Who cares about Brenda or Dillon??

Larry Mohr

This market has always been cyclical. One of the factors is that potential buyers are waiting for the market to drop additionally so they can get really good deals. With the REOs on the market, the lenders will deal as their inventory of REOs affects their compliance with regulations regarding their financial situation and what they can do.

There are two types of buyers in B.H. 90210. There are those for whom the expenditure is significant, and who are waiting for a good deal. And there are those for whom their "life's time" is more important, and who are indifferent to price, usually because of their financial situation.

I had an uncle who had a home improvement company years ago. He occasionally made sales calls to keep tabs on the pulse of the market. He called on one lady in her early 30s, who had three children by three different husbands, and who was collecting some $90.000 per month in child support.

She had a six month lease on an "apartment." She obtained the accord of the landlord, and had the apartment upgraded to the tune of some $40,000 in work. The requirement was that the work be done on an accelerated basis, while she stayed in a hotel. She told my uncle that she wanted things "just so" in her life, and that cost was not a factor for her.

Go figure.

The impact on BH property indicates not only the decline in marketability because of factors peculiar to the real estate market, but more significantly, that the incomes sufficient to maintain mortgage payments are not being sustained.

Just a note, however. The "wealthy" people usually pay cash at purchase for these properties and do not pay on a note. So, the people losing their homes due to inability to keep up the mortgage payment (or an unwillingness to keep up the mortgage payment because the value has declined to where it is lower than the note) are marginal in their class.

Some people living in 90213 or 90212 in BH are far wealthier than those who carry "flash rolls," and want to parade their "success" by displaying a bankroll or with ostentatious housing.

This won't affect me because I own 3 houses in BelAir and 2 in Pacific Palisades.

You don't loose money unless you sell....low.

Dont feel sorry for them at all. You cant pay cash, you cant afford it. I'm smart enough to know his and this is why i will NEVER borrow from a bank without 35% cash up front.

There are lots of places in this great land where you would be upside down on your home even if you did pay 35% down.

There are lots of places in this great land where you would be upside down on your home even if you did pay 35% down.

Posted by WilliamJ

Wouldn't that depend on how stupid you were? That is to say when you bought.

It's a nice feeling to own my house in 779-- free and clear of any mortgage. I still have taxes, insurance, and maintenance though and I never saw my house as some great investment, but a place to LIVE and for my grand kids to play.

I don't feel sorry for people who live right up to the level of their income and when there is the slightest problem, they lose their home. "Live below your means" and "neither a borrower or lender be" are good philosophys. Another guaranteed way of losing your house is to get a divorce.

We spent the last 10 years whining about houses that were too expensive. Now that prices are dropping a little, we're whining about that. Collective Americans are so stupid, sometimes....

You don't lose money unless you sell....low.

Posted by Sniper at 2008-06-11 08:25 AM

How true. If your house was worth $X in 2005 (prime time for the housing bubble) why rush to sell right now and take a much lesser value. The only question is how much longer do you think this slump will continue?

If one wants to sell is it better to stretch out the time a few more months before putting the house on the market? Or, if your particular suburb has always been an attractive place to buy (good schools, police, fire dept., hospital, etc.), would this slump in housing prices even affect your own home? I can't see why a countrywide slump in housing prices means that everyone's asking price for their home to be sold has to be dragged down with it. Don't other factors come into play -- like location, location, location?

My neighborhood is such a radical mix of homes. All are worth money but there is such a variety. There are huge million dollar plus, 2-story new homes just 1/2 a mile up the street and just below me 1/2 a mile on the same street are much smaller homes that were built in the 1940's to accomodate housing for what was then Lockheed's booming war defense industry.

I've heard realtors say "oh the market has gone down" without even seeing any of the homes in question. Seems they are basing their opinion only on what the media is telling them. I have a feeling them a lot of realtors are looking to push people into a "quick sale" (and a quick commission in their own pockets) by using making the seller feel they probably won't get much for their home so sell at a lower price and don't expect more. I don't believe it. I think many more factors come into play. I don't see a ton of "for sale" signs in my very multi-type of homes neighborhood either.

The way I look at it is I only need ONE buyer who will pay my asking price -- the housing market slump nationwide be damned.

Example --

There's a home right around the bend of the road from my house -- and this home was worth maybe at least $700,000 - $800,000 minimum. That home has now been leveled to the ground. In its place on the lot is now being built some ugly mother-f__king 2-story "McMansion" that looks like an apartment house with openings for many windows, etc. on each side.

Since my neighborhood is not zoned for apt. buildings I stopped on my way to the store and asked some guy there in a hardhat clutching a roll of blueprints just what was being built on that lot. He said it was a "single-family" house, not an apt. Whoever is having his new home built from the ground -- and doesn't blink and eye about leveling the previously nice home on that lot down to the ground -- sure ain't hurting for bucks. If I sell, all I need is ONE buyer just like him.

Question for DR grammargeeks --

When does one use "whoever" and "whomever"?

Whenever it's the subject of the sentence or in the nominative case, it's "whoever". Whenever it's a direct or indirect object, it's "whomever."

"Whoever is going to the store, please remember to pick up some milk." (Subject)

"Send the package to whomever you like." (Indirect object

RIGHTISRIGHT is right.

Kudos to your English teacher.

"Ed McMahon can vouch for that. The former Johnny Carson sidekick and TV pitchman recently saw his $5 million Beverly Hills home go into foreclosure."

Anyone with that much money shouldn't owe any.

Correct rightisright! Thanks!

"Ed McMahon can vouch for that. The former Johnny Carson sidekick and TV pitchman recently saw his $5 million Beverly Hills home go into foreclosure."
* * * *

A McMahonsion?