stepping_up_IHB
New member
[quote author="OC Zed" date=1232008986][quote author="skek" date=1231989713][quote author="Chuck" date=1231987042]I've been keeping an eye on the Harbor View area, Irvine Terrace and the Port Streets. Prices have definately been creeping downward but in my opinion they are still too high. Does anyone have any insight into any of these areas and/or any predictions for where prices will eventually settle? Thanks!</blockquote>
Because these neighborhoods are older, they had fewer peak buyers. I also get the sense that there was less (although not zero) HELOC abuse in some of these neighborhoods. So, the number of motivated sellers is lower. On the other hand, all three neighborhoods rose to unsustainable values, especially the Port Streets. It is a great family neighborhood, and it is on our list for that reason, but it is unremarkable in every other way, but for the fact that it has a Newport address. Price declines will come, but they will be slow. As to where they end up? I'd say 2003 prices. That's my prediction for most of Newport -- 2003 for the desirable neighborhoods, slightly less for the less desirable neighborhoods.</blockquote>
I would disagree on bottoming at 2003 prices as those prices still outpace most Newport incomes. Moreover, you would have a stalled move-up market if every other town fell to 2001/2002 levels and Newport stayed at 2003.</blockquote>
I agree if that if we are going to bottom in Newport at 2003 pricing, it doesn't seem fair, since the difference between '01 and '03 is tremendous everywhere. Even '03 prices on the little fixer bungalows in CDM that were torn down to be replaced with a god awful tuscan monstrosity were outrageous. Other areas seemed high, but Laguna., CDM and Newport seemed excessively high in '03 for what you got. However, isn't hard to use newport incomes to predict prices since you have so many young renters there, particularly on the peninsula? There are a ton of these $40K-$50K single people in Newport that don't even enter the buying equation. Take those people out and average out my uncles and man, the incomes there are reallly high.
Because these neighborhoods are older, they had fewer peak buyers. I also get the sense that there was less (although not zero) HELOC abuse in some of these neighborhoods. So, the number of motivated sellers is lower. On the other hand, all three neighborhoods rose to unsustainable values, especially the Port Streets. It is a great family neighborhood, and it is on our list for that reason, but it is unremarkable in every other way, but for the fact that it has a Newport address. Price declines will come, but they will be slow. As to where they end up? I'd say 2003 prices. That's my prediction for most of Newport -- 2003 for the desirable neighborhoods, slightly less for the less desirable neighborhoods.</blockquote>
I would disagree on bottoming at 2003 prices as those prices still outpace most Newport incomes. Moreover, you would have a stalled move-up market if every other town fell to 2001/2002 levels and Newport stayed at 2003.</blockquote>
I agree if that if we are going to bottom in Newport at 2003 pricing, it doesn't seem fair, since the difference between '01 and '03 is tremendous everywhere. Even '03 prices on the little fixer bungalows in CDM that were torn down to be replaced with a god awful tuscan monstrosity were outrageous. Other areas seemed high, but Laguna., CDM and Newport seemed excessively high in '03 for what you got. However, isn't hard to use newport incomes to predict prices since you have so many young renters there, particularly on the peninsula? There are a ton of these $40K-$50K single people in Newport that don't even enter the buying equation. Take those people out and average out my uncles and man, the incomes there are reallly high.