Comments on: Real Homes of Genius – Pasadena Million Dollar Home or $3,500 a Month Rental? You Decide.

By: Informed Sideliner

Informed Sideliner — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 21:17:49 +0000

After going on one of the MLS websites today, I see how out of wack the Pasadena housing market is. I’m seeing condos listed for $500,000 and these condos are in areas that are not all that great. I’m seeing houses listed at $500,000 that are in a “decent” area of Pasadena, but it concerns me when those houses sold for around $200,000 prior to The Great Housing Bubble. I have said before that there are some areas in Pasadena where a house is worth a million dollars. I accept that. Those areas of Pasadena have been unaffordable for the “average Joe” before The Great Housing Bubble started. Most of the other areas of Pasadena should not have houses or condos priced at $500,000. I feel like I am back in 2006 when easy credit was available for everyone and stated income loans were being given out. Anyone looking to buy in Pasadena should research the pre bubble prices of the areas they are interested in buying. Many people who buy now in Pasadena are going to take a major hit in the future. When I say major, I mean possible 50% and higher losses on the value of their properties. These homeowners are going to be very heartbroken. The house sold for $700,000 in 2006 and now it’s priced at $500,000. Is that a good bargain? No people, because that house sold for $200,000 in 1999 before The Great Housing Bubble started and got out of control. Easy credit caused this mess, and that is something that will probably not happen again. Do your research people before you buy or you will take a MAJOR hit in the future. You see everyone else underwater right? Do you want to be like them? Be informed before you buy. Buyer beware.

By: tankertoad

tankertoad — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:54:38 +0000

The area of Pasadena in which these properties are located is called San Rafael Flats. I say flats because there is also a hilly part of San Rafael (the “Hills”) and that commands a lower price than the flats. Real estate is property to property, street to street, etc. Annandale and Glen Summer are prime streets in a prime neighborhood. Price per square foot rivals the Westside and better parts of the San Fernando Valley. These homes are only overpriced for those who can’t afford it. The market dictates (mostly) for how much a property will sell. This area has always (at least the past decade or two) and will probably always be desirable and those in the know about Pasadena who can’t afford the mansions by Cal Tech or larger homes in Linda Vista (west of the Rose Bowl) but can still afford private school. As long as someone comes in and says, “Oooh, thats less than it was four years ago.” and has the means, it will sell for at least $800K. NOT 2, 4, or 600K (unless we have a huge earthquake, speaking of). I too, wish this home was 600K but it’s not going to happen in a desireable place that is built out. Double wides in Malibu and Huntington Beach will ALWAYS be expensive. They will follow a down market but not by the same percentage as the Palmdales and the Hemets. And, they will increase at a faster rate in the good times. So, by all means keep renting. The other shoe may drop. But don’t expect prime (or relatively prime) California real estate (and that includes Marin county for the poster above) to return to the levels of affordability of the 60′s. There are still a ton of top tier income earners out there and they are still buying. I was in an open house in San Marino not too long ago and overheard a gentleman saying he just bought his son a house not too far way FOR CASH. It’s depressing, I know, because average Joe’s like we STILL can’t afford the 1800 sq ft house in our neighborhoods of choice even in this market. Hopefully that will change in a year or three but I won’t be surprised if it doesn’t.

By: Robert Stiles

Robert Stiles — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:08:13 +0000

Until unemployment decreases housing prices will continue to decline in South Lake Tahoe as well. This is second home country and no one is going to lose their first home by holding on to their second home. Why buy when you can rent for far less?

By: Kid Charlamagne

Kid Charlamagne — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 14:47:13 +0000

@CB
Apples to Oranges? That is an ignorant statement. They are both apples, just finding someway to value them both, other than the sticker price of the RHG. If apple A is worth a million dollars, no way it will rent for 3500; thus, the house isn’t worth a million is the point. In case you haven’t noticed, the entire world economy crashed because of de-leveraging of debt, focused on the national housing bubble.
Instead of a useless statement like that, why don’t you present an argument to explain why you feel the house is worth a million, or whatever your position is.
And I don’t personally feel that someone that pays 3500/mo for rent is trailer-park trash. Can you explain that statement too please? How about a little disclosure on your interest in being a bubble-believer?

By: Informed Sideliner

Informed Sideliner — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 11:08:15 +0000

Pasadena had its gang problems before The Great Housing Bubble started, and some of those years were a lot worse than now in terms of gang killings (especially in the 90s). Like I said before, there was a time when housing was affordable in Pasadena, and it was called prior to The Great Housing Bubble. Most if not all of the current listings in Pasadena are ridiculous and unrealistic. I’m seeing homes in the high crime areas of Pasadena going for $300,000 or more. You’d be lucky to get a fixer upper for $200,000 in these areas. I’m seeing some houses in Pasadena that sold for $200,000 in 1999 going for $500,000 now. Condos that sold for around $100,000 in the late 90s are now priced at $300,000 or more. Come on. Give me a break. What justifies these prices? Absolutely nothing. I love Pasadena, but I will not get sucked into buying a house that is priced at two times or more of the “real” value of the home.