What's going into escrow - Irvine and maybe some Tustin too

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228438966][quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228390567]Turtle Ridge



Condos

67 Shade tree - sold for $890K - Nov 13 2008 - In 2004, similar house was bought for $1.250M. A whopping $360K loss.

133 Danbrook - asking price $320K - Bough for $472K. $152K loss if sold at asking price



SFR

36 Crimson Rose - asking price $1.199M - Dec 2008 - Bought for $1.447M - $248K if loss if sold at asking price.



I plan to add more when I have time.</blockquote>


Those look like some pretty hefty losses to me.</blockquote>


WPR is providing false info.



Danbrook was bought for $445K, not $472K in early 2005. It is ranged priced from $320-370K. It is a big loss for TRidge though if it sold that low. Sucks to be right on top of the 73...



<strong>Where is this 36 Crimson Rose listing? What is the MLS number? Zillow can't find it and the OC assessors office has no record of that home existing.</strong>
 
[quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228443082][quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228438966][quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228390567]Turtle Ridge



Condos

67 Shade tree - sold for $890K - Nov 13 2008 - In 2004, similar house was bought for $1.250M. A whopping $360K loss.

133 Danbrook - asking price $320K - Bough for $472K. $152K loss if sold at asking price



SFR

36 Crimson Rose - asking price $1.199M - Dec 2008 - Bought for $1.447M - $248K if loss if sold at asking price.



I plan to add more when I have time.</blockquote>


Those look like some pretty hefty losses to me.</blockquote>


WPR is providing false info.



Danbrook was bought for $445K, not $472K in early 2005. It is ranged priced from $320-370K. It is a big loss for TRidge though if it sold that low. Sucks to be right on top of the 73...



<strong>Where is this 36 Crimson Rose listing? What is the MLS number? Zillow can't find it and the OC assessors office has no record of that home existing.</strong></blockquote>


I got the Danbrook from the OC tax site. Again, I'm not a realtor and the number is not that far off.



It's 46 Crimson not 36. I'll update my list.



Ipo, just don't go into a bit twit, nitpicking every little things. I said I typed it late last night. Two words for you PLEASE BUY, you put yourselves out of misery.
 
[quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228444169][quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228443082][quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228438966][quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228390567]Turtle Ridge



Condos

67 Shade tree - sold for $890K - Nov 13 2008 - In 2004, similar house was bought for $1.250M. A whopping $360K loss.

133 Danbrook - asking price $320K - Bough for $472K. $152K loss if sold at asking price



SFR

36 Crimson Rose - asking price $1.199M - Dec 2008 - Bought for $1.447M - $248K if loss if sold at asking price.



I plan to add more when I have time.</blockquote>


Those look like some pretty hefty losses to me.</blockquote>


WPR is providing false info.



Danbrook was bought for $445K, not $472K in early 2005. It is ranged priced from $320-370K. It is a big loss for TRidge though if it sold that low. Sucks to be right on top of the 73...



<strong>Where is this 36 Crimson Rose listing? What is the MLS number? Zillow can't find it and the OC assessors office has no record of that home existing.</strong></blockquote>


I got the Danbrook from the OC tax site. Again, I'm not a realtor and the number is not that far off.



It's 46 Crimson not 36. I'll update my list.



Ipo, just don't go into a bit twit, nitpicking every little things. I said I typed it late last night. Two words for you PLEASE BUY, you put yourselves out of misery.</blockquote>


I agree, IPO buy now while the prices are still high and they have a long way to drop, that will definitely put yourself out of misery
 
[quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228444169]

I got the Danbrook from the OC tax site. Again, I'm not a realtor and the number is not that far off.



It's 46 Crimson not 36. I'll update my list.



Ipo, just don't go into a bit twit, nitpicking every little things. I said I typed it late last night. Two words for you PLEASE BUY, you put yourselves out of misery.</blockquote>


"Not that far off"... Why be far off at all if you are going to post such things? Why not say "between 450-475K" vs. coming out with a specific number? I try to be very careful about the data I post. If I don't have confidence in the data and can't get a good number for a previous sale price for example, I don't use the information.



Property taxes go up each year. Even if you use the assessor's site, if you know the purchase year, you can interpolate closely to the original price. I do the same. That doesn't work for newer places which have had re-assessments down though.



No idea what buying a house has to do with anything... Even if I do buy, I'll still come here to present factual data. I'm in the same position as you - waiting for declines. I just don't allow my desire and hope for further price declines to distort the facts.



<strong>Where was that $1.25M 2004 TRidge 2000sf place? You appear to be avoiding that question...</strong> I'd love to see the place that commanded a price of $625/sf back in 2004. Maybe even send them a letter asking them WTF.
 
[quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228445931][quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228444169]

I got the Danbrook from the OC tax site. Again, I'm not a realtor and the number is not that far off.



It's 46 Crimson not 36. I'll update my list.



Ipo, just don't go into a bit twit, nitpicking every little things. I said I typed it late last night. Two words for you PLEASE BUY, you put yourselves out of misery.</blockquote>


"Not that far off"... Why be far off at all if you are going to post such things? Why not say "between 450-475K" vs. coming out with a specific number? I try to be very careful about the data I post. If I don't have confidence in the data and can't get a good number for a previous sale price for example, I don't use the information.



Property taxes go up each year. Even if you use the assessor's site, if you know the purchase year, you can interpolate closely to the original price. I do the same. That doesn't work for newer places which have had re-assessments down though.



No idea what buying a house has to do with anything... Even if I do buy, I'll still come here to present factual data. I'm in the same position as you - waiting for declines. I just don't allow my desire and hope for further price declines to distort the facts.



<strong>Where was that $1.25M 2004 TRidge 2000sf place? You appear to be avoiding that question...</strong> I'd love to see the place that commanded a price of $625/sf back in 2004. Maybe even send them a letter asking them WTF.</blockquote>


Not avoiding that problem. I had to go out and exercise and now I'm back to work. I'll find out later. Like I said you love to pick on little things. I went to sleep last night and did not have time to check other website. I should have posed roughly. But the real answer to your question is why TR prices have NOT been dropped. My main response was that TR Prices have been dropped.
 
[quote author="Stuff It" date=1228445264][quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228444169][quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228443082][quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228438966][quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228390567]Turtle Ridge



Condos

67 Shade tree - sold for $890K - Nov 13 2008 - In 2004, similar house was bought for $1.250M. A whopping $360K loss.

133 Danbrook - asking price $320K - Bough for $472K. $152K loss if sold at asking price



SFR

36 Crimson Rose - asking price $1.199M - Dec 2008 - Bought for $1.447M - $248K if loss if sold at asking price.



I plan to add more when I have time.</blockquote>


Those look like some pretty hefty losses to me.</blockquote>


WPR is providing false info.



Danbrook was bought for $445K, not $472K in early 2005. It is ranged priced from $320-370K. It is a big loss for TRidge though if it sold that low. Sucks to be right on top of the 73...



<strong>Where is this 36 Crimson Rose listing? What is the MLS number? Zillow can't find it and the OC assessors office has no record of that home existing.</strong></blockquote>


I got the Danbrook from the OC tax site. Again, I'm not a realtor and the number is not that far off.



It's 46 Crimson not 36. I'll update my list.



Ipo, just don't go into a bit twit, nitpicking every little things. I said I typed it late last night. Two words for you PLEASE BUY, you put yourselves out of misery.</blockquote>


I agree, IPO buy now while the prices are still high and they have a long way to drop, that will definitely put yourself out of misery</blockquote>


Well said, I totally agree.

Pull the trigger if you don?t want to wait.

You obviously think you know more than us.

All because you have better access to information and choose to spend all your time on it.

Prove us wrong, step up.

Let's see it.

Otherwise, stop whining about the declines not being big enough or happening faster.

If that?s the case, you should?ve never sold your home in the first place.

Stay put, pay the place off, and be content.
 
[quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228455867]



Well said, I totally agree.

Pull the trigger if you don?t want to wait.

You obviously think you know more than us.

All because you have better access to information and choose to spend all your time on it.

Prove us wrong, step up.

Let's see it.

Otherwise, stop whining about the declines not being big enough or happening faster.

If that?s the case, you should?ve never sold your home in the first place.

Stay put, pay the place off, and be content.</blockquote>


Your post is moronic ten. I know you are smarter than your faulty conclusions exhibit. You can keep firing away at the messenger but that isn't going to change the message.



With regards to housing prices in Irvine over the past twelve months, yes, I do know a hell of a lot more than you. You don't spend an hour or two a day searching/tracking mostly every unit north of 1200sf in Irvine do you? Of course not... I am sure you have much better things to do and that's what you have me for anyway. Unfortunately you don't want to believe the results for some reason.



There are strong downward trends in Irvine RE this year, but they have not necessarily been sales price:



<img src="http://www.ipoplaya.com/1001mp.jpg" alt="" />



Irvine median has been hovering around $600K for almost the entire year... By golly it even went up during the early part of the year.



<img src="http://www.ipoplaya.com/1001dom.jpg" alt="" />



Days on the market sure has solidly trended down. Things are selling a whole lot quicker these days.



<img src="http://www.ipoplaya.com/1001sd.jpg" alt="" />



The sales discount to list price has trended down as well.
 
[quote author="irvine_home_owner" date=1228464705]Man... graphs are so hard to argue with.



Did ipo just ShoRyuKen this thread?</blockquote>


<img src="http://www.ipoplaya.com/ipobruce.jpg" alt="" />
 
[quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228461247][quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228455867]



Well said, I totally agree.

Pull the trigger if you don?t want to wait.

You obviously think you know more than us.

All because you have better access to information and choose to spend all your time on it.

Prove us wrong, step up.

Let's see it.

Otherwise, stop whining about the declines not being big enough or happening faster.

If that?s the case, you should?ve never sold your home in the first place.

Stay put, pay the place off, and be content.</blockquote>


Your post is moronic ten. I know you are smarter than your faulty conclusions exhibit. You can keep firing away at the messenger but that isn't going to change the message.



With regards to housing prices in Irvine over the past twelve months, yes, I do know a hell of a lot more than you. You don't spend an hour or two a day searching/tracking mostly every unit north of 1200sf in Irvine do you? Of course not... I am sure you have much better things to do and that's what you have me for anyway. Unfortunately you don't want to believe the results for some reason.



The sales discount to list price has trended down as well.</blockquote>


There?s nothing moronic about it.

Unlike you, I?m perfectly content with what?s occurring in the marketplace.



For instance, 9 Paso Robles closed at $1.35M at the end of Oct.

Last sale was April of ?06 at $1.668M

That?s a $318K decline in two and a half years.

If you?re a buyer in that area, please explain to me how that is not something to get excited about?

Is that loss not significant enough?

Sure it is, almost as much as you made selling your condo.



Regarding you being smarter than me.

What will determine that will be what we buy and for how much.
 
[quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228468555]



Unlike you, I?m perfectly content with what?s occurring in the marketplace.



For instance, 9 Paso Robles closed at $1.35M at the end of Oct.

Last sale was April of ?06 at $1.668M

That?s a $318K decline in two and a half years.

If you?re a buyer in that area, please explain to me how that is not something to get excited about?

Is that loss not significant enough?

Sure it is, almost as much as you made selling your condo.



Regarding you being smarter than me.

What will determine that will be what we buy and for how much.</blockquote>


This has nothing to do with content or discontent. This debate is a matter of fact... Are you not reading the words? You and WPR think prices have declined <u>this year</u> and at least for Irvine for the better part of the year, that is wrong.



Where or when did I ever say I was smarter than you? Do you see that anywhere? I'll give you a moment to review... Thought not... I don't make those kinds of assumptions. Don't have nearly enough data or <em>statistics</em> to arrive at a reasonable conclusion in that regard.
 
[quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228469408][quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228468555]



Unlike you, I?m perfectly content with what?s occurring in the marketplace.



For instance, 9 Paso Robles closed at $1.35M at the end of Oct.

Last sale was April of ?06 at $1.668M

That?s a $318K decline in two and a half years.

If you?re a buyer in that area, please explain to me how that is not something to get excited about?

Is that loss not significant enough?

Sure it is, almost as much as you made selling your condo.



Regarding you being smarter than me.

What will determine that will be what we buy and for how much.</blockquote>


This has nothing to do with content or discontent. This debate is a matter of fact... Are you not reading the words? You and WPR think prices have declined <u>this year</u> and at least for Irvine for the better part of the year, that is wrong.



Where or when did I ever say I was smarter than you? Do you see that anywhere? I'll give you a moment to review... Thought not... I don't make those kinds of assumptions. Don't have nearly enough data or <em>statistics</em> to arrive at a reasonable conclusion in that regard.</blockquote>


Ipop, I dont think I said TR prices declined this year, ie since beginning of 2008 to now. I said since I've been tracking prices which is 2004 to now it has been declined. Thanks for being the complete ASSHOLE!!!!!!!!!! and twisted my words around.
 
[quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228469619][quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228469408][quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228468555]



Unlike you, I?m perfectly content with what?s occurring in the marketplace.



For instance, 9 Paso Robles closed at $1.35M at the end of Oct.

Last sale was April of ?06 at $1.668M

That?s a $318K decline in two and a half years.

If you?re a buyer in that area, please explain to me how that is not something to get excited about?

Is that loss not significant enough?

Sure it is, almost as much as you made selling your condo.



Regarding you being smarter than me.

What will determine that will be what we buy and for how much.</blockquote>


This has nothing to do with content or discontent. This debate is a matter of fact... Are you not reading the words? You and WPR think prices have declined <u>this year</u> and at least for Irvine for the better part of the year, that is wrong.



Where or when did I ever say I was smarter than you? Do you see that anywhere? I'll give you a moment to review... Thought not... I don't make those kinds of assumptions. Don't have nearly enough data or <em>statistics</em> to arrive at a reasonable conclusion in that regard.</blockquote>


Ipop, I dont think I said TR prices declined this year, ie since beginning of 2008 to now. I said since I've been tracking prices which is 2004 to now it has been declined. Thanks for being the complete ASSHOLE!!!!!!!!!! and twisted my words around.</blockquote>


You also made the STUPID mistake of selling and renting for a short term, which is not something anybody would recommend. You can't time the market for that short of a time. So STOP going around blaming people for your MISERY.

You MORON!@
 
[quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228469408][quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228468555]



Unlike you, I?m perfectly content with what?s occurring in the marketplace.



For instance, 9 Paso Robles closed at $1.35M at the end of Oct.

Last sale was April of ?06 at $1.668M

That?s a $318K decline in two and a half years.

If you?re a buyer in that area, please explain to me how that is not something to get excited about?

Is that loss not significant enough?

Sure it is, almost as much as you made selling your condo.



Regarding you being smarter than me.

What will determine that will be what we buy and for how much.</blockquote>


This has nothing to do with content or discontent. This debate is a matter of fact... Are you not reading the words? You and WPR think prices have declined <u>this year</u> and at least for Irvine for the better part of the year, that is wrong.



Where or when did I ever say I was smarter than you? Do you see that anywhere? I'll give you a moment to review... Thought not... I don't make those kinds of assumptions. Don't have nearly enough data or <em>statistics</em> to arrive at a reasonable conclusion in that regard.</blockquote>


You?re the one that needs to focus.

The whole discussion was based on my comments regarding the closing sale price on 23 Lookout.

You scoffed at 15% off peak.

The 9 Paso Robles example came right off your stats as well.

Those are the numbers I?m talking about.
 
You're funny WPR... Just takes a little needlin' and you break out with the 3rd grade name-calling. Yeah, that really makes me buy into your its-all-in-my-brain pricing analysis.



Hum, let's see, wonder who posted this - <strong>"I mean prices are going down. I have been keeping track of them."</strong> Ooooohhhh, did you mean some other year WPR? Oh, okay, you weren't talking about this year. Apologize for twisting your words. I thought your statements were pretty clear to me.
 
[quote author="tenmagnet" date=1228470476]

You?re the one that needs to focus.

The whole discussion was based on my comments regarding the closing sale price on 23 Lookout.

You scoffed at 15% off peak.

The 9 Paso Robles example came right off your stats as well.

Those are the numbers I?m talking about.</blockquote>


So did I post at all about being smarter than you? If so, then I apologize as I have more respect for you and people in general then WPR obviously does...
 
[quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228470671]You're funny WPR... Just takes a little needlin' and you break out with the 3rd grade name-calling. Yeah, that really makes me buy into your its-all-in-my-brain pricing analysis.



Hum, let's see, wonder who posted this - <strong>"I mean prices are going down. I have been keeping track of them."</strong> Ooooohhhh, did you mean some other year WPR? Oh, okay, you weren't talking about this year. Apologize for twisting your words. I thought your statements were pretty clear to me.</blockquote>
I also dealing with a 3rd grader too so I have to come down to his level. That exactly is what I mean prices have come down and I have been tracking them in the last 4 years. Perhaps my English is not as clear because it's my second language.

But I reiterate my statement that you are a complete ASSHOLE for the second time. You MORON!!!!!!!!!!
 
[quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228451865]Not avoiding that problem. I had to go out and exercise and now I'm back to work. I'll find out later. Like I said you love to pick on little things. I went to sleep last night and did not have time to check other website. I should have posed roughly. But the real answer to your question is why TR prices have NOT been dropped. My main response was that TR Prices have been dropped.</blockquote>


You find that 2004 $1.25M TRidge comp for 67 Shade Tree yet WPR?
 
[quote author="ipoplaya" date=1228471383][quote author="WestparkRenter" date=1228451865]Not avoiding that problem. I had to go out and exercise and now I'm back to work. I'll find out later. Like I said you love to pick on little things. I went to sleep last night and did not have time to check other website. I should have posed roughly. But the real answer to your question is why TR prices have NOT been dropped. My main response was that TR Prices have been dropped.</blockquote>


You find that 2004 $1.25M TRidge comp for 67 Shade Tree yet WPR?</blockquote>
I don't have time, because I don't have MLS. But like I said this were sold in 2004 not in 2008. Is this where you are complaining about?

Am not even sure you sure even be called a man. More like a SISSY!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top