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 : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (78878)	5/7/2008 9:42:51 PM
From: benwood	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

If it was my oil field, for argument's sake, I could sell it 4% a year for 25 years and then never need another one. Why would I need another oil field? An oil producer might want another one, but they hardly need one. They can sell the field, put the money in the bank, and go home. I want to live somewhere all the time, however. If I sold my one house, I'd need another right away. Or I could keep it. My options appear to be keeping it, or selling 100%. For all practical purposes, there is no in-between. With the oil field, if I"m selling 4% per year right now, I could up that to 5% or 6% if I think the price is going to crest soon, or perhaps cut back to 2% to 3% to help drive up the price. But either way, I get $$$ profit and I invest that somewhere else, e.g. gold or Chinese automakers. You are needlessly quantizing the oil -- it's a reservoir and you can sell it a barrel at a time, generate income for 20-50 years. The house is just a single entity. It didn't matter one iota that my house price went up 200% in 15 years -- the other houses went up 200% too. Rent differentials matter, but not much. There are many barriers to selling my house (school district, hassle, market forces). The market for oil is gigantic and liquid.