Manhattan Beach Confidential - Latest Comments in Strand Adjustments

Re: Strand Adjustments

Do show — Mon, 18 May 2009 18:03:17 -0000

I'm pretty sure that I could learn to live with Megan's tats!

Re: Strand Adjustments

Jane Goodall — Sat, 16 May 2009 21:30:46 -0000

Shhhhh, don't tease the baboons.

Re: Strand Adjustments

anon — Sat, 16 May 2009 19:01:15 -0000

I'd like to see them in 30 years and see how they like those tattoos.

Re: Strand Adjustments

Tattoo You — Sat, 16 May 2009 14:33:04 -0000

Meanwhile, Megan Fox just got voted #1 on the Maxim hot 100. She's pretty, but I just can't get past all the tattoos. I can't stand it. I'd say, on the whole, MB's youth has fewer tattoos than many other SoCal locales, but I think the trend is growing. Whatever happened to just a beautiful body?

Re: Strand Adjustments

stu-pid — Sat, 16 May 2009 14:21:44 -0000

wrong, wrong, 13M

Re: Strand Adjustments

sickened by egomania — Sat, 16 May 2009 13:55:50 -0000

... and calling yourself the 'Piper' would *not* be wishful thinking? Talk about the pot and the kettle ...

Re: Strand Adjustments

anon — Sat, 16 May 2009 11:55:32 -0000

I had to sell my angst at a loss.

Re: Strand Adjustments

anon — Sat, 16 May 2009 11:53:24 -0000

Right, and Obama will be re-elected, and the Cubs will win the world series.

Re: Strand Adjustments

Piper — Sat, 16 May 2009 11:13:56 -0000

Contrary to "scottr's" conjecture, Strand owners as a group are not leveraged with maxed out HELOCs, worried about shrinking credit card limits or job losses. Three of the last four houses that sold on the Strand were sold to all cash buyers from people that owned the properties free and clear. The wishful thinking to see those who have these properties knocked down to our level is a pipe-dream.

Re: Strand Adjustments

bob — Sat, 16 May 2009 09:10:04 -0000

There is a lot of pain and angst on this blog the people who thought about buying on the strand in 1995 and didn't pull the trigger are of course despondent since they missed out on the run from 900k to 6.7 million

Re: Strand Adjustments

scottr — Sat, 16 May 2009 01:10:30 -0000

I guess one (of many) wildcards in play is the number of people that bought in these areas by leveraging to the max. Now that prices are falling, the stress on all highly leveraged households will be immense. With HELOCs already maxed, credit card limits shrinking, wages stagnant, and jobs disappearing (especially in RE and financials), we could indeed see a collapse even in oceanfront properties. When you factor in the immanent Alt-A/Option Arm recasts, it's looking increasingly likely that we will see 1995 prices again, in real (if not nominal) dollars. Of course, since RE usually tracks inflation, this wouldn't be exceptional in the grand scheme of things, just a bit more dramatic collapse than usual. Generally with bubbles, the bigger they get, the faster and farther they fall. This one's not looking to buck that trend.

Re: Strand Adjustments

MB_Watcher — Sat, 16 May 2009 00:17:41 -0000

You're right, Comm, about 1712 and I've changed that from "speckie" to "new home." As to the double lot sale down south, I was cutting past a lot of that detail, with which I was familiar. It's touchy because the sale price on 204 is not public, but it's the only one that posted a market-testing list price before a deal was struck. The essence here is not incorrect – the sellers at 204 thought that a lot in that basic location was worth 8.2, but the sale at 208 tells us that a lot right around there was actually worth 6.7, significantly less, though not a small amount in itself...

Re: Strand Adjustments

commentator — Fri, 15 May 2009 21:01:33 -0000

I've said it before and I will say it again, 1712 The Strand was NOT a house built on speculation - or a "speckie" as MBW likes to elementarily call it. 204 The Strand did not lower it's asking price because 208 "came on the market". A deal was simultaneously made for one buyer to purchase both properties and 208 was never on the market. The agent put up a sign and posted it on the MLS for comp purposes, as is typical for off market sales.

Re: Strand Adjustments

anon — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:47:57 -0000

if the credit card defaults increase another 5%, these homes will drop like a stone to $3/lot.

Re: Strand Adjustments

Unfair Prices! — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:32:46 -0000

Circa 1996, you could buy a strand lot in MB for $900k. I'd bet some readers here are screaming that $5m for a Strand lot is unreasonable since it's more than 5x the price from 13 years ago.

Re: Strand Adjustments

Hank — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:27:43 -0000

Those 30% drops are interesting. I will be following the strand homes to see what happens to them in the future and how the coming credit card defaults will impact the banking and housing industry. As a side note I always kind of liked 3404. I know it’s dated but its kind of funky and I thought someone with the right vision could update it to be a top notch place. I hope it’s not a tear down for another cliché Mediterranean style home.

Re: Strand Adjustments

stu — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:09:23 -0000

just goes to show how much the land south of the pier is loved and how much the land way north of the pier is hated Strand south of the pier land = 6.7 million Strand way north fo the pier land = 4.5 huge huge gap by the way, what did strand dirt peak at - what was the highest price recorded for strand dirt?

Re: Strand Adjustments

anon — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:00:12 -0000

these houses will be worth $2 in three years.

Re: Strand Adjustments

anon — Fri, 15 May 2009 15:35:07 -0000

maybe this is off topic, but U.S. credit card defaults rose in April to record highs, with Citigroup and Wells Fargo posting double digit loss rates. get ready everyone. green shoot rally is drawing to a close. credit is getting tighter everywhere, not looser (and with good reason, see above).

Re: Strand Adjustments

anon — Fri, 15 May 2009 13:23:27 -0000

these houses will be worth $1 in three years.