Latest Headlines on OCRegister.com
[x] Close
Lansner on Real Estate ~ The latest news about the housing market from Orange County Register columnist Jon Lansner.
« Previous Post
Next Post »

O.C.’s mid-section leads homebuying revival

October 29th, 2008, 12:56 am · 17 Comments · posted by Jon Lansner

Overall O.C. homebuying Q3
Slice Price Vs. ‘07 Sales Vs. ‘07
House $500,000 -28.6% 5,519 +42.4%
Condo $315,000 -28.7% 2,193 +38.7%
New $485,000 -12.2% 467 -45.8%
All $445,000 -28.2% 8,179 +29.4%

Analysis of DataQuick’s third-quarter report shows the county’s mid-section is leading a modest homebuying revival.

DataQuick identified 2,567 home sales in 24 mid-county ZIP codes in the summer quarter, up 90% from a year ago. In these 24 ZIPs — including cities such as Santa Ana, Garden Grove, Anaheim and Westminster — last summer’s median price change was down 28.2% vs. a year ago! (All told, countywide sales were off 29% while the median selling price fell in the past year by 28%.)

[ MORE: Register's Jeff Collins' analysis of 3rd quarter data IS HERE! ]

Compare that to …

  • North inland ZIPs had 2,035 sales, up 30% from a year ago. In these 23 ZIPs, last summer’s median price change was down 22.5% vs. a year ago.
  • South inland ZIPs had 2,209 sales, 29% from a year ago. In these 19 ZIPs, last summer’s median price change was off 18.9% vs. a year ago.
  • DataQuick identified 1,206 homes selling in beach cities’ ZIP codes last summer, down 4% from a year ago — the only loser in these four slices of the market. In these 17 ocean-close ZIPs, last summer’s median price change was down 14.4% vs. a year ago.

O.C. real estate news …

ADVERTISEMENT

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Reader Comments
Comments are encouraged, but you must follow our User Agreement.
  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic.
  2. No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.

 17 Comments

  • lee in irvine says:
    October 29, 2008 at 4 am

    Wall Street is done securitizing mortgages the way of the past.

    Question to any permabull out there:

    If we know that WS is done handing out funny money, how are OC real estate prices not gonna continue to decline?

  • Shane says:
    October 29, 2008 at 6 am

    Because in a lot of areas, especially the condo market, buying the home is cheaper than renting the same exact home even with a FHA loan down payment of 3% . And you would have the tax write-off as well !!

  • Mick says:
    October 29, 2008 at 7 am

    Wow, which areas are you talking about. None that I’ve ever seen. Maybe Santa Ana?

  • dafox says:
    October 29, 2008 at 7 am

    from the article:
    How did Santa Ana’s 92707 ZIP code triple its home sales during the summer?
    Easy. Sellers cut their prices almost in half.

    no way! you put something on sale for 50% off and you sell more of it? say it aint so!

  • The Money Pit says:
    October 29, 2008 at 7 am

    In a world where people expect prices to continue to decline, buying should be significantly (i.e. 50%) less than the price of renting to make up for capital losses.

    To pay more than rent to buy on the expectation of capital gains was lunacy.

  • The Money Pit says:
    October 29, 2008 at 7 am

    Given the tax advantage, buying should be 30-40% less than renting the equivalent place, and even then you have to factor in maintenance costs in addition to property taxes, HOA’s, etc.

    The tax advantage is free money from the government. Landlords can’t compete with that.

  • awgee says:
    October 29, 2008 at 7 am

    Home buying revival? Revival? It would seem to me that projecting a month or two’s numbers much into the future would seem a bit hopeful in the least and more accurate as farfetched.

  • Shane says:
    October 29, 2008 at 7 am

    Show me one instance where the home values went below the rental rates level, meaning people were better off buying, but chose to rent in CA ?!
    The capital losses you refer to is a temporary trend. Just like the unreasonable bull trend that all the people bought into in 2004 to 2006 did. It’s the same concept. After all is said and done, you always get a 6% annual appreciation in southern CA .

  • Chuck in Newport says:
    October 29, 2008 at 9 am

    People, refuse to believe the canard about “in real estate you always make X percent”…it is simply false. Example: I bought a house for 315K in 1999 and the seller had bought it in 1990 for 275K. After paying the exorbitant commissions, he made nothing during nine years of owning. I sold the property after 8 years, in 2007, for 830K. So same house, and one owner over 9 years made nothing, and I made a nice sum in 8 years of ownership. What does this tell you? That NOTHING is a given when you are dealing with assets on the open market. Don’t believe the lies from agents, loan officers, etc. who seem to troll around trying to drum up business, even in a free-falling market. Buy a house only with the full realization that it may be worth less than what you paid for it when you want to sell it. That is the plain truth.

  • pdu says:
    October 29, 2008 at 10 am

    Shane,

    Shame!

  • Mulliganville says:
    October 29, 2008 at 10 am

    Shame for taking the other side? pdu, you communist!

  • Mick says:
    October 29, 2008 at 12 pm

    This is just the tip of the iceburg of “THE HERD O’ HOMEBUYING FOOLS, ACT II”. That’s right. It’s a mad rush to gobble up all the homes you can before the prices reach billions and billions of dollars a piece! Hurry!

  • shane says:
    October 29, 2008 at 2 pm

    Chuck in Newport,

    If you check the historical data, you will see that OVER THE LONG TERM the average annual price appreciation is around 6.5%. That’s a fact, not an opinion.

  • mav says:
    October 29, 2008 at 2 pm

    Shane has a very precise definition of “OVER THE LONG TERM”…..

    it requires you to buy near the bottom and sell near the top of a cycle….

    shane what the hell is “OVER THE LONG TERM”… 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, 40 years? 100 years…….

    shane let’s get one thing clear…. anyone who bought in 2006 does not have a shot in hell to ever see their annual rate of return at 6.5%…. shane you would need a rudimentary education in finace to even understand this….

  • Chuck in Newport says:
    October 29, 2008 at 3 pm

    That “over the long term” is the canard of which I spoke. It’s too vague to have any meaning, and it is misleading at best and fraudulent at worst. Most real estate agents will “brag” that people only stay in their houses 5-7 years…and so will lenders, who try to hook people into ARMs- - on the theory that “hey, you won’t even be in this house in 5 years, so why not do a 5 year ARM?” Well, many people do stay in houses for 5 years and make some money. But plenty do not make a dime even if they stay 10 years. That fallacy, about “average 6.5 percent” is all propaganda from the industry people (a dying breed?). If you don’t time the purchase and sale correctly, you’ll be SOL and have nothing to show for your “investment.” Again, people should be warned that real estate, like stocks, is an investment capable of going up or down, and anyone who so invests should realize that before diving in- - it is not a “sure fire” way to make money.

  • snotty scotty says:
    October 29, 2008 at 6 pm

    It’s not a surefire way to make money, but there are other variables besides home appreciation (no, I’m not a realtor or mortgage broker, never have been). Given the write-off vs. the $50 renter’s credit on your tax return and the other available tax breaks or rebates due to home improvements, you can do reasonably well IF YOU DON’T BUY DURING THE HYSTERIA. Any time you buy during a period of double-digit increases, you’re gambling big time, unless you buy a fixer at a bargain price, fix it and get out within months, and that’s no guarantee either. But if you’re sensible, it can be done without having to be an expert.