Frustration with Irvine inventory!

[quote author="davidkrm" date=1247488986][quote author="ocresident73" date=1247487087]who are these people who can still afford these ridiculous prices - I clearly need to start moving into their line of work. </blockquote>
Then you gotta become Chinese overnight :x</blockquote>


There is some truth to this. Have you been the the latest Irvine new town homes in WE. I am convince that it must be FCB that bought all of this homes in phase 1 within 15 minutes. The place was packed with mostly Asian buyers. Granted that 50% there for the free bees, but there is a clear interest.
 
[quote author="irvinebullhousing" date=1247489747]There is some truth to this. Have you been the the latest Irvine new town homes in WE. I am convince that it must be FCB that bought all of this homes in phase 1 within 15 minutes. The place was packed with mostly Asian buyers. Granted that 50% there for the free bees, but there is a clear interest.</blockquote>


Oh gawd... here we go again with the FCBer myth. So you are telling me as a percentage of population that there are more FCBers/Asians here in 09, than there were in 06, 02, and 96? And, that they are buying more homes than non-FCBers/Asians? Do you have data to prove this? Because if that were true, then the US would have to issue more VISAs, which they haven't. And I have the sales data, and it shows that FCBers have always been in Irvine and they like to buy homes. In 2009, it is the same as it was in 06, 02, and 96. Just because you started paying attention to the buyer demographic doesn't mean that it is increasing.
 
Irvine population by year



1971 10,081

1975 31,750

1980 62,127

1985 84,400

1990 110,330

1995 120,000

2000 143,072

2005 183,457

2006 194,126

2007 201,154

2008 207,848

2009 212,793
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1247491031][quote author="irvinebullhousing" date=1247489747]There is some truth to this. Have you been the the latest Irvine new town homes in WE. I am convince that it must be FCB that bought all of this homes in phase 1 within 15 minutes. The place was packed with mostly Asian buyers. Granted that 50% there for the free bees, but there is a clear interest.</blockquote>


Oh gawd... here we go again with the FCBer myth. So you are telling me as a percentage of population that there are more FCBers/Asians here in 09, than there were in 06, 02, and 96? And, that they are buying more homes than non-FCBers/Asians? Do you have data to prove this? Because if that were true, then the US would have to issue more VISAs, which they haven't. And I have the sales data, and it shows that FCBers have always been in Irvine and they like to buy homes. In 2009, it is the same as it was in 06, 02, and 96. Just because you started paying attention to the buyer demographic doesn't mean that it is increasing.</blockquote>
You know... you keep posting this as an anti-FCB theory but I think you are just further proving it. Let's break this down:



1. Graph says that FCBs have been in Irvine "forever".

2. Historically, Irvine has always had a price premium over surrounding cities.



So, uh, what exactly is wrong with the FCB theory that Foreign Cash Buyers tend to keep prices inflated in Irvine?



I mean... it's not a scientific fact but you tell me why Irvine prices are usually higher than say Santa Ana, Orange and even unincorporated North Tustin Foothills and I bet it's going to lead back to some Chinese, Korean, Persian, Indian, Jewish, [insert foreign ethnic origin here] reason.



BTW: Snooby's population report refutes your notion that there are the same *amount* of FCBs now as there were back then (I know that's technically not what you meant but it's quite funny).



Disclaimer: This isn't a serious post... I just like to kick 'cakes in the grouchy pants every once in a while.
 
[quote author="irvine_home_owner" date=1247531500]BTW: Snooby's population report refutes your notion that there are the same *amount* of FCBs now as there were back then (I know that's technically not what you meant but it's quite funny).</blockquote>


What took you so long to post? You slacker.



You are right, it is not what I meant technically, which either makes it kinda funny... or the reading comprehension at Irvine schools is not as good as everyone says. As a percentage, the foreign population has barely budged, <a href="http://factfinder.census.gov/">according to the Census</a>...



In 2000: Foreign born 45,877, 32.1%, the US 11.1%.



In 2005-07: Foreign born 61,824, 33.2%, the US 12.5%.



The percentage increase is a whopping 3.4% compared to the US increase of 12.6%. I doubt anyone would notice a a 3.4% increase when elsewhere it is four times as high. And funny... but I don't hear much about FCBers outside of Irvine, even though statistically there are more.



While you weren't being too serious, and you like to kick my grouchy pants, you still know I love to debunk this myth. The logic behind this myth is what is truly funny, because there are so many facts that are so easy to find to debunk it. It's like saying: "All bimmers are pieces of sh*t! My friend had one that was a total lemon." When in fact 99% of the other bimmers were not lemons. Not a fair sample size, or based on facts as a whole.
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1247533790]What took you so long to post? You slacker.

</blockquote>
I can't track EVERY FCB Myth buster... I pick and choose my spots.

<blockquote>

You are right, it is not what I meant technically, which either makes it kinda funny... or the reading comprehension at Irvine schools is not as good as everyone says. As a percentage, the foreign population has barely budged, <a href="http://factfinder.census.gov/">according to the Census</a>...



In 2000: Foreign born 45,877, 32.1%, the US 11.1%.



In 2005-07: Foreign born 61,824, 33.2%, the US 12.5%.



The percentage increase is a whopping 3.4% compared to the US increase of 12.6%. I doubt anyone would notice a a 3.4% increase when elsewhere it is four times as high. And funny... but I don't hear much about FCBers outside of Irvine, even though statistically there are more.

</blockquote>
Hold. Where are the numbers for FCB population percentage in Irvine? I don't care about US foreign-born percentage... stop giving me unnecessary numbers... you know how that confuses me!

<blockquote>

While you weren't being too serious, and you like to kick my grouchy pants, you still know I love to debunk this myth. The logic behind this myth is what is truly funny, because there are so many facts that are so easy to find to debunk it. It's like saying: "All bimmers are pieces of sh*t! My friend had one that was a total lemon." When in fact 99% of the other bimmers were not lemons. Not a fair sample size, or based on facts as a whole.</blockquote>
Hey... you missed my first question... what are your reasons that Irvine home pricing has a premium over other OC cities? I still think part of that has do to with either Kim, Wang, Haddad, Cohen or Patel.
 
[quote author="irvine_home_owner" date=1247531500]

So, uh, what exactly is wrong with the FCB theory that Foreign Cash Buyers tend to keep prices inflated in Irvine?

</blockquote>


the problem with the FCB theory is it conveniently changes to suit the current environment. if someone's willing to do the research, i bet you can find subtle changes in the wording of the FCB theory. initially there were those that swore FCB would prevent any <strong>decline</strong> in irvine values. then the phrasing became FCBs would prevent a <strong>collapse</strong> in prices. most recently it's FCBs would keep prices higher <strong>relative to other neighborhoods</strong>.



in any case, if that's the current iteration of the theory, i think don bren, city planners, park and neighborhood designers, active HOAs, irvine pd, and a whole slew of other ppl would want some credit as well.
 
Oops... typed too fast, the 32.1% and the 33.2% are for Irvine, the 11.1% and 12.5% is for the US.



Yes, part of the premium for Irvine is the demographic. Much like there are premiums for other cities based on a completely different demographic. There are many other reasons why Irvine has a premium, like schools, low crime, tot lots, etc. There are also reasons why N. Tustin has a premium, for many of the same reasons as Irvine.
 
[quote author="acpme" date=1247535774][quote author="irvine_home_owner" date=1247531500]

So, uh, what exactly is wrong with the FCB theory that Foreign Cash Buyers tend to keep prices inflated in Irvine?

</blockquote>


the problem with the FCB theory is it conveniently changes to suit the current environment. if someone's willing to do the research, i bet you can find subtle changes in the wording of the FCB theory. initially there were those that swore FCB would prevent any <strong>decline</strong> in irvine values. then the phrasing became FCBs would prevent a <strong>collapse</strong> in prices. most recently it's FCBs would keep prices higher <strong>relative to other neighborhoods</strong>.

</blockquote>
Hmm... I think for the most part, my definition of the theory has stayed consistent. It's always been a comparison to other cities. But stop telling the world my secrets on how I can prove that "I may not always be right... but I'm never wrong!".

<blockquote>

in any case, if that's the current iteration of the theory, i think don bren, city planners, park and neighborhood designers, active HOAs, irvine pd, and a whole slew of other ppl would want some credit as well.</blockquote>
No soup for them! And all of that can be traced back to an FCB if you use enough creative reasoning (ie Don Bren knows that FCBs have money so he makes sure that Irvine is attractive to such buyers... check out the Woodbury East thread. By the way... if Don is reading this... more 3-car garages please).



It's all about the FCB yo... whether graph likes it or not!
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1247535868]Yes, part of the premium for Irvine is the demographic.</blockquote>
See... if this forum had signatures... I would surely put this in mine.



I know it's out of context... but that's what the IntarWebs is all about!



Interestingly enough, since this thread was first posted, the 4/3s that cherry was looking at seemed to have settled into a $650k range as I stated on my thread (too lazy to link it). There aren't that many available (hence inventory frustration) but rental parity seems to be coming close in this category.
 
7/13/09

"Hmm... I think for the most part, my definition of the theory has stayed consistent. It's always been a comparison to other cities."



11/26/08

"The contention isn?t that FCBs will *save* Irvine from price declines? that only they are an unquantifiable factor that may slow them down."
 
[quote author="acpme" date=1247537711]7/13/09

"Hmm... I think for the most part, my definition of the theory has stayed consistent. It's always been a comparison to other cities."



11/26/08

"The contention isn?t that FCBs will *save* Irvine from price declines? that only they are an unquantifiable factor that may slow them down."

</blockquote>
Hey... only I can use the "out of context" stick!!!



Obviously I meant that in comparison to other cities... does my 11/26/08 statement indicate that I'm not comparing Irvine to other cities? Isn't that the whole crux of the FCB theory? Sure... maybe the actual "what is being compared" fluctuates... but again... not really a scientific hypothesis we're talking about here.



Since we're talking about failsafes... look at that word "may"... very convenient of me to place that there so that I can refute any future inspection... like now... hehe.

<blockquote>

Questions:

1) Have price declines in Irvine slowed down in 2009?

2) What types of neighborhoods are seeing declines increase?</blockquote>
I believe that listing prices in the upper-middle tier have remained rather stagnant in the last year. Since 2008, I have been tracking several neighborhoods in QH, Woodbury and PS and they have still yet to go below the $1mil mark, which I had though would have happened by now. There is some hope, recently, PS Los Colinas models are selling in the $900k range and even Serra have gone as low as $1.1mil (they used to be $1.5+). But resale homes seem to be pretty stubborn. I have yet to see a QH Tapestry or Chantilly model go below $1mil. I think a WB Mille Fleurs will get there soon... but it's taking much longer than I thought it would (I blame the government too... not just the FCBs!).



As for increasing declines... I believe Ladera Ranch, Coto (and even parts of Newport Coast) are still bleeding pretty badly as are other parts of Santa Ana, Orange and Lake Forest. For the latter, this may have to do more with age of homes and for the former, maybe the lack of inventory in Irvine (remember... I'm not a real believer in the FCB Theory... I just think it's a cool unquantifiable contributing factor).



Honestly, I wish prices would drop faster in Irvine... graph keeps showing us those cool red/green circles from ForeclosureRadar but is there some REOMonster who is eating them before they can hit market? Ask IPO... the declines are just not going down fast enough in Irvine... curse those FCBs!!!!!



However, none of this indicates any type of bottom to me. I still think 2012+ would be a better timeframe to buy... now if only I can convince the sig-oth of that.
 
just pushing your buttons ;-) you're FCB theory has remained consistent for the most part. i think most would agree with you about price premium in irvine, but i just think your cause and effects are flipped.
 
[quote author="acpme" date=1247540457]just pushing your buttons ;-) you're FCB theory has remained consistent for the most part. i think most would agree with you about price premium in irvine, but i just think your cause and effects are flipped.</blockquote>
Heh... what came first... the chicken or the FCB?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top