Friday, Nov 21, 2008
Wow, its really happening, only to 2003 levels, long way to go.
LA Times: Price of Southern California homes falls 41% from peak
What IDIOTS borrowed that much money?! "With the median price of Southern California homes down more than 40% from its peak, the housing market has now slid further than most economists expected. The median sales price for homes in the region fell to $300,000 in October, a level not seen since 2003 and a 41% drop from the peak price set in the spring and summer of 2007, according to San Diego-based MDA DataQuick."
Posted by planning4acrash @ 01:23 AM (557 views) Add Comment
9 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. drewster said...
But property prices in Southern California can NEVER fall! There is a limited amount of land between the mountains and the sea, more and more immigrants every year, more and more wealthy movie stars living there, etc etc etc.
In other words, just like London. Another 6-12 months and we'll be catching up quickly.
2. amjidk said...
yep, i bet some of the predicted house price falls, will look very optimistic in 12 months time...
3. Deeks said...
Great News!! Another 40% and they will be back to 1998 prices!!! Thats when to buy!
4. str 2007 said...
Have been looking for another rental in South Bucks or South Hants areas over the last month or so and what I noticed logging into rightmove last night is that nothing is moving, virtually all houses I saw in the last 4-8 weeks were still on and several have rates dropped now. Even the ones I thought were priced ok (against a back drop of overpriced ones) were still on.
In fact I'd go further and say the rental asking prices and those achieved is falling faster than house sale asking prices.
The reason I guess is with a rental stood empty you are realising the loss month by month where as a house for sale loss isn't realised until it's sold and if it doesn't sell then you haven't realised the loss which means you can still go on comforting yourself about what your house WAS worth with head stuck firmly in the sand.
It won't be long before landlords will have to actually do some decorating and fit new kitchens and bathrooms to let a property, unlike in the past when they could pass off any old piece of shabby rubbish as though the renter was some sort of second class citizen.
This is looking better by the day, I might even consider a longer term rental if this keeps up - I'll need to see about a 40% fall in rents though.
5. str 2007 said...
Re: the article
Sales are up 56%. Actual prices may not be increasing yet and the 56% increase may be from a low base line, but someones opinion on what is a good deal is starting to change, and I guess someone is providing the finance.
6. planning4acrash said...
str 2007, soon they will be giving houses away. I know of rental houses that are worse than anything I've seen in Africa. Seriously. Particularly in University Towns. Imagine if the University bubble burst, and people would have to leave useless media/propaganda courses and have to actually make stuff and get trained up or become entrepreneurs. Imagine if Uni Towns lost just 10% of students, all the rubbish houses would have to literally be given away, because they are in that bad a state, with literally everything needing renewal.
7. It_is_going_with_a_bang said...
The economists quoted in this article do a fantastic job of gu-estimating what the falls would be.
The expert opinions being anywhere between 10% and 55%. What a wonderful professional body of people they really are.
The only thing that seems "economic" about them is the "truth".
8. rm96696 said...
I think we'll be reading the same article about London in a year's time.
9. s2rjul07 said...
str 2007: I can relate to what you say about falling rents. Back in June of 2007 when we found the place we are renting, there were three properties available to let in the whole area of the city that were vaguely suitable for us. Our needs were modest; 3 bedrooms, reasonable size. Now there are FOUR properties to let on our street alone, some having been on for many months. One of them took about four months to let last year and now the tenants have done a runner judging by the notice from the landlord on the door, and so they are back to square one. Now we want an extra bedroom and now not only are four and five properties available to rent, but they just don't shift unless they drop the price to match the (asking) price of a 3 bed. We are spoiled for choice.