would probably think it is a steal.
Inflation is not our friend! Remember when gas was less than $0.85 back in 1989?
Q) “It’s all interconnected, my friend. There is no free lunch.”
A) I agree. I worked hard to scrape together a down payment for three years, obtained a 30 year fixed mortgage and then diligently paid down the mortgage and did not go on a HELOC spree buying cars and mega vacations. I never asked for a handout or a break.
All I am doing is selling my house after being responsible with my finances. We all know the market will set my final price. So I do not see the ‘free lunch’ aspect of it since the person buying the house for whatever the selling price is feels it is worth it to them. It is basic economics.
Q) “When prices in your area drop back down to late 90’s levels, you aren’t going to feel so confident in your wonderfulness.”
A) If prices drop all the way back down, that would not be the end of the world for me (as long as I am employed) since I can still put a down payment on another house and my tax burden will be much better.
I am an average Joe just like everyone else. I have a regular job, keep my finances in order and just happened to buy a house at a good time and lucked out.
I never asked you to reveal any of your personal finances.
I was just asking if you could afford your own house with that same down payment that you saved up over 3 years?
A simple yes or no question.
I think that your asking price is greedy and offensive, but hey, if you can find a schmuck to buy it for that – congratulations.
He may not be entitled to that profit, but if it’s there for the taking, why shouldn’t he grab it? I would. What should he do – ask $350k less for the house to be more ethical?
I didn’t say he should not sell. I understand the greed motivation as well as anyone else.
I was just posing some tough questions.