Santa Clara Rocking The Overbids!


#121

Definitely 2 and 2.5 cant remember which way though.


#122

2 listing and 2.5 buyer


#123

No. I am a bear because they failed to diversify their income source after all these years. I don’t like they burning money in their so-called moonshots. There are no business models behind any of those, just mindlessly burning money on science projects.


#124

They have enough cash to acquire Tesla or Nflx and should be doing so.


#125

You will have to agree to be taken into a car blindfolded. After driving around in SF for about 2 hours, you will be dropped off into manch’s home, to a Faraday cage with no wireless reception. Manch will be there to greet you.


#126

@punchitchewie mentioned Won Kee. There was a time I practically went there for dinner every week. Now that I think about it there may be one or two instances when I smelled something. But no biggie.

Milpitas is in a building boom. I don’t think it’s that much of a deal. Certainly not a dealbreaker for thousands of people who call Milpitas home.


#127

Building boom means business opportunities. Businessman should move to smelly Milpitas


#128

[While in Milpitas]
Harriet: *sniff sniff, you smell that Manch?
Manch: I do indeed. That’s the smell of opportunity $$$

:laughing:


#129

Me in Milpitas:


#130

There is more important things than money. I wouldn’t move to Milpitas to sacrifice the nose for a few bucks :grin:


#131

Frankly, too late for Milpitas. My Big Bro bought in eons ago. Brand new home, 4 bd in a cul du sac under 200K. Gotta be at or near 1M now. Shoot, when I was helping him with something, he had free dumping at the Dixon Landing site, and if I remember correctly it was smelly back then…


#132

Nah, it’s never too late. Was it too late to buy 20 years ago? Yes compared to people who bought 30 years ago, but not compared to today.

Ditto for 10 years ago. 5 years ago. Today.

It’s never too late.


#133

That sounded like some SM escapade… :laughing:


#134

Well, if that were the case, then you should be doubling down on the perennial favorites like your Cupertino and Sunnyvales of the world. But, you aren’t right? Buy-in is just too high now that it would be difficult to be anywhere near cash flow positive or even break-even on SFH buys. Not everyone has cash like you, you know…


#135

I agree with this. I remember when I moved here and all of my friends who had lived in the area for awhile had bought the previous year. When I bought it was 50% higher than what they paid, and I was thinking - wow it’s so expensive :frowning: ) . Now it’s almost doubled what I paid, so hindsight is certainly 20/20. I do agree certain areas will plateau off and you won’t see the exponential gains, but the long term graph is positive.


#136

What is the expected(average) growth rate over the next 10 years for RE prices in Bay Area?


#137

10%. In 10 years an average home in SF or South Bay will be worth more than $2M.


#138

Love it… if that happens.

So, that means average home in SF or South Bay is @780K now.

Follow up question will be, will local salaries grow higher to support it? I believe, investment led price growth can work for some time but eventually locals have to be able to afford RE here. If not, we will get extreme left policies taking more and more prominent space.


#139

Yeah, but we should also differentiate from primary home buying vs investment rental buying. As you said, some areas have reached that plateau (vs other relatively speaking cheaper areas). Nowhere in there I am saying prices couldn’t continue going up but if you are buying to play landlord you are going to have a hard time making the numbers make sense at least on SFHs or having to dish out some huge down payment.


#140

Local salaries will not make a difference to home prices in the future. It will be international buyers (China, India, Europe) filling in the gap. Local salaries will likely not keep pace with the growth in prices as buyers become more and more internationalized.