S&P/Case-Shiller Index Change: December 2009 (www.SocketSite.com)
According to the December 2009 S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index, single-family home prices in the San Francisco MSA fell 0.2% from November ’09 to December ’09, up 4.8% year-over-year for the second year-over-year gain since September 2006 but still down 37.5% from a peak in May 2006.
For the broader 10-City composite (CSXR), home values fell a nominal 0.2% from November to December (the second slide in seven months) and remain down 30.1% from a peak in June 2006 (down 2.5% year-over-year).

Looking at the monthly statistics, 15 of the 20 metro areas showed a decline in December over November, with Chicago posting the sharpest decline, down 1.6%. Las Vegas finally posted its first positive print in more than three years, with +0.2%. The Southwest continues to be a bright spot, with an Diego posting its eighth consecutive monthly increase, and Los Angeles and Phoenix both posting their seventh.

Three of the markets – Charlotte, Seattle and Tampa – posted new low index levels as measured by the past four years. In other words, any gains they might have seen in recent months have been erased and December is now considered their current trough value.

On a month-over-month basis, San Francisco MSA single-family home prices rose across the bottom price tier but slipped nominally at the top.
S&P/Case-Shiller Index San Francisco Price Tiers: December 2009 (www.SocketSite.com)
The bottom third (under $325,729 at the time of acquisition) gained 1.7% from November to December (down 3.6% YOY); the middle third fell 0.1% from November to December (up 1.7% YOY); and the top third (over $601,121 at the time of acquisition) fell 0.3% from November to December (down 3.6% YOY).
According to the Index, single-family home values for the bottom third of the market in the San Francisco MSA are back to August 2000 levels having fallen 57% from a peak in August 2006, the middle third is back to June 2002 levels having fallen 36% from a peak in May 2006, and the top third remains at March 2004 levels having fallen 24% from a peak in August 2007.
Condo values in the San Francisco MSA were unchanged from November ’09 to December ’09, down 5.6% on a year-over-year basis and down 27.4% from an December 2005 high.
S&P/Case-Shiller Condo Price Changes: December 2009 (www.SocketSite.com)
Our standard SocketSite S&P/Case-Shiller footnote: The S&P/Case-Shiller home price indices include San Francisco, San Mateo, Marin, Contra Costa, and Alameda in the “San Francisco” index (i.e., greater MSA) and are imperfect in factoring out changes in property values due to improvements versus appreciation (although they try their best).
Home Prices Continue to Send Mixed Messages as 2009 Comes to a Close [S&P]
November Case-Shiller Index: Up For Bottom Tiers But Flat At The Top [SocketSite]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by ling

    How odd, condo’s are holding up better than sfh’s. Or maybe it’s that more condo’s are in SF and that SF proper is holding up better?

  2. Posted by REpornaddict

    Seasonally adjusted prices rose strongly across all three tiers (2%, 1% and 1% in past month alone).
    Ninth consecutive gain once seasonality is considered,and the the sixth consecutive month prices rose across all threee tiers.
    Index is now up around 15% from bottom – and SF has seen the strongest price gains YOY.

  3. Posted by tipster

    How FHA odd, FHA condo’s FHA are FHA holding FHA up FHA better FHA than FHA sfh’s. FHA Or FHA maybe FHA it’s FHA that FHA more FHA condo’s FHA are FHA in FHA SF FHA and FHA that FHA SF FHA proper FHA is FHA holding FHA up FHA better?
    Yes. It’s odd.

  4. Posted by anonn

    Yeah. All the people buying 2M houses in the last couple weeks are using FHA. The 600K top tier is a really useful tool for measuring “San Francisco” too. End sarcasm.

  5. Posted by Mole Man

    The distribution of condo units is weighted heavily toward the low end. That makes them relatively easy to buy even after only modest repricing. Homes are more likely to have extra bedrooms and big price tags that can make finding a buyer with needs and means matching the property and its price more challenging.
    If the last bubble blowout is any guide then we should have at least five years to play with happy fun dead cat.

  6. Posted by hkjhjkkj

    I call bottom (and I am a bear generally)
    too much inflation and never ending subsidies supported by paper money

  7. Posted by hkjhjkkj

    and one more thing… no matter how much homes go up in value from here on out, the price of bread will be higher.

  8. Posted by Embarcadero

    How many $2M homes were sold in the past few weeks? I’m just curious.
    I’m also wondering what will happen if we have a full-on double-dip, and governments are too broke to flood capital markets with cash. Will sentiment impact what appears to be an upward trend in prices (nominal prices, anyway)? I can’t help but think that RE prices are stabilizing because consumers are no longer terrified to splash out on a major purchase for fear that they’ll lose their savings/job/investments portfolio.
    I’m assuming that buyers today have 20% down and are meeting more rigorous standards for lending. Am I delusional about that?

  9. Posted by A.T.

    A couple trillion dollars of housing stimulus pumped in during 2009 and it provided a very, very tiny little bounce. The stimulus is now coming to an end. Look for CSI down 5% in 2010 and drifting lower the next few years beyond that. CSI is almost irrelevant to SF now with the tier structure as it is (although “top third remains at March 2004 levels” is about right for SF). Going forward, SF will see bigger declines than CSI, which centers on the burbs that have led SF on the way down.
    Look at that middle chart. Those that bought in 2006 and 2007 (and 2005 and 2008) are in sad shape indeed.

  10. Posted by Anon E. Mouse

    Btw, will be interesting to see what First Republic comes up with for the “Prestige Index”:
    http://www.firstrepublic.com/lend/residential/prestigeindex/sanfrancisco.html

  11. Posted by Big V

    Here we go folks! Buy your SF house now while it is still “cheap!”
    Every market raises against a wall of worry — i.e. if you wait until all doubts and fears are put aside and you are sure its a safe time to buy, then you are a sucker buying at the peak of the market.
    And while government stimulus might be coming to an end, that is not the important part — what matters is mass psychology — if enough people start feeling confident to buy, the market will support itself. We are getting enough positive news now that folks are showing up to buy, especially here in SF. The government support wont be needed much anymore.
    If you have been shopping around at all, you will notice that any house worth buying in areas like the Mission are jumping into contract almost immediately with multiple offers, often settle above asking. Some even settling at 2006/7 peak prices.
    So yah, it might still be a bit scary, but it should be if you are buying at a good time….

  12. Posted by A.T.

    “We are getting enough positive news now that folks are showing up to buy, especially here in SF. The government support wont be needed much anymore.”
    Or one could take a look at some facts:
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=artrtGVa__ro&pos=1

  13. Posted by dub dub

    “And while government stimulus might be coming to an end, that is not the important part”
    I disagree (twice).

  14. Posted by anonn

    The government stimulus is coming to an end? Aren’t the GSEs about to buy back 187B in bad assets any day now? Big V, none of these folks take the local market for more than a grain of salt. They’d rather talk about FHA and 600K. There’s probably the biggest divide right now between the CS MSA and the SF properties that make up 90% of the content on this website. A lot of people are using FHA in SF. But they’re buying 750K to 900K houses.

  15. Posted by joh

    if enough people start feeling confident to buy, the market will support itself.
    Many felt confident a few short years ago, yet the housing market did not support itself.
    For the housing market to be sustainable, people must be able to afford their homes. Home prices still seem too high compared to incomes and employment rates. Many home sales are failing to close because buyers can’t get a loan.
    Of course, investors can sustain or even drive up home prices, though I doubt that they can get the rents to put them in the black.

  16. Posted by ex SF-er

    As always, winter data has too few data points to be a reliable guage (and yes I say this every year in up or down years).
    the real test comes this spring. I eagerly anticipate April and May’s numbers because that is when (in theory) the MBS and Treasury purchases by the Fed come to an end, when the FTHB credit comes to an end, and it is during prime selling season when we’ll have more transactions to see the health of the SF market.
    I don’t believe for one second that govt support of housing will come to an end, but in theory it does 3/31/2010. we’ll see.
    I have a hard time imagining we’ll see a significant increase in housing prices anytime soon. we need a vibrant job economy for that, and that’s nowhere to be seen right now. but a plodding market with sideways (or choppy) movement for years? I can easily envision that.
    as expected, this downturn is taking years to play out. we’re maybe half way through it IMO (in terms of duration, not severity).
    SF saw some modest price increases recently. So did SD, Boston, DC, Denver, and Dallas. Not sure what that means/if it means anything.

  17. Posted by Rillion

    Yep, looks increasing likely that the government has been able to stop the freefall of the housing market. It still has a long way to go though imo before we start seeing sustained increases. I am in the camp that expects choppy (little up little down) numbers trending sideways for a couple years still.

  18. Posted by sparky-b

    “Nope. It was Oroweat whole wheat bread. The regular price at Safeway is $4.69, and last year it would go on sale for $3.69-3.99. $1.99 was pretty much unheard of. Head in to a grocery store and look around. The prices will surprise you. Lucky had bags of pasta for $0.33 last weekend. No one can make a profit at that price and even the competitors of the companies that are selling it are getting killed.
    Last week, I bought a year’s supply of copy paper and envelopes for 50% off what we paid all last year. That’s my point: the sales that drive the economy blipped up, but only because pricing is so aggressive. We didn’t buy all that paper because we needed it, we have a month’s supply, we bought it because they were giving it away. We’re using less than half the paper we used last year but I bought 6 times or regular order. Does that mean the economy is improving?
    Posted by: tipster at October 29, 2009 1:56 PM”

  19. Posted by john

    tipter, where have you been? This practice of selling items at loss to bring in traffic has been there for years.
    The best years were 2007, when you could get a laser printer for $50, or computers for FREE. The deals have been LESS aggressive since then.

  20. Posted by embarcadero

    Big V, were you swinging a stopwatch while writing that? Was your intent to hypnotize the audience?
    Really, what matters is access to capital. The government has demonstrated that it’s willing to shut off or seriously slow down two key spigots: low interest rates and the free for all in US taxpayer backed mortgages.
    The stock portfolios that may have been recovering may not fare so well if there’s a full-on double-dip recession.

  21. Posted by anonn

    The government has demonstrated that it’s willing to shut off or seriously slow down two key spigots: low interest rates and the free for all in US taxpayer backed mortgages
    It has? Literally, the GSEs are buying 4 month delinquent mortgages this week or next.

  22. Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

    Really, what matters is access to capital. The government has demonstrated that it’s willing to shut off or seriously slow down two key spigots: low interest rates and the free for all in US taxpayer backed mortgages.

    From The L.A. Times on friday:

    Standing in the heart of the nation’s hard-hit foreclosure country, President Obama on Friday rolled out a $1.5-billion mortgage program meant for a handful of states, including California…that have endured waves of home foreclosures during the recession.

    …and from the press release:

    This new program will apply to states that have suffered an average home price drop of over 20% from the peak. State and local Housing Finance Agencies (HFAs) in each state are already familiar with the urgent challenges facing their communities and have demonstrated the ability to address these challenges…For states with more than 20% home price declines, a large portion of homeowners are “underwater”—they owe more than the house is worth in the current market. Such borrowers often find it difficult to sell their homes—lenders may not agree to a sale that fails to pay back a mortgage in full. HFAs may…assist borrowers to negotiate with lenders to write down mortgages.

    Note the lack of mention of any testing to see if the underwater mortgagor committed loan fraud when they got the loan in the first place. They’re filling up the punch bowl on Wall Street, and the fly-by-night mortgage brokers in The City are already gearing up for a banner year!

  23. Posted by tipster

    “Literally, the GSEs are buying 4 month delinquent mortgages this week or next.”
    Won’t have much of an effect on SF, the number of loans is nearly zero, but the GSEs foreclose just like anyone else. There are 848 active foreclosure listings from one of the GSEs in LA county alone.
    And who will foreclose more quickly: the GSE holding the loan or the lender holding a government backed loan for which the GSEs are paying the note each month while the homeowner bails.
    That’s why they are doing it: the lenders are just taking the government guarentee and not kicking the homeowners out, and the GSEs are bleeding all of their cash. This will allow the foreclosure process to happen more quickly for loans that the GSEs were already standing behind anyway.
    As for Brama’s post, each state gets about $300 million. Two hundred forty thousand underwater CA homeowners get their average $1200 mortgage (about the payment on a $300K home – right around the CA median) paid for one month and then the money is gone. There are 2.4M such undeerwater homeowners, so this helps 10% (about the unemployment rate) for one month, but doesn’t help anyone who owes less than their home is worth, the vast majority of homeowners. It will help some, mostly unemployed people who bought homes at or near the peak, but it isn’t going to solve anything or give anyone a “banner year” I’m afraid.

  24. Posted by diemos

    “It has? Literally, the GSEs are buying 4 month delinquent mortgages this week or next.”
    God bless the gubmint. Your tax dollars at work.
    I liked your story about the $400K downpayment FHA loans better. Nothing gives me the warm fuzzies like the thought of people putting their own money in a first loss position.

  25. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    cold introspection
    can dead cat feel zero G ?
    kōan in haiku

  26. Posted by NewBuyer

    I am NewBuyer, the SocketSite commenter who has been the most accurate in his predictions so far.
    As I predicted many months ago, we have already hit the bottom of the CSI.
    But what I have to say next will really interest you all:
    I think that we are going to be flat for another year from here on out. The CSI will remain within 10 points or so of where we are now as the year commences.
    But we will see some real increases in 2011, because by that point, the economy will have improved due to everyone being bored of this recession.
    As for government interference, we should consider the following:
    1) The $8,000 tax credit has had very little impact on any of this for the most part. Maybe this money means something in Cornfarmerville, IN, but what does it mean in the major metros that CSI tracks? Nothing in SF. Nothing in NY. Nothing in Boston. It may mean something in Phoenix or Vegas, but those cities have not improved as much as ours. Plus, so many buyers aren’t even eligible for it…
    2) Low interest rates have had some impact. Good. Hope you all took Monetary Policy 101 classes in college. These rates will hold until the economy improves, then be slowly eased back up a point or two. Just like last recession.
    Government interference is not why prices have stabilized. Prices falling 20 – 50% across this nation are why we hit the bottom.
    Duh.

  27. Posted by Embarcadero

    Do you honestly think that a “$1.5 billion mortgage plan” is enough to prop up prices in this country? In this state? In Fresno?
    Is there any reason to think that these new loan modification programs – in which the HFA “may help” to negotiate loan modifications – will be less disastrous than the last?
    I was unaware that the GSEs are back to buying delinquent mortgages; if they are, I hope its to foreclose on them quickly. I was under the impression that the FHA – which had been the dumpster of choice for toxic MBA – was suddenly scrutinizing its loans.
    If it is true that we’re back to producing and buying RE’s toxic sludge, it’s sad. If it’s not true, then I can’t help but think that higher interest rates and sagging asset values might dissuade a lot of buyers.
    As for the assertion that the economy will improve because people are bored of the recession… Well, I’ll drink to that.

  28. Posted by Katy Dinner

    In the SF market, we have had a flood of good inventory and are seeing multiple offers in certain home types and districts. My current listing had 115 people through this weekend.

  29. Posted by badlydrawnbear

    Well thank god that’s over. Time to party like it’s 1999 … oh wait.

  30. Posted by ex SF-er

    Government interference is not why prices have stabilized.
    Untrue. The US mortgage market was nearly entirely nationalized (Fannie, Freddie, Ginnie, FHA, Fed purchases of MBS, etc). This obviously had a large role in stabilization.
    Prices falling 20 – 50% across this nation are why we hit the bottom.
    That’s another reason. But not sufficient. Housing prices can fall way more than 50% (for instance, places in Japan fell 90%).
    The entire securitization market froze back in 2007-8, something that had never really happened before. (not just mortgages, many different types of Asset Backed Securities) as well as much of the credit market. There was pressure on the Money Markets as well (Reserve Fund broke the buck).
    Although I disagree with much of what has been done, I do agree with one thing: we faced a total collapse of our entire financial system. The government (not private enterprise) was able to stop this using the huge power that is the American Taxpayer.
    Total collapses of financial systems often lead to >50% RE losses. you blithely ignore what was really going on in 2007-8.
    Are you really saying that housing prices would have fallen only 50% if almost all of the major banks fell (all were and most still are massively insolvent), and every Investment Bank (every IB did fail)? Not to mention many money market accounts, the stock market and international trade? what, people would pay all cash for their homes (the cash they lost in the stock market, the money market, and the RE market?) Did everybody have gold laying around like me?
    Even now the banks are lending primarily using government programs, and there is very little lending outside of that. (hint: that’s GOVERNMENT SUPPORT-in other words, we still don’t have much improvement in private mortgage market)
    because by that point, the economy will have improved due to everyone being bored of this recession
    are you Dick Cheney? Recessions start because people are “whiners” and they end because people are “bored” of them.
    you can’t be serious. Duh indeed.
    I have no idea if you’ve been the most accurate SS poster on here… if so it’s clearly not by your deductive reasoning elucidated above.
    Despite people’s boredom I foresee at least another 2 years of pressure (until end 2011) given the massive overhang of debt that still has not been dealt with. FWIW: I have used the date Dec 2011 as the duration of housing pressure since I have been posting on SS in 2007, and have not changed it.
    In terms of markets: all one needs to do is look at the market action of late.
    Anytime the equities market or bond market even gets a whiff that there COULD be removal of government intervention you see massive selloffs.
    Yesterday as example there was a major selloff because of the Treasury program that was announced. It isn’t even tightening… it’s just that it MIGHT be tightening.
    Thus Bernanke will slink in today and give testimony reassuring everybody that they don’t need to worry, Mama Govt’s teat is wide open with the Taxpayer’s heavenly breastmilk and things will settle down.
    He finds himself in quite the predicament… he has covertly nationalized most of our economy and now is realizing that it’s very very hard to undo.
    So I think we’ll all have to be bored with this recession for quite a bit longer than 12 more months. I’ll change my tune when we can even TALK about having interest rates above 0%. or when we actually SEE removal of govt support from our economy. Or when we see job growth (instead of persistently high but stabilized job losses).
    obviously: nominal housing prices can do many things. I really only forecast real prices.
    also obviously: as I’ve said 100,000 times on Socketsite over the last 18 months: you cannot really prognosticate the housing market because it is not a capitalistic market. It is a government controlled market. Thus, to evaluate it you must understand politics.
    Housing will do what Obama/Pelosi/Reed/Shumer/Dodd/Geithner/Bair/Bernanke feel is politically expedient to do.
    at least until the bond vigilantes wake up… which could be tomorrow or could be 10 years from now. who knows? (the govt is very powerful but not all powerful… at some point it becomes obvious that it’s writing checks the taxpayer can’t afford, but that could be years from now).

  31. Posted by tipster

    Feb. 24 (Bloomberg) — Sales of new homes in the U.S. unexpectedly fell in January to the lowest level on record, a sign that an extension of a government tax credit may not be enough to rekindle demand.
    Purchases declined 11 percent to an annual pace of 309,000, below the lowest forecast in a Bloomberg News survey of economists, from a 348,000 pace, figures from the Commerce Department showed today in Washington. The median sales price dropped 2.4 percent from January 2009 and the supply of unsold homes increased.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=acWCYvHlWvs8&pos=1
    But Katy Dinner DID have 115 people through her open house last week. Apparently there are 115 other owners of similar places nervously wondering what their homes are currently worth.

  32. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    Another market bomb kills twenty in Bagdad.
    Warming climate causes an ice shelf the size of Riverside county to fall into the sea.
    ho-hum…
    If you’ve been sitting on the sofa watching the evening news whining about the same old same old then the Institute of Boredomology wants you ! Though your spouse thinks your whinging and complaining is annoying you’ve actually been gifted with super powers. It really really works. Without the efforts of Boredomologists Gilligan’s Island would be celebrating its 40th season and we would not be blessed with dozens of reality programming each week.
    Now that the recession is licked, we’re moving on to AIDS. We’re bored with yet another life extending therapy. We’re bored with yet another pharma product that replaces eight pills with one. We want a cure. And then we’ll get bored with that too.
    C’mon and join us. Fulfill your own prophecy ! Become a Boredomologist and save the world ! Not because you care, but because you’re bored.
    (Now accepting applications for the fall semester)

  33. Posted by HappyRenter

    For those people claiming that this represents a good start to 2010 please note: this is the December 2009 report, not the Jan (or Feb) 2010 report.
    It has been mentioned before that “Real SF” pricing is tied to stock prices, I wonder how the January correction will figure in buyers minds.
    The Prestige index records a small decline in 4Q’09, so it seems that “Real SF” is faring a little worse than the ‘burbs. The Prestige index has not had an up quarter since 2Q’08.
    As mentioned above, nationally the pace of home sales fell MoM from December to January 11.2% to a 309,000 unit annual rate, the lowest level since records started in January 1963.
    Will this decline in the number of sales change the CS graph much?
    ….
    FWIW I always found Satchel/LMiM to be the best predictor.

  34. Posted by sparky-b

    ^^^
    For what it’s worth I think I am the best predictor.
    LMiM predicted that Florida would be an awesome place to live. I think that will end up being a very bad prediction.

  35. Posted by anonn

    It has been mentioned before that “Real SF” pricing is tied to stock prices, I wonder how the January correction will figure in buyers minds
    It’s doing well. Much better than December. It probably has to do with a lot of the big tech around here, and their announcements in January and early Feb. As for LMRiM, apparently you didn’t hold him accountable for “Bernal is tanking” “Glen Park is tanking” “Miraloma Park tanked” “Noe Valley is going to tank” and other gems. Don’t worry. Others held him accountable. The guy didn’t know what he was talking about when it came to neighborhoods + real estate, other than Westwood Highlands and surrounding.

  36. Posted by anonn

    Sales of new homes in the U.S. unexpectedly fell in January to the lowest level on record, a sign that an extension of a government tax credit may not be enough to rekindle demand …. But Katy Dinner DID have 115 people through her open house last week. Apparently there are 115 other owners of similar places nervously wondering what their homes are currently worth
    You still want to make everyone think that you have the ability to distill the national into the micro local. Nobody bought that act. Not two years ago, not now. And nowadays you are actually weighing in on micro local, talking about “how does this effect San Francisco, not very much” and stuff.

  37. Posted by Rillion

    The low nationwide december sales figures I suspect had something to do with the tax credit. While it did get extended, the fact that it orginally had a deadline likely caused some people that would have ended up waiting to buy to buy a bit earlier then they otherwise would have. Government subsidies and incentives like this usually cause demand to be pulled forward. Same thing happened with Cash 4 Clunkers, it time shifted the sales.

  38. Posted by tipster

    ^ Except that the housing tax credit was extended AND expanded to include other sales, and the market still tanked.
    “Nobody bought that act. Not two years ago, not now.”
    Except the market here dropped about 25% to 2004 levels (see the headline post in this thread), LOL. The only thing that stopped it was fewer and fewer people could sell: When all of the equity was exhausted and more and more people became trapped in their homes, there was a pause. That’s what we’re in now.
    The next phase will be government sanctioned short sales, and people running out of money to throw into a continuously falling asset and the second leg down will begin in earnest. The politically palatable drop appears to be about 7% per year ($42,000 for a $600K condo). More than that and the government will try to slow it down. They can’t stop it but they can delay it. You can pretty much set your watch by how predictable this all is.

  39. Posted by REpornaddict

    Those thinking this Prestige Index is some kind of a proxy for real SF either need their heads read or need to read the blurb.
    Index is spread over 25 cities, I think, in 8 counties – and only includes, off the top of my head, 3+bdrms, 3+bathrooms and 3,000+ sq foot.
    that would, I believe represent a very small % of sales in SF making their way into the index, even in ‘Real SF’.
    from the site.
    Some common features of luxury homes in the Index: 3,000 to 6,000 square feet, three to six bedrooms, and three to six bathrooms. San Francisco Bay Area properties include a cross-section of luxury homes in Alamo, Atherton, Belvedere, Danville, Healdsburg, Hillsborough, Lafayette, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Mill Valley, Moraga, Orinda, Palo Alto, Piedmont, Portola Valley, Ross, St. Helena, San Francisco, Saratoga, Sonoma, Tiburon and Woodside

  40. Posted by anonn

    The market “here,” eh? 25% eh? No. Then you go on to talk about the future, I think. Didn’t read that.

  41. Posted by curmudgeon

    ^^MoD^^
    Milkshake wins another prize for best writing on Socketsite. In both prose and verse. Deadcat at zero G indeed….

  42. Posted by nnona

    “I am NewBuyer, the SocketSite commenter who has been the most accurate in his predictions so far.”
    Wow, this one belongs in the SS quote Hall of Shame right next to “I’m always right”.
    The name “NewBuyer” says it all, really.

  43. Posted by NewBuyer

    @nnona
    Who are you? Nobody knows who you are.
    @ex-SFer
    Your response to me is not a reasonable one, and you know it. Pointing out that the government prevented a complete Depression-era collapse of our markets is a totally different conversation than is their efforts around lowering mortgage rates and $8,000 tax credit.
    And you know that.
    Yes, obviously everything in the financial realm is inter-related at one level or another. But the actions taken to prevent the meltdown should not be bundled with the highly-targeted efforts that were done exclusively with an eye towards housing.
    With regard to bailing out Fannie/Freddie, what’s done is done.
    The conversations still in play are with regard to the tax credit and holding interest rates lower. Will those benefits last? How long can the gov’t keep them going? Are their impacts waning?
    THOSE are the questions in play here.
    And I’m here to say that because the fear of a meltdown is behind us, and because prices have already fallen a ton, most fears should be behind us…
    Geeze.
    @nnona, once again…
    Just checked out several comps in my local area. I bought my home in the second half of 2008. It was a sub-million in “Real SF”, and the value has probably increased since then, if not held firm. That is based on very reasonable comps that have sold recently.
    Just deal with the reality! CSI might be down 10% since late 2008, but that just isn’t the case for sub-millions in Pac Heights area.
    It’s all about the micro!

  44. Posted by anon

    “And I’m here to say that because the fear of a meltdown is behind us, and because prices have already fallen a ton, most fears should be behind us…”
    Famous last words…….

  45. Posted by joh

    That is based on very reasonable comps that have sold recently.
    Are those “reasonable comps” also TICs?

  46. Posted by joh

    That is based on very reasonable comps that have sold recently.
    Are those “reasonable comps” also TICs?

  47. Posted by diemos

    “the fear of a meltdown is behind us”
    The fear may be behind us but the losses that created the meltdown are still sitting out there on the books.

  48. Posted by Embarcadero

    If the fear of meltdown is behind us, it’s only because we’re running away from it.

  49. Posted by Tony Cartman

    Prices are falling? Let’s see if people will buy more

  50. Posted by nnona

    “Who are you? Nobody knows who you are.”
    …. at a site populated by anonymous posters.
    Go figure.

  51. Posted by joh

    NewBuyer,
    Pacific Heights suffered price drops since late 2008, according to redfin:
    http://www.redfin.com/neighborhood/2074/CA/San-Francisco/Pacific-Heights
    Perhaps you got a good deal. But that doesn’t mean that your statement CSI might be down 10% since late 2008, but that just isn’t the case for sub-millions in Pac Heights area is necessarily true.
    So I decided to look for very reasonable comps myself, and failed to find any sub-million dollar TICs that sold in Pacific Heights during the past 3 months. I did, however, see a few condos sold. Surely you aren’t looking at condos as very reasonable comps, are you?

  52. Posted by NewBuyer

    @joh
    Very fair questions. Comps for TIC’s can be tough to find, so I also sometimes look at other neighborhoods of comparable quality.
    These particular TIC’s were at 1442 Sacramento Street in Nob Hill. Toured them a few weeks ago in fact.
    They did a good job with them, though I would only buy a TIC that is conversion eligible.

  53. Posted by joh

    Just checked out several comps in my local area.

    Comps for TIC’s can be tough to find, so I also sometimes look at other neighborhoods of comparable quality.

  54. Posted by NewBuyer

    @joh,
    Stop being obnoxious. It’s about a one mile walk from my house. Still pretty damn local.

  55. Posted by diemos

    There’s only a mile between nob hill and the tenderloin.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *