Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Jones who wrote (2567)	5/9/2002 1:21:00 AM
From: John Chen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

David Jones,re:"not push to the max". God bless you. Now, here is the hard math: is 6% of 1000000 (60000) larger than 10% of 500000 (50000). The raw number of people out of work is much larger than last recession. However, 'recession' and 'high unemployment' are good for real-estate PROs. People still have to live, with or without a job, except they cannot hold on to the house. For someone with deep pocket, that's excellent opportunity. For some apartment syndicate (institution), they can raise the rent to make up for the 'vacancy'. It's much easier to be a local monopoly. But greed would sometimes get to you, once tenant is 'forced to buy', once that supply/demand crossed over, you are talking about years to rebalance.

To: David Jones who wrote (2567)	5/9/2002 2:06:13 AM
From: portage	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

David, infill is a good answer, and will be/is happening in many of the more urbanized Bay Area cities. Look at Jack London Square in Oakland. Many of those suburbs still resist though, but when they see the life it brings to their sleepy city centers, some do buy into it, at least partially. My favored improvement is to allow more legal in-law units be built in urban/suburban areas. Quick and easy, and doesn't require all kinds of new space, but the neighbors go off ranting about increased traffic, etc. Would allow more first time buyers to buy in if they can also cover part of the mortgage by renting out the in-law, plus creating more in-law units for those who can't. It's not strictly lack of land that's the problem, but lack of will to get realistic.

To: David Jones who wrote (2567)	5/9/2002 12:51:13 PM
From: Ahda	Respond to of 306849

I'm a bit long winded today.-/ It appears you are a fresh breeze in posts. VBg In SF area due to the high tech you would have increased vacancies. In the LA area there are few vacancies in the more desirable areas. Rent control and rulings I feel reduces development yet i understand the need of affordable housing. The one unit you speak of is ever too true but in the case of rent control the lack of the ability to charge rents that are in line with the market has severely reduced apartment availability. I agree with you in regards to people preferring the serenity of the suburbs, however, I don't think we have a choice other than to revitalize the core centers of a city. Here we are so extensively reliant on a freeway system that cannot possibly grow enough to accommodate the needs of the future. You can always add another train or a bus but adding lanes to freeways is a very short term solution that ends up with congestion in the inner streets plus the traffic lanes that become so jammed they reduce if not eliminate leisure time. Hopefully Staples Center and the surrounding area will create a new life style called foot peddling. Creating an environment where people walk or bike to work would curtail costs on a square foot useable base by elimination of the need of such enormous parking facilities. This would have a temporary affect of reducing housing costs as well as business costs hopefully this would last long enough that the advantage of core rebuilding would set the wheels in motion. I'm a bit long winded today.-/ So am I. The difficulty in realestate market now is the high costs of building. Our business world is evoking cost cutting measures which do not add up to increased employment and a over demand of housing. As R&D is reduced, job hunting finds a more competitive market place where the employer has the wage advantage and the risk factor in the broad realestate market increases.