3-Bedroom Lincoln Park Townhouse Sells For $88K Under 2008 Price: 2547 N. Greenview
We last chattered about this 3-bedroom 2200 square foot townhouse at 2547 N. Greenview in Lincoln Park in November 2010.
See our prior chatter here.
It has sold for $88,000 under the 2008 purchase price but for $19,500 more than the 2005 purchase price.
The townhouse was built in 1988 and had living space on 4 levels.
The living/kitchen combo were on the second floor, two bedrooms on the third floor, and the third bedroom on the fourth floor.
The kitchen had maple cabinets, stainless steel appliances and granite counter tops.
It also had 2-car parking.
Did someone get a deal for the square footage and the location across from Wrightwood Park?
Stephanie Cutter at Coldwell Banker had the listing.
2547 N. Greenview: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 2 car parking, 2200 square feet
- Sold in August 1990 for $255,000
- Sold in June 1994 for $386,250 (I wonder if this isn’t a typo in the public records and should be $286,250)
- Sold in June 2001 for $394,000
- Sold in May 2005 for $370,500
- Sold in October 2008 for $478,000
- Originally listed in May 2010 for $497,500
- Reduced several times
- Was listed in November 2010 at $399,000
- Sold in December 2010 for $390,000
- Assessments of $286 a month (includes cable)
- Taxes of $6209
- Central Air
- Bedroom #1: 17×14 (third floor)
- Bedroom #2: 17×10 (third floor)
- Bedroom #3: 12×11 (fourth floor)
- Family room: 17×11 (first floor)
Stephanie Cutter at Coldwell Banker has the listing. See the pictures and virtual tour here.
2547 N. Greenview: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 2 car parking, 2200 square feet
- Sold in August 1990 for $255,000
- Sold in June 1994 for $386,250 (I wonder if this isn’t a typo in the public records and should be $286,250)
- Sold in June 2001 for $394,000
- Sold in May 2005 for $370,500
- Sold in October 2008 for $478,000
- Originally listed in May 2010 for $497,500
- Reduced several times
- Currently listed at $399,000
- Assessments of $286 a month (includes cable)
- Taxes of $6209
- Central Air
- Bedroom #1: 17×14 (third floor)
- Bedroom #2: 17×10 (third floor)
- Bedroom #3: 12×11 (fourth floor)
- Family room: 17×11 (first floor)
I think these are good prices for the location/space. I have clients looking in the area.
Quality places for the price, plus it’s right by Wrightwood Park. And while it might be a ways from the nicest outdoor environments in the city (the park/lakefront), it’s that much closer to the nicest environments in the country (the western mountains and the Pacific Ocean).
Without doing any research at all it strikes me as a pretty good deal. I think the area is great. The major downside is that it’s 2200 sq ft on 4 levels, so it’s a pretty small footprint and the bedrooms are split. However, when you consider that a 2200 sq ft townhouse in University Village goes in the upper 400s at a minimum….
I am not a fan of the cookie cutter suburban style townhome. I would much prefer a brick building, but the area is OK. I am not sure what previously occupied this area, but a lot of full city blocks have been converted to cookie cutter residential developments. It reminds me a lot of the Florida land scams where there was no government regulations for residential development, so infrastructure and public transportation was non existent. The city should have stepped in around here to plan for it.
The blocks where Embassy Club and other major townhouse developments sit (as well as some huge tracts a couple blocks west of here that are full of newer houses & townhouses) were all industrial, but most were torn down 10 – 20 years ago.
ChiBuilder on December 17th, 2010 at 8:13 am
. . . I am not sure what previously occupied this area, but a lot of full city blocks have been converted to cookie cutter residential developments.
I understand the appeal of the amount of space for the price but I hate hate hate townhomes. It’s the same as condo living but the downside is that it has lots of stairs and no view. Look at the size of the structure above. It’s a large condo building divided up vertically instead of horizontally.
But you have to climb numerous sets of stairs in your own home. And then the developers pack as many as they can on to the smallest parcel of land making it difficult to park in your own garage; and this unit is no more than 14 feet wide. That’s it. 2,200 sq feet and it’s no more than 14 feet wide. No thank you.
p.s. the sellers lost every penny of their down payment. Townhomes suck the life, and the money from you.
“However, when you consider that a 2200 sq ft townhouse in University Village goes in the upper 400s at a minimum….”
…it becomes apparent that the bubble lingers and increases in affordability will continue.
Oh no G, increased affordability and Detroit and synonymous! Homes are already affordable, it’s just that you need to earn more money to afford where you really want to live!
hahahaha just kidding
“#G on December 17th, 2010 at 9:31 am
“However, when you consider that a 2200 sq ft townhouse in University Village goes in the upper 400s at a minimum….”
…it becomes apparent that the bubble lingers and increases in affordability will continue.”
‘are synonymous!’ early morning typo
I remember when i was a teen Wrightwood Park had gang problem. funny how things change.
I actually wouldnt mind 4 level living if the layout was well done. and really this is really three level living. compared to a normal home here its just the basement family room is really bumped up 4 feet.
with a house you still have to navigate 6 stairs to get to your front door.
one thing i would like personally is the kids room to be the top floor and the master to take the whole floor below it. it makes it harder for the kids to sneak out when grounded.
“I understand the appeal of the amount of space for the price but I hate hate hate townhomes. It’s the same as condo living but the downside is that it has lots of stairs and no view. Look at the size of the structure above. It’s a large condo building divided up vertically instead of horizontally.
But you have to climb numerous sets of stairs in your own home. And then the developers pack as many as they can on to the smallest parcel of land making it difficult to park in your own garage; and this unit is no more than 14 feet wide. That’s it. 2,200 sq feet and it’s no more than 14 feet wide. No thank you.
p.s. the sellers lost every penny of their down payment. Townhomes suck the life, and the money from you.”
Just wanted to post this one more time because it is awesome and I completey agree (though you do typically have lower assesment and burn more calories).
“It’s a large condo building divided up vertically instead of horizontally.
But you have to climb numerous sets of stairs in your own home. And then the developers pack as many as they can on to the smallest parcel of land making it difficult to park in your own garage; and this unit is no more than 14 feet wide. That’s it. 2,200 sq feet and it’s no more than 14 feet wide. No thank you.”
I rent a 3 level townhome with about 2700 sq ft. First, I really like townhome living. I have an attached 2 car garage – no weather, no elevator, no ramp driving. I have 2 balconies and a large deck. No one lives above me or below me and there is only one common wall. We rarely go up or down the stairs, and frankly when I do I take them 2 at a time to get the exercise.
I would buy a good sized 3 level townhome in a heartbeat (at the right price). However, I think 4 levels are ridiculous and I can not believe the developers build them on such small footprints. And then the bedrooms are split so they don’t work for people with kids. What amazes me – totally dumbfounds me – is that in the west loop and south loop these 4 level townhomes fetch $700 – 800K in today’s market. But the market is what the market is.
2700 sq feet over 3 floors is far superior to 2200 sq ft over 4 floors. 900 sq feet a floor is like a large one bedroom apartment per floor. 550 sq ft a floor is like 4 studio apartments
This is the 4th sale of this property since 2005. I guess the average person can only withstand a year of soul-sucking before they need to get out.
12/10 – $390K
10/08 – $478K
12/07 – $575K
01/05 – $420K
12/98 – $320K
11/97 – $293K
I agree with all the comments about townhouses. I lived in a 3-level one for a few years & it was great (but very well built, so no noise from adjacent units, and we had about 1000 sq. ft per floor, so it was more like a single family in size, and all 3 BR’s on one floor). When we were looking, we were shocked by some of the poor layouts, 4 levels was typical, and we even saw one that was essentially on 5 levels!! (parking underneath in a common garage, then up a flight to the first level out of 4). We also looked at an upper unit at the Pointe, where it was a beautiful unit–on 2 levels, but you had to go up 40+ steps from the garage or front door to get to the main living area.
“This is the 4th sale of this property since 2005. I guess the average person can only withstand a year of soul-sucking before they need to get out.
12/10 – $390K
10/08 – $478K
12/07 – $575K
01/05 – $420K
12/98 – $320K
11/97 – $293K”
Redfin mushed together two THs–this one’s PIN ends in 1023, the other ends in 1021. The sales you (and RF) list which aren’t in the post relate to 1021. Check the APN in the listing above the price history v. the APN in the “public facts” below–>they don’t match, but both make it into the history.
“10/08 – $478K
12/07 – $575K”
Lehman wha? I am a shrewd RE investor cuz this thing is worth 575k! I got 97k off!!
“Lehman wha? I am a shrewd RE investor cuz this thing is worth 575k! I got 97k off!!”
Two different units wha? Scroll, then post, wha?
But, still no justification for 370 in ’05, 478 in ’08. $390 is the right ballpark.
“Slide, slide slippity slide. I’m hittin switches on the block in a 65. Come along and ride on fantastic voyage. Slide slide hoo ride, ain’t no valley low”
$299k in 2013.
The previous owner lost ALL their down payment. $392,000 mortgage on a $478k sale. Sold for $390k but after fees, etc, this was an expensive way to owner for a couple of years. They could have given the money to me and I would have promised to return at least half.
Who is foolish enough to think that they won’t also lose their pants like the previous owner?
“Who is foolish enough to think that they won’t also lose their pants like the previous owner?”
what a stupid and ignorant rhetorical question…
how about “value seekers” that think that ok, well there already has been a shitload of equity lost and believe it or not a 2200sqft (bleh) townhouse in a great neighborhood does have some intrinsic value and isn’t worth $0, and they probably won’t “lose their pants” if they decide to actually live in the place for a while
“$299k in 2013.”
So, do you think these places will be renting for under $2500/month, or that mortgage interest rates will be over 7.5%, or that the taxes will be at or more than 50% higher in 2013, or some combination there of?
“Who is foolish enough to think that they won’t also lose their pants like the previous owner?”
Someone who has a reasonable basis for thinking they will actually want to live there for 7-10 years? Yes, *objectively* that might be irrational, but no one actually lives objectively.
“They could have given the money to me and I would have promised to return at least half.”
but you couldnt promise a “LP” address and pride of ownership. so you suck.
“Who is foolish enough to think that they won’t also lose their pants like the previous owner?”
You guys seem to forget that the VAST MAJORITY of people out there buy real estate to live in – it is not only an investment but contributes SIGNIFICANTLY to your life/lifestyle. Most people, while being mindful of losing money, are more concerned with finding a place they can afford and will fit their life. They are NOT (and should not) be looking it purely as an investment.
Also, what is the alternative – renting? That is ok if you are in your 20s or very early 30s, single or without kids – but once you start having kids and accumulating things, you will find that you will need a bigger place – and big places aren’t cheap to rent.
It is for all of these reasons that real estate will continue to be a pretty good long term investment (both in monetary and social terms).
“It is for all of these reasons that real estate will continue to be a pretty good long term investment (both in monetary and social terms).”
pleasepleasepleaseplease don’t let this start a “address/ownership =/= status” discussion this friday pm. Because that’s not what clio was saying.
It is very easy to say that renting is better than owning – I recently had the opportunity to sell my primary residence, I seriously considered renting -but when I looked at the prices of rentals (larger places in better areas), I was shocked – it would cost me more to rent than owning my own house. It is crazy when you actually break down the costs.
Home owners (including myself) don’t always properly analyze the costs. For example, even though I only have a 1 million dollar mortgage on my house, my monthly expenses are close to 6000 (including taxes, insurance, principal, and interest). I thought – wow, i could rent great places for 6k – but when I broke down the costs, I realized that 1100 goes to principal and also I get about 1650/month back for mortgage interest deductions. This leaves my true monthly costs at 3250 – and when you look at what you can rent for 3250, nothing compares to anything close to what I live in. Add the security of knowing you don’t have to move, the opportunity to express your creative ideas, and a blank canvas to do your own personal remodeling – you can see why home ownership is preferable to renting.
Don’t think short term (less than 5 years) – most everyone will do fine if they stay in their place for more than 7 years – especially if you buy now and buy well, you will actually do EXTREMELY well in 10 years.
“you will actually do EXTREMELY well in 10 years.”
Tell that to the people who are now selling their places they bought in 2001 for near their 2001 price. Or maybe they didn’t “buy well”?
“my monthly expenses are close to 6000 (including taxes, insurance, principal, and interest).”
Don’t you spend more than $6k/month on replacement arbor vitae, light bulbs and driveway maintenance (plowing, sweeping, etc.)? Oh, and mousetraps. Aren’t those mainly avoidable costs were you renting?
Bob – first of all, I am talking about buying now, in 2010 when we are at or near the bottom and when rates of low. Second of all, even people who bought in 2001 may not have done as badly as you think. Remember, if they got a good rate, and were able to take the mortgage interest deductions, they actually could have saved money by buying (instead of renting). For example, even if I sold my primary residence for less than what I paid, the fact that I only paid a fraction of what I would have spent on renting should be factored in.
It all depends on the size of the down payment. If it’s a small down payment they may be trapped for 7-10 years anyway.
I’ve been to at least two open houses where the sellers list at the same at the 02 price – which in ’10 is 8 years after purchase – and guess what: They’re not OK. They are unwilling to sell for less than they paid. Yes the next 8 years may be different than the previous 8 – but what if they’re not. Would you overpay for a house today knowing that in 8 years you could risking losing some if not all of your entire down payment?
“Someone who has a reasonable basis for thinking they will actually want to live there for 7-10 years? Yes, *objectively* that might be irrational, but no one actually lives objectively.”
“Would you overpay for a house today knowing that in 8 years you could risking losing some if not all of your entire down payment?”
OK – what don’t you guys understand ? – THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE BUY HOUSES TO ENHANCE THEIR LIFE/LIFESTYLE – it is NOT just about the investment aspect. Are you seriously thinking that people are going to rent for the next 8 years because of uncertainty?!!! What about the uncertainty of quality rentals? What about the uncertainty of rising rents? You guys are totally clueless – oh, and the fact that many of you have recently bought homes and are continuing to actively look make you hypocrites as well!!!!!
clio – HOW DOES PISSING AWAY YOUR DOWN PAYMENT ENHANCE YOUR LIFE/LIFESTYLE?
How does losing $88,000 of your $90,000 down payment improve their life/lifestyle?
I don’t understand. maybe I’m stupid, but this is not making any sense to me.
I mean, if I lost $88,000 my SO would be really at me, in fact, the SO would berate on a daily basis about that for the rest of my life; in fact, there is a change that my partnership with my SO might dissolve due to such a loss that would take years to recover from.
you didn’t “lose” it… it was more of an “additional cost of living”
its sort of like buying a 90,000 car… upon purchasing such a car did you really “lose” your money?
and if your SO would berate you on a daily basis for a poor financial decision that a majority of people made anyway, she’s a bitch
“I mean, if I lost $88,000 my SO would be really at me, in fact, the SO would berate on a daily basis about that for the rest of my life; in fact, there is a change that my partnership with my SO might dissolve due to such a loss that would take years to recover from”
Actually, this is more telling of your relationship than it is about real estate. All kidding aside, I don’t think your SO would/should be mad or angry or remind you of financial downfalls. You deserve better!!
“its sort of like buying a 90,000 car… upon purchasing such a car did you really “lose” your money?”
EXACTLY!!! Cars are the worst investments – yet people continue to spend large amounts of money on them (and will continue to do so). I have “lost” much more money in cars than in real estate but I am more worried about real estate for some reason -odd, isn’t it?
“my partnership with my SO might dissolve due to such a loss that would take years to recover from.”
If that is the case then you’re SO is little more than a high priced escort.
Y’all be ignant if you believe that relationships don’t break apart due to financial stress. The third house I looked at a few months ago, the realtor told me that they had financial hardship, one reason of which was losing $50,000 on a down payment for a new construction house when they couldn’t get a mortgage. Divorce.
I don’t want to lose $88,000 like these people. That TOTALLY SUCKS.
I hate to throw myself into Clio’s camp, but he continues to make some solid points on the rent vs. buy argument.
After I articulated the criteria that I wanted in a place, I think someone on here recommended one possible rental that met pretty much all of them (but the location was borderline, and it was, of course, a rental, which carries the potential – albeit perhaps remote – for instability). I purchased a place that meets, and in some ways, exceeds, those “unicorn” criteria, at a total monthly cost that is close to my stated rental max ($3k/mo).
We all have to live somewhere. Whether I try to sell in 3 or 6 or 9 or 12 years, my potential to realize a profit will obviously vary, but I will have lived in a place that (i) met my desired criteria, (ii) provided at least some tax relief (whereas servicing my other major debt, student loans, provides none), and provided stability for my family (though my previous rental was a fantastic deal on very nice place, the unit owner had indicated that he might want to kick us out so that he could move in).
“I don’t want to lose $88,000 like these people. That TOTALLY SUCKS.”
its already lost (the liquidity anyway) when you buy the house… who cares!
HD – it does suck – and I know that several relationships fall apart secondary to financial reasons – but those relationships were probably doomed from the start. It happens to me all the time (people thinking that I have an unlimited supply of money – they start dating me and then break up with me when they figure out I am not going to pay for their car/condo/jewelry, etc.). True love will triumph over all financial, physical, and social issues….it’s just kind of hard to find.
Before you start insulting my significant other; you may want to get your analogies correct.
you spend money on high priced escorts; my comment above was about LOSING money, not spending it. my signifncant other likes to keep the money in teh bank, invested, etc. not impulsively spending it on stupid overprice vertical crapboxes in LP just to say taht ‘we own in LP’.
“#Bob on December 17th, 2010 at 1:56 pm
“my partnership with my SO might dissolve due to such a loss that would take years to recover from.”
If that is the case then you’re SO is little more than a high priced escort.”
The entire point is not to lose it. So I care and my SO does too.
“its already lost (the liquidity anyway) when you buy the house… who cares!”
HD – I don’t think anyone is insulting or means to insult your SO – but you may be underestimating his love for you – if your relationship was strong, he probably wouldn’t leave you if you lost money or didn’t spend it.
so basically you’re never going to take any risk.
got it. enjoy never having wealth, ever, which for some isn’t important anyway
different strokes for different folks, so whatever allows you sleep at night!
i’m sure most of us here are quite different so you can expect some outrage when you make assanine comments about your wife/SO divorcing you because you lived in a nice house for 8 years and don’t have equity to roll into your next purchase
clio is on a nice roll.
“my comment above was about LOSING money, not spending it.”
I fail to see the difference. In both cases (losing or spending it) you are parting with money. One is an outright expense sure, but their economic comparison is the same (as utilizing escorts are not a pre-paid asset to provide some economic value in the future).
I’m going to have to go with Sonie’s reply above. Sometimes your arguments extend to borderline ridiculous on here.
Bob – is it miller time yet?
It’s really never miller time, but I’d say it is definitely beer o’clock. I received a Goose Island Bourbon County Stout Rare as a gift; good night gracie!
“my signifncant other likes to keep the money in teh bank, invested, etc”
could that be consider hording a version of ocd?
“not impulsively spending it on stupid overprice vertical crapboxes in LP just to say taht ‘we own in LP’.”
you got a good one HD,
oh man do i hate a few of my friends wives that go on and on and on about how great her home is at xxx address and will bring it up at any chance she can. IDK extending my families financial and physical future to brag about an address is so stupid.
I say I don’t want to be berated by the SO for losing $88,000 and then you call the SO an escort? Whose argument is ridiculous?
There is risk and there is calculated risk. Risk isn’t about having cajones and throwing money away; risk is about taking a paper and a pencil and a calculator and doing some simple math, and using your general knowledge of the markets.
I’m sorry, but I had the opportunity near the top of the market to buy and both the SO and I flat out rejected and said “We’ll wait – there’s no way this is going to go on. ” Others impulsively said “buy now or be priced out forever!”
“i’m sure most of us here are quite different so you can expect some outrage when you make assanine comments about your wife/SO divorcing you because you lived in a nice house for 8 years and don’t have equity to roll into your next purchase”
Well, if the purchase starts with “I hate this house, it costs more than a better apartment and I *know* we’re going to lose money when we sell” and the purchase is made anyway after a “It’s ok, honey, I know what I’m doing. In 8 years, we’ll move into your dream house in [Park Ridge/Inverness/K’worth/Lake Forest/Englewood]” and then, 8 years later, it becomes “well, we can get rid of the house if we write a check for $32,583, or we can jingle mail, and rent until the f/c rolls off the credit report”–one could see it happening.
thank you anon(tfo), thank you.
You understand, quite well too.
“thank you anon(tfo), thank you.
You understand, quite well too.”
And you know well that I think you’re being ridiculous in your home search, but I don’t doubt–given some of the example that you post–that there’s some gap in your fam b/t what is acceptable price+quality wise. And domestic harmony is better in a rented apartment than bickering about the damn house and how much it cost in a purchased house.
And anon(tfo), the one conversation I had with my SO, in an EXTREME moment of weakness, was a variation of that above – (not necessarily to get on the equity elevator but to live in a nicer unit in the same area); This was late 04, 05 maybe and I remember thinking “how do people buy all these new condos in my neighborhood (roscoe village)?” And then I started doing closings at work and I was like “Oh, your mortgage takes 50% of your take home income” – or “one paycheck pays the mortgage, one paycheck pays the bills and then there’s nothing left.” Then I typed in housing bubble in 05 I think it was and discovered the HBB (100% lurker, never post so don’t try to look for me) and any notion I had of buying 2005+ beyond was totally vanquished. The SO who is far wiser than me wouldnt’ even considering buying especially not the unit I pointed out – which in retrospect, would have been the stupidest decision of my life to buy at that point. Yet it is so weird how other people view the exact same situation and impulsively think “buy now or be priced out forever!” They’re now paying dearly for their impatience.
(shrugs) If Al lost 88k through bad financial decisions I would remember pretty quick that people go through a lot worse, like losing a partner through cancer etc. It’s only money, people.
“And you know well that I think you’re being ridiculous in your home search”
eta: limited, of course, to that expressed on here–>the stuff you appear to be considering solely b/c it’s cheap is total, total crap and the nicer things that you post are (when they’re the u/c ones, really, truly) pretty decently priced, *if* they actually suit your expected lifestyle for 10+ years (and, as always, assuming no major hidden defects).
“(shrugs) If Al lost 88k through bad financial decisions I would remember pretty quick that people go through a lot worse, like losing a partner through cancer etc. It’s only money, people.”
If Al lost $88k b/c he stuck bought $88k of LEH *after* the BK, and asked you before hand and you said “hey, they filed BK. Stock ain’t comin’ back” and he bought it any way, and the $88k was your designated DP fund, for a house you’d already identified, which left you living in a condo you didn’t like for 8 more years … yeah, it’s still just money, but you’d be at least a *little* upset, no?
anon(tfo), the heart of the issue is that I’m pretty comfortable paying my $900 or whatever per month to rent and psychologically it’s difficult to make the leap into the move-in home when I will have to pay a minimum of $2,000 a month or more up to $2,600 or $2,700. I can ‘afford’ it in the sense that it’s well within the 28/36 DTI ratios but budget-wise I enjoy having a lot of wiggleroom to take nice vacations, furnish my house however I want, save lots of money, repay the principal on my student loans at an exponential rate, etc. However, other people are willing to take a lot more risk and they’re willing to ‘invest’ or however they want to view it, pay $2,400 a month for a mortgage. Now I understand I get more for my money with that $2,400 a month or whatnot but still. $2,400 is about the average PITI I’ve seen for most places that would be what I’m interested in but that seems to be what people will pay. However, prices are falling, the $2,400 houses are selling less and less, and I envision a time when I could probalby find a house that with a down payment and lower taxes I could pay $1,800 a month. Maybe I’m on crack, i don’t know.
“And you know well that I think you’re being ridiculous in your home search”
“eta: limited, of course, to that expressed on here–>the stuff you appear to be considering solely b/c it’s cheap is total, total crap and the nicer things that you post are (when they’re the u/c ones, really, truly) pretty decently priced, *if* they actually suit your expected lifestyle for 10+ years (and, as always, assuming no major hidden defects).”
But if you have the HD worldview and thinks prices are headed where he thinks they are, then those houses are not pretty decently priced relative to what he could pay for them in 3-5 years. Why not wait?
What I take you to be saying is that he’d be fine, he could “afford” the house, he would enjoy the house, why not buy the house? The why not is he doesn’t want to lose the money. I faced the same issue a few years ago when my worldview then was similar to what HD’s is now, and decided to wait. If I had HD’s worldview today, I might continue to wait. You can think that his worldview is ridiculous but not clear to me his decision-making is fundamentally flawed.
PS Bob’s escort/SO analogy besides being unnecessary and unkind, is not particularly apt.
Um, we make all of our large decisions jointly, and if one person has very strong feelings either way, that person always wins. And we just don’t resent each other in general? 9 years and 4 property purchases together, mistakes have been made, but life moves on. If Al lost EVERYTHING and we went bankrupt I’d be supportive of him ‘cos I know he’d be feeling terrible. Richer and poorer, dude.
“I could probalby find a house that with a down payment and lower taxes I could pay $1,800 a month. Maybe I’m on crack, i don’t know”
not on crack just looking in the wrong area, expand and you shall find. easy to find a good brick 3br for 225k just not in old Irving or mayfair or walking dis to your train line.
Peg, you’re a good woman.
DZ: Don’t forget how I’ve spent the last 3 years of my life – in an office processing foreclosures for banks, and, bankruptcies for a certain well paid niche of the workforce with access to an attorney just a phone call away. just today we had someone come through who owed $200k in credit card debt and they’re going to pay $40k over the next five years. Housing prices are high because household debt is so high. As debt is curtailed, defaulted or paid off, housing price continue to fall. When the level of work passing across my desk tapers off from debt related cases and into other areas of law, then I’ll know that times have started to change. I’m a barometer. I prefer to base my opinions on things based upon what I see on the ground. Sort of like how the generals in the pentagon have one opinoin of the war but those out on the battlefield have another….well the guys you see on tv or in the newspaper they’re the generals, i’m on the battlefield looking at the carnage.
“Um, we make all of our large decisions jointly, and if one person has very strong feelings either way, that person always wins.”
In the HD example, they’d never buy the house as the SO feels strongly about not buying.
“And we just don’t resent each other in general?”
HD’s statement about being berated every day for the rest of his life (is that also true post divorce?) was a touch extreme.
I did take the precaution of marrying a hard-working genius with a lot of street smarts. 🙂
I am new to this site. We are considering a move back to chicago after being away for several years. Prior to leaving, my stomping grounds were West Rogers Park & Evanston, and the whole north shore suburbs area. If we moved back, I want a downtown chicago lifestyle. So this site has been helpful to get a pulse of the different areas.
Not discounting anyones experience or opinion, CLIO seems to be the “always positive” voice. A “look at the big picture” MO.
We are weighing the rent vs buy options now. It seems the “big picture/positive” lesson to learn here is:
Yes, maybe the sellers lost 88K….which hurts.
But if they had just rented the last 8 years they would have lost more. Am I right??
“In the HD example, they’d never buy the house as the SO feels strongly about not buying.”
Correct. And my counter hypo was that the house was purchased despite the strong objection. In that hypo, resentment brews.
“You can think that his worldview is ridiculous but not clear to me his decision-making is fundamentally flawed.”
I said neither, it’s his *home search* I find ridiculous. Why, if he has that worldview, does he bother looking, only to find unacceptable crap at this desired price point and his desired houses either very overpriced or selling quickly at slightly (~15%) more than he’d like to pay? Because he’s not *quite* certain about his worldview and needs the reassurance? Fine, I understand that, but I think he’s grinding his gears and should check out of looking at particular properties until a preset alert on some realtor website dings with a certain level of new inventory under a price point that isn’t likely to be seen until early spring at least. Just take a break from looking–and that’s based only on the good/bad/cheap/expensive pairings he picks out–>either he’s too jaded or the inventory really is that awful.
Either way, continuing to watch closely what crap comes available in OIP for the next 3-5 months is going to have a negative effect on the ability to properly judge when there are more choices, at (likely) better prices in the spring. Amybe miss a “deal” over the winter, but if the worldview is pretty solid, it shouldn’t matter.
“PS Bob’s escort/SO analogy besides being unnecessary and unkind, is not particularly apt.”
I consider all SO’s who would terminate a relationship purely on economic reasons, especially on an economic reason like 80k on their combined wages, to essentially be money grubbers and hence in a sense, escorts.
We’re not talking about some guy suddenly revealing to his fiancee he has 300k in student loan debt. We’re talking about an 80k loss on a rollover.
80k loss on a RE rollover which, in HD’s situation, is likely not damning given their combined wages. So yes I think HD was embellishing reality a bit.
It is my suspicion most RE related transactions that play out as such do not wind up in divorce court.
OK, being berated everyday by my SO is a ‘bit’ extreme and I didn’t mean that in the literal sense, but that conversation would be often and very unpleasant.
And anon(tfo) I’m just following my selected neighborhoods; I was only serious about buying for a few months over the summer for various life event related reasons…i’m out of the market for a while now.
last summer is when I toured a few homes with my contractor brother in law but I was extremely discouraged. Two of the four houses I looked at sold; one reduced the price and one went off market. The two that sold were distressed properties and the other two are regular sales. I just like following the neighborhood now because it’s where I live; but it wouldn’t hurt to take a break for a few months and see what’s out there, no doubt. Maybe I will take your advice and give it a break.
“Peg Bundy on December 17th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
Um, we make all of our large decisions jointly, and if one person has very strong feelings either way, that person always wins. And we just don’t resent each other in general? 9 years and 4 property purchases together, mistakes have been made, but life moves on. If Al lost EVERYTHING and we went bankrupt I’d be supportive of him ‘cos I know he’d be feeling terrible. Richer and poorer, dude.
p.s. the story about supporting your husband if he went bankrupt reminds me of a time when I was a 1L – the professor asked a female student a hypothetical question about the law (in the socratic method), ‘what if your husband filed bankrupty?’ and how it would relate to the legal issue we were discussing.
Honest to god truth, the student’s response was: ‘He better not file bankruptcy or I’d divorce him’ and all 100 1L’s in the room just laughed and laughed.
“all SO’s who would terminate a relationship purely on economic reasons”
I don’t think “purely” would apply. She would be upset b/c a decision was taken against her strongly expressed wishes. I hope HD’s SO would stay with him if he just lost $80K b/c of something random.
“Why, if he has that worldview, does he bother looking, only to find unacceptable crap at this desired price point and his desired houses either very overpriced or selling quickly at slightly (~15%) more than he’d like to pay?”
1. For fodder for CC.
2. OIP HD is much happier than regular HD.
3. He likes looking at houses on the off ramp. I’ll agree that part is nuts, he’s surely not going to live at those places, although it does satisfy (1) (probably not (2)).
4. Even accepting your points, do they add up to making his home search “ridiculous”?
“Maybe I will take your advice and give it a break. ”
Find some site that will send you emails and set a restrictive thing that’s almost crazy (like 4/3 under $250k in OIP) and only look at the one or two that pop and otherwise just take a break, bc I think that the crap is overwhelming you–based on what you show here, you mainly have at hand unacceptable stuff either bc it’s crap or way too expensive, and with that frame, one starts *expecting* everything to fit the frame.
“Even accepting your points, do they add up to making his home search “ridiculous”?”
1. Given that words like “ridiculous” on the intertubez are marked up (or is that down?) 50%, esp when used directly at fake internet friends, then,
2. If he’s serious about *maybe* buying a house in OIP within the next 24 months, I think so.
I think it affects his perspective on the *actual* possibilities negatively, especially wrt price drops from peak, as the proverbial off-ramp house has totally different market pricing characteristics both at peak and now compared to a house happily habitable by HD’s SO.
And, of course, OIP HD is much happier, but OIP HD focuses only on nice to very nice houses in OIP which have sold or are on the market for ~$150-175 psf + ~$50k/lot, **max**, which have been rather few in the 2d ha of 2010.
I actually enjoy watching what sells in my chosen areas not even for purposes of buying but just for my fascination with real estate generally which developed sometime after college when I realized that I wasn’t going to be living the college lifestyle for the rest of my life. I’ve watched hgtv for hours and hours on end but thankfully i don’t have cable so I don’t. but sometimes I’ll catch those this old house on channel 11 and then the SO has to shut off teh tv.
anyway, right now the double dip is starting and its’ SLOW. I would hate to be a realtor right now (MG excluded) because it’s SOOOO SLOOOOOOOW. I mean, this is more than seasonality going on, it’s like paralysis. Maybe there will be a post-superbowl increase, maybe there won’t be. I just post a lot of crap, it’s a schtick, a character, when I post on this board. Like moost others including clio.
Basically $300k-$400k homes roughly 2,000 sq or less, of which there have been very few, you’re right. perfect analysis.
off topic, last night I had some time to kill so I looked a housing prices in westchester county NY and i knew that was expensive but the stuff that’s selling out there is ridiculously priced. It was pretty shocking to say the least.
“And, of course, OIP HD is much happier, but OIP HD focuses only on nice to very nice houses in OIP which have sold or are on the market for ~$150-175 psf + ~$50k/lot, **max**, which have been rather few in the 2d ha of 2010.”
Did I mention that taxes on the $550,000 in westchester county were $15,000 a year?
“I actually enjoy watching what sells in my chosen areas not even for purposes of buying but just for my fascination with real estate generally”
That’s different, of course. I was on the actually buying hypo.
“off topic, last night I had some time to kill so I looked a housing prices in westchester county NY and i knew that was expensive but the stuff that’s selling out there is ridiculously priced. It was pretty shocking to say the least.”
That’s why people move to northern westchester and dutchess (per our discussion the other day).
i somehow just knew this place was going to be *lively* on a friday afternoon.
“We are weighing the rent vs buy options now. It seems the “big picture/positive” lesson to learn here is:
Yes, maybe the sellers lost 88K….which hurts.
But if they had just rented the last 8 years they would have lost more. Am I right??”
Cominghome38- welcome to Crib Chatter!
Why would they have lost more if they rented? They owned a little over two years and lost $88k PLUS the realtor fees and transfer costs. They lost at least $116,000 (give or take.)
Otherwise, they would have paid monthly rent to a landlord. But that rent wouldn’t have been much different than what they paid to the bank. You do realize- that buying just means renting from the bank, right?
With a $100,000+ loss- how long does it take the average family to overcome that? How many years? (or decades?) As we’ve talked about before- for most people- it will set them back financially for at least 5 to 10 years. At least. It’s a loss that some won’t ever recover from, frankly.
The losses right now are devestating to most homeowners. And with that kind of loss, many cannot be moveup buyers.
Thanks for the welcome!
I guess I confused these sellers with others listed here. There is another property bought in 2001-2002ish. Recently it closed at a loss. I was devasted for them and others that this happening to. But now I realize that renting for an extended period is even worse.
We are long time renters that are seriously taking that next step. Now I am not sure we HAVE to go that direction.
Hey Grunt,
What about addressing the possibility of 2/3 flats you’d be guaranteed the renting lifestyle while having the ability to own. On the ground I see a new wave of reo’s being put under contract after the 15 day limit for Fannie homepath program. weather they close or not remains but indicates corporate and rich $$ are being invested in anticipation of the recovery.
Moreover I forsee once your comfortable buying a home, the recovery in the housing market would have already started and home prices in IP, leave alone OIP will be higher than 150-175psf.
Sure there will be deals but the good ones would have been pick over by investors and bank insiders trying to start a new wave of hold and flip.
I don’t doubt there will be a double/triple dip; the CS index for the 1st two went to around 120. I would say we’ll be within 5% of the low.
So would you act if the deal came? Not trying to attack but you’ve personified, the housing grump, you seemed to have already made the case perpetually that you’ll always consider purchasing but its a big permanent risk.
Anyways, Happy Holidays to all you CC’ers and have a great New Year. (whether you rent or own) 🙂
”
When the level of work passing across my desk tapers off from debt related cases and into other areas of law, then I’ll know that times have started to change. I’m a barometer. I prefer to base my opinions on things based upon what I see on the ground
”
”
And, of course, OIP HD is much happier, but OIP HD focuses only on nice to very nice houses in OIP which have sold or are on the market for ~$150-175 psf + ~$50k/lot, **max**, which have been rather few in the 2d ha of 2010.
“
We are not within 5% of the low.
If you saw the wave of foreclosure and bankruptcies that cross my desk everyday you would have no doubts that we are nowhere near the bottom and you speak from a position of naivety.
Buying is always a risk, but especially now.
I will buy and I will pay what im comfortablr paying and it will be a modest home in my area. When the 23 homes in the,mls above 500k fianlly sell at prices below 500k, it will push down the prices of homes in the tier below that.
Patience my friend.
Im doing you all a favor and you will thank me someday in the. Future, even if you don’t recognize it now.
revassal:
Read the article below. Chase has $21,700,000,000 of mortgages currently in foreclosure.
This $21,700,000,000 has gotten prices to where they are today.
Chase has $43,400,000,000 in mortgages past-due in the foreclosure pipeline.
5% of bottom, like I”m going to miss it or something! Hahahaha!
“Friday, October 22nd, 2010, 4:05 pm
JPMorgan Chase (JPM: 39.67 -0.86%), Wells Fargo Bank (WFC: 29.96 -0.20%) and Bank of America (BAC: 12.57 +0.40%) each reported more than $20 billion in single-family mortgages currently foreclosed or in the process of foreclosure as of midyear, according to Weiss Ratings.
In addition, for each dollar these banks held of mortgages in ?foreclosure, they had additional exposure to more than $2 in mortgages that are 30 days or more past due.
“Although only some portion of the past-due loans will ultimately go into foreclosure, these figures tell us that the biggest players are not only in deep, but could sink even deeper into the mortgage mayhem,” said Martin D. Weiss, chairman of Weiss Ratings.
Among all U.S. banks, JPMorgan Chase has the largest volume of mortgages in foreclosure or foreclosed with $21.7 billion. It has $43.4 billion in mortgages past due.
Bank of America has a somewhat smaller volume of foreclosures ($20.3 billion), but it has a larger pipeline of past-due mortgages — $54.6 billion. Thus, overall, including all foreclosed and delinquent categories, Bank of America has the largest volume of bad mortgages among U.S. banks, with $74.9 billion, while Wells Fargo has the second largest with $68.6 billion.
Other banks, despite their large size, are less heavily exposed. Citibank has $6.3 billion in foreclosures and $19.2 billion in past-due mortgages, or a total of $25.6 billion. The volume held by other large banks, such as U.S. Bank, PNC Bank (PNC: 58.50 +0.14%), and SunTrust (STI: 27.04 +4.56%) is smaller.
“In addition to the volume of bad mortgages, the vulnerability of each bank to the foreclosure crisis depends on the capital and loan-loss reserves it has set aside to cover losses and other factors such as its earnings, liquidity, reliance on less-stable deposits, and the quality of its overall loan portfolio,” Weiss said.
Among banks with $1 billion or more of mortgages already foreclosed or in process of foreclosure, Wells Fargo has the greatest exposure to bad mortgages in proportion to its capital. For each dollar of Tier 1 capital, the bank has 75.4 cents in bad mortgages, or a ratio of 75.4%. The equivalent ratios for JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and SunTrust are 66.8%, 66% and 57.6%, respectively.
Write to Kerry Curry.”
http://www.housingwire.com/2010/10/22/jpmorgan-wells-fargo-and-bofa-each-hold-more-than-20-billion-in-foreclosures
Mentally replace the word “STOCK” with the word “HOUSING” – here’s where we are now:
“Even the man who waited out all of October and all of November, who saw the volumne of trading return to normal and saw Wall Street become as placid as a produce market, and who then bought common stocks would see their value drop to a third or a fourth of the purchase price in the next twenty-four months. ”
This is a real estate depression – the below quote is a piece of history and it’s happening all over again – except with housing. Even the smart money has suffered losses and will continue to do so.
“From Chapter 7: “Things Become More Serious”
Things keep getting worse
Extracts from “The Great Crash: 1929”, John Kenneth Galbraith, First Published 1955, Page 130
“In the autumn of 1929 the New York Stock Exchange, under roughly its present constitution, was 112 years old. During this lifetime it had seen some difficult days. On 18 September 1873, the firm of Jay Cooke and Company failed, and, as a more or less direct result, so did fifty-seven other Stock Exchange firms in the next few weeks. On 23 October 1907, call money rates reached one hundred and twenty-five per cent in the panic of that year. On 16 September 1922 – the autumn months are the off-season in Wall Street – a bomb exploded in front of Morgan’s next door, killing thirty people and injuring a hundred more.
A common feature of all these earlier troubles was that, having happened, they were over. The worst was reasonably recognizable as such. The singular feature of the great crash of 1929 was that the worst continued to worsen. What looked one day like the end proved on the next day to have been only the beginning. Nothing could have been more ingeniously designed to maximize the suffering, and also to ensure that as few as possible escaped the common misfortune. The fortunate speculator who had funds to answer the first margin call presently got another and equally urgent one, and if he met that there would still be another. In the end all the money he had was extracted from him and lost. The man with the smart money, who was safely out of the market when the first crash came, naturally went back in to pick up bargains. (Not only were a recoreded 12,894,650 shares sold on 24 October; precisely the same number were bought.) The bargains then suffered a ruiness fall. Even the man who waited out all of October and all of November, who saw the volumne of trading return to normal and saw Wall Street become as placid as a produce market, and who then bought common stocks would see their value drop to a third or a fourth of the purchase price in the next twenty-four months. The Coolidge bull market was a remarkable phenonmemon. The ruthlessness of its liquidation was, in its own way, equally remarkable.”
Revassal-
2/3 flats boomed big during the boom, because a lot of people thought the same thing. (annecdotal evidence garnered during our home search, which resulted in buying a 2 flat to convert.) But the amateur landlord game is not one I’d recommend lightly. There is no condo association. When the roof goes, you pay for it. Rent is nice, but then you have someone living below you who you have a business relationship with. And when you’re buying the property, you’re competing (at least in trendy neighborhoods) not only with other people who want to rent the place out, but also with developers and people who want to do the SFH conversion.
And I also say happy holidays to everyone! Love the residence you’re with and be with the residence you love.
2/3 flats are selling like hotcakes now too. Sort of a mini-boom in that.
re: what HD said
Because good housing stock for sale at a reasonable price in certain areas is in short supply, even with everything going on, and people fool themselves about renovation. Some people have the riverboat casino, I have places with “good bones” and “potential.”
Heathrow flights are still blocked… Awesome. Anyway, John Lydon is an awful human being, but this *is* totally the crib chatter anthem… http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=wzNjmIWbns4
those bank losses are large but puny compared to TARP QE 1, 2 and all the fed balance sheet (tax cuts etc). moreover they are going to be just fine bc their margins are on the backs of consumers and that will help them ride the storm.
as far as 2/3 flats thats why I bring them up, they are in some areas including ip in decent/livable shape and in cash flow/less than rent scenarios, with a similar living situation just being an owner.
so why isn’t that a good buy* or an encouraging sign that were working our way through the mess. Why don’t the bear relent and admit there will be buyers that will be fine(even do well) just like I would admit that there will be some screwed people.
and if it gets as worst i.e. CS 90 or lower that everybody(society) will be in a world of pain.
It would make your argument more believable and probably give you the correct perspective.
*true its not easy either you have to try hard or know someone)
I don’t think 2 flats are a good buy yeet because rents will drop as more units flood the market. I jnow for a fact that’s starting to happen in some of the highly distressed areas on the south and west sides. Lots of investors tribuying up cheap rentals and and undercutting the competition in price.
I saw a crains article that said effective rents were flat and potential to go up as rental demand increased due to a variety of causes. loans, fear, flex, etc.
”
a fact that’s starting to happen in some of the highly distressed areas on the south and west sides. Lots of investors tribuying up cheap rentals and and undercutting the competition in price.
”
again if this ‘highly distress’ happens everywhere you would not buy cause the fear aspect will be justifiable larger.
Also some of those undercutters have real wealth built up so they can play that game, doesn’t mean reasonable rents won’t clear the market
http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/article/20101115/CRED02/101119937/big-rent-hikes-foreseen-for-downtown-apartments
as somebody brought-up I don’t think anybody want to lose money(rich and capable or not) or get less than market rent; So the FB’s hold on for better times and non-FB’s wait on the sidelines, rents go up. Economic reality will have to catch up eventually to these capable money losers. (increase in rents or new wave of reo)
RE: 100k loss over a 10 year period.
OK – even if you lose this much , you may actually be ahead when compared to renting. When you add up all the costs (including this 100k loss) and subtract mortgage interest deduction, you come up with a monthly figure. Compare that to what you would have paid for a similar rental property. When I do that for myself, I realized that I could sell my house for a 200k loss and still would be ahead compared to if I had rented a similar place – bottom line is that you will ALMOST CERTAINLY lose money if you rent for a long period of time (compared to buying).
HD – your perspective is unique but completely influenced by what you do. By dealing with foreclosures everyday, I am sure that your attitude is quite adversely affected – but remember, that for every foreclosure, there are at least 10 properties that are doing ok. Also remember that many people have paid off their homes – these people are rarely counted in the mix. Finally, even if there are billions/trillions of dollars worth of real estate going into foreclosure, there are at LEAST 10 times that amount in real estate that is in no risk of going into default.
SUBPRIME IS CONTAINED.
“there are at LEAST 10 times that amount in real estate that is in no risk of going into default.”
“There are no American infidels in Baghdad. Never!”
cliches don’t make an argument; they do make a mentality
“and if it gets as worst i.e. CS 90 or lower that everybody(society) will be in a world of pain”
“again if this ‘highly distress’ happens everywhere you would not buy cause the fear aspect will be justifiable arger”
Do straw men make an argument?
G – you have a myopic view of the world – seriously, dude – look at the facts:
1. The vast vast majority of real estate is doing fine, not in foreclosure, and not at risk of foreclosure (distressed properties account for a very small percentage of what’s on the market) – furthermore, what’s on the market accounts for an EXTREMELY small percentage of the real estate out there.
2. The economy is improving – the stock market is at 2 year highs – morale is up which, as we know, leads to more spending
3. The population is increasing and everyone needs to live somewhere. Although we overbuilt in the past decade, construction has slowed to a virtual halt even though demand will continue to go up (couple this with the fact that a good percentage of older houses become uninhabitable every year), you have a recipe for increased demand.
4. and MOST IMPORTANTLY – although Cribchatter is full of 20 and early 30 year olds who make less than 100=150k/year, the WORLD is not just made up of you guys. There are thousands that make millions and even more that make over 250k. There are billions/trillions that are going to be inherited – there is a LOT of money out there – just because you don’t see it everyday, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
“It happens to me all the time (people thinking that I have an unlimited supply of money – they start dating me and then break up with me when they figure out I am not going to pay for their car/condo/jewelry, etc.).”
Hey Clio –
You should try to date a self-made woman who has some real estate and investments of her own. Not a materialistic ho who earned it on her back from a man. And get to know these women as friends first so you can see where they’re coming from before you get romantically involved. And it’s probably better not to reveal too much about your position too soon.
Clio
1. So true. Most people do not get a daily beat down of their real estate on CC.
2. Morale and the media will prop things up slighty in 2011. Will not be full recovery but it will allow some to have enough confidence to buy RE.
3. True but long time for that to play out and have a meaningful impact.
4. Your best point yet! Many will take advantage of the wealth accumulated by their parents to move on up to a bigger or better home!
“Morale and the media will prop things up slighty in 2011. Will not be full recovery but it will allow some to have enough confidence to buy RE.”
While it is true the tax bill is a stealth stimulus, I don’t expect people enjoying a 2% payroll tax holiday to rush out to buy RE. The impact of this will be much smaller than the 8k tax credit.
The media next year will hype increased consumer spending but not connect the dots for people that it is temporary due to the payroll tax holiday.
“Morale and the media will prop things up slighty in 2011.”
You mean the media that will be reporting data with headlines that read “house prices continue to decline” or “sales at lowest level in 20 years”?
Don’t forget- the White House is expected to tackle Freddie and Fannie in early 2011 as well (with the new Congress.) What’s going to come out of that? Will mortgages be even harder to get?
“Many will take advantage of the wealth accumulated by their parents to move on up to a bigger or better home!”
From which generation? The baby boomers? Many of their finances are even more messed up than Generation X and Y.
“The economy is improving – the stock market is at 2 year highs – morale is up which, as we know, leads to more spending.”
The stock market is NOT the U.S. economy.
“From which generation? The baby boomers? Many of their finances are even more messed up than Generation X and Y.”
Not true at all – boomers are EXTREMELY wealthy – the richest generation there is. They possess trillions of dollars – seriously, look it up.
“The stock market is NOT the U.S. economy.”
If you guys are going to use CS index to misinterpret the state of real estate, I can certainly use the stock market to do the same about the state of the US economy.
gold!
”
“The stock market is NOT the U.S. economy.”
If you guys are going to use CS index to misinterpret the state of real estate, I can certainly use the stock market to do the same about the state of the US economy.
“
“gold!”
No, gold isn’t a good proxy for the US economy, housing or, even, the US$.
well I was call the turn-about gold; i should have been more specific
bear causal proxies are similar to bull ones. therefore some bear arguments are just as valid as some of clio’s
”
““gold!”
No, gold isn’t a good proxy for the US economy, housing or, even, the US$.”
“