Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Dennis (SoCal)

Posted by Killer Joe on August 05, 2005 at 11:33:15:

GW,

I stopped for gas in LP returning from a ski trip in 1984 and the gas station attendant was a 21 year old kid that was born there and had never been out of the city limits according to him. I was blown away.

I thought to myself how wonderful it must be to only have experienced life in Lone Pine, and never have seen a freeway, traffic jams, city stress, racial strife, and all the other problems that come from living in Los Angeles.

What a beautiful place that was back then, I hope it still retains those qualities today. If it has, you are one fortunate individual.

KJ

Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Dennis (SoCal)

Posted by Dennis (SoCal) on August 01, 2005 at 12:06:30:

Hi,
Since I don’t seem to have any friends who are actually interested in the RE market, I thought I’d trouble you all for your opinions on the CA market. =)

My fiancee and I were looking at a 4/2 house yesterday for us to live in, (not a CRE deal), it’s selling for 750K, (comps are higher lady is in assisted living and wants fast sale), and after looking at it and thinking about it, I’m trying to figure out how can prices in CA stay so high?(Orange County in particular)

Together she and I make over 100K, have 150K as a down, (if we sell my house), and have average debt. Yet I’m not sure we’d qualify for the loan, and I know I wouldn’t take it at 3,500/month anyway.

My question is - how are people going to be able to afford houses out here anymore? Wages don’t appear adequate to buy houses that retail on average for 500K+
And the funny thing is, I don’t think we are going to “burst” either. I expect that sales will slow and the market will become softer as rates rise, but I doubt that there will be any massive drop in prices like in the 90’s.

I just don’t understand it. And I was hoping some of you more knowledgeable people would be kind enough to share your opinions. =)

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Gavin Wilkinson

Posted by Gavin Wilkinson on August 02, 2005 at 18:58:34:

I would like to present the other side why prices may not decline.

First of all, why are prices in California so high? If you have been involved with subdividing property lately, or if you have tried to build houses recently, you know that government and environmentalists make your life miserable. First the government sticks you with all kinds of fees and delays. Then they make you put in improvements to their specifications, and usually these include some useless expenses. Then you attend dozens of meetings. Then you change something and have to have the whole thing redrawn again for another 5k a pop. In the meantime you are paying 18% interest because no lender is interested in lending to a speculation like a development. Then you have to pay extortion to the tortise fund, the chipmunk fund and the owl fund. All the neighbors come out and call you greedy, and tell you that you are evil and want to ruin the neighborhood and destroy the planet.

So supply of new lots and houses is very limited. So when demand goes up, instead of more houses being built, only a few are built, and prices go through the roof.

I lived in Palo Alto during the 1980’s and at the time, prices seemed very high. You could pick up a house in Southern California for a third of the price then. Well, guess what. The prices there never declined. Now houses in Palo Alto cost double or more, and are even more unaffordable.

There are some scenarios which would cause the real estate market to decline quickly. If interest rates jumped to 8% suddenly, the market would slow down and prices would fall. But it is just as likely that price increases will just slow down to 2-5% a year, and wages and rents will start to increase more.

If people are unable to sell their homes, they usually simply take them back off the market and stay put. Unless a huge number of owners lose their jobs, or come under severe stress, prices may not decline

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by speednxs

Posted by speednxs on August 01, 2005 at 14:13:12:

The most desirable areas only need to attract the highest wage earners. Average wage earners just don’t have a chance. I don’t know how many times I heard “My type A, overachieving wife’s salary pays the mortgage and my salary pays for everything else.”
On the other hand, mortgage rates moving up a few (hundred basis) points are a serious problem for high prices, when it finally happens.

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Killer Joe

Posted by Killer Joe on August 01, 2005 at 13:29:33:

Dennis,

The current mindset is that unlike every other cycle in RE that has come before, this cycle is ‘special’ and won’t be subjected to the same pressures that have caused corrections in the past. I personally don’t buy into that hype.

If we were to look at just two simple items that are basically ‘outside’ of RE, yet will have an overall bearing on the market, we can see that RE is not as isolated a realm as some believe. There are many factors that can change a market, let’s just talk about these two…

The first one is historic highs for gasoline and fuel oil. The second is the recent trend of credit card companies to double the minimum payments from 2% to 4 %, with the last of the CCCs instituting this change by Oct, 05.

The overall effect of these two seemingly unrelated items will be a ‘cash crunch’ for those that are at or near their limit regarding discretionary income. As an example, if you are a ‘renter’, and your financial profile is such that you are living as close to ‘hand to mouth’ as you can and yet still stay afloat, you may have one ‘Titantic’ of a winter coming up. If you are the landlord to this tenant, you may feel the impact to this individual as well.

Additionally, if you have ‘stretched’ to become a landlord such that your staying power will not allow you to carry a property through a prolonged vacancy phase, you may face the same troubles as your tenant. In effect, his house of cards fell down and landed on yours.

One predictable outcome of the above scenario is a rise in the RE inventory available for purchase. There is a direct correlation between inventory and prices. Markets that stagnate or retreat are historically led by investors hoping to ‘cash out’ or ‘bail’ before the whole ball of wax melts. Homeowners do not subject the market to these same pressures because overall they are in no hurry to disrupt their lives and relocate for the sake of market pricing.

While it is true that all markets are local, and they all have unique tendancies, the overall trend regarding interest rates, financing, allocatable resources such as fuel and gas, both for transportation and housing et al, are becoming national in nature if they weren’t already. In reality they are becomming global in nature. (If you don’t believe the recent overtures of the Chinese Government to buy Cheveron won’t affect you, you’re not paying attention.)

One trait of human nature is to seek a position that will lessen the overall stress endured on a daily basis. In the last two RE recessions I have witnessed in SoCal, I have watched people literally walk away from properties that are causing them too much stress. This, BTW, was in spite of any and all monies invested in the properties. They simply cut their losses and moved on. This drove an already heavy inventory to the point of no return as far as apprieciation went. In fact it fueled the deflationary fires even more. This led to a situation where people stopped investing in fixing up the structures, and allowed the physical decline of the structures to influence prices as well. This last effect is more pronounced toward the end of the down cycle, although is initiated shortly after the crest when people realize that no matter what improvements are done to the property the monies invested will not pay a return, only be buried.

If you have trepidations about the SoCal market reaching the boiling point, and realize that the pace of housing costs is way ahead of income at this point, I share those sentiments. As a student of the last two cycles I see no circumstances that will change the cycle to one of being impervious to market pressures. In fact, I just gave you two more pressures to add to the list. HTH

KJ

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Gene

Posted by Gene on August 03, 2005 at 17:50:53:

So your agument is because its harder to build houses there is a demand issue.

But that is just not the case. There is plenty of empty units all across the country.

There were an estimated 123.7 million housing units in the United States in the second quarter 2005. Approximately 107.9 million housing units were occupied: 74.0 million by owners and 33.9 million by renters.

Given 107.9 million occupied units out of a total of 123.7 million housing units, my math suggests there are 15.8 million unoccupied units. The BLS does not break those units down into houses, condos, and apartments, but it does seem preposterous to be proclaiming a shortage. Also note that close to 70% of the people own their own home even though there are tens of thousands of unoccupied condominiums with 10 years worth of supply coming on in Florida in the next two years alone. Finally note that 70% ownership just might be the saturation rate given that many of the 30% are city dwellers that do not want to own and/or are just plain incapable of owning a house for economic or disability reasons. With all that in mind, it is well into fantasyland to suggest a shortage of houses.

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Dennis (SoCal)

Posted by Dennis (SoCal) on August 01, 2005 at 14:19:51:

Thanks for the thoughts KJ. I didn’t realize that the CC companies were raising minimum payments to 4% - I knew they’d changed the bankruptcy laws to make things harder but not the min. pymnt too. Ouch, doubling my monthly CC pymnt is going to hurt! No more pizza nights. =)

I know I’m already starting to see prices flatten and houses DOM going up, at least for the over $500K crowd, anything under $500K is still going fast.

I do wonder though if all the new investors out there won’t keep the market propped up for some time, if not here then out-of-state. I can see the national median house price going up to $400K within a few yrs despite the energy crunch because of all the people out there willing to just throw their money into RE as a “get rich quick” scheme.

My daughter’s mom moved to Phoenix last yr and I just found out that my daughter has to be bused to a neighboring city because her local schools are full. Talk about growth! And every time I visit there the prices are up and at least one out of every three homes has a 4-rent sign on it. It’s crazy all over. =)

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Gavin Wilkinson

Posted by Gavin Wilkinson on August 04, 2005 at 10:23:14:

I don’t live “all across the country” so I cannot speak for conditions in your neighborhood, just the several markets here in California I keep up with.

Nor do I know where the figures you cited come from. Do vacation houses count as “unoccupied”? I own two houses right now, and rent and occupy a third. One is a vacation house. One is being finished. So personally, I account for 2 “unoccupied” houses. But they are not available for use. I suggust that if you investigate your figures, the “unoccupied” houses you cite will turn out to be second houses, or houses that are under construction or under rehabilitation. Also remember that in any market there has to be some slack for people to switch houses. Just as in a healthy economy 5% of the people will still be unemployed, 5% of houses will have to be empty so houses can be sold etc. Also I suspect that you would find that the empty houses are all in Kansas, not at the beach in California.

I can tell you about my neighborhood. In my town, rents are up 100% over the last 5 years. It is a small market, but every time a rental comes up, it is quickly filled.

There are very few unbuilt lots available, and very little land available for subdividing, because the federal, state and local governments have bought or always owned all the other land.

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Gene

Posted by Gene on August 02, 2005 at 14:26:08:

“I can see the national median house price going up to $400K within a few yrs despite the energy crunch because of all the people out there willing to just throw their money into RE as a “get rich quick” scheme.”

I personally do not see this happening. I think prices are already way too high across the country. There will be a correction soon.

The coasts are about to be in a world of hurt. Banks will not be able to offer the loans they do now. And when the media picks up stories about “poor helpless investors” that were victomized by the hype…real estate investing will again be considered dangerous and will loose popularity.

Look at current inventory levels…they are up across the country. I think we could see a correction sooner than later. This bubble might last into 2007 but I dout it. Too many lier loans and teaser loans that will come due.

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Dennis (SoCal)

Posted by Dennis (SoCal) on August 04, 2005 at 11:12:42:

Gavin,

If you don’t mind my asking whereabouts do you live in CA? I’m down in the OC myself. From your post I’m thinking you live up north a ways?

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Dennis (SoCal)

Posted by Dennis (SoCal) on August 02, 2005 at 17:07:47:

Hey Gene,

I agree with you that the coasts are definitely going to be in for a downturn, but I don’t see why the other places in the nation won’t just take up the slack. With all the investors looking for a quick buck, won’t they just start throwing their money at the nearest 200,000 neighborhood? And then move on once they’ve run that place up past the point of feasability.

I’m not sure what you meant about banks not being able to make certain kinds of loans in the future. What kinds of loans will they have to stop making? And why?

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Gavin Wilkinson

Posted by Gavin Wilkinson on August 05, 2005 at 10:50:56:

I’m in the tiny town of Lone Pine, Ca, which is on highway 395 in the desert near the Sierra Nevada.

Re: Question/discussion on CA market - Posted by Gene

Posted by Gene on August 02, 2005 at 17:24:30:

Right now the masses think that you cannot loose in real estate. When folks on the coast get worked, people all over the county will remember that markets go up and down and that there is risk.

Markets are ruled by two things…fear and greed. Right now there is no fear. Soon we will be reminded of the risk and fear will be reintorduced.

The other thing is that many of the run ups are because of the new equity on the coasts. People are refinancing and using that money to buy in other areas. This is a very very common occurence. When the coasts get worked…there will not be the money that is pooring into the other states. Another thing that is intresting is that the rich are selling real estate right now. They know its time to cash out. The buyers right now are the greedy that have seen everyone making money and want in the action.

As far as my statements about loans goes…Right now lenders are being very generous and are putting out risky loans. They need to just to stay competative. When loans on the coast start going south, the banks are going to get burned. They will tighten up thier standards and raise thier rates. Right now they will give anyone with a pulse a loan…that will change real soon.

I personally think everthing we are seeing is more of a finance bubble rather than a real estate bubble. Either way its going to end badly.

The other thing about the very generous loans we have been seeing…if the feds raise rates next week .25 again, we will have a flat yeild curve. If we see even one more raise and we will have a reverse yield curve. This will change everything when it comes to the teaser loans we have been seing.

Its going to be ugly.
Gene