Irvine Starter Homes 2024

irvinehomeowner

irvinehomeowner

Well-known member
So I did this OC thread for starter homes in 2022 just to see what is out there:

Starter Homes 2022

Been looking at Redfin for a bit and shocked by prices but since someone claims they are helpful (not!), I decided to make a thread that might give us an idea of what a starter home would go for in the OC area. Since everyone's definition of a starter home is different (depending if you're...
www.talkirvine.com

But since this is TalkIrvine... I wanted to see what I could find if I were a newly married couple and was looking for an SFR 2br/1.5ba (you should probably be looking for a condo/townhome but when looked for my first house... I wanted an SFR). This is what I found and it's crazy:

3/2 $1.060m 1176sf


No interior pictures so based on the exterior pics, probably bad. Large lot and okay location (backs Yale) but wow... over $1m for this?

It gets more ridiculous:

3/2 $1.280m 1216sf


Has interior pictures but backs the train tracks.

If you want newer:

3/2.5 $1.580m 1734sf


This is over double what similar sized homes were selling for just 10 years ago.

Just goes to show... any time is a good time to buy if you can afford it and hold on for at least 5-10 years. :)
 
irvinehomeowner said:
This is because you didn’t buy in Irvine. 😂
Click to expand...
Yes, a 28% decline in value is your idea of a good time to buy. Of course, there were also the thousands of Irvine residents that lost their homes. I'm sure those people are glad they listened to your sage advice.
 
Sorry... not in the homes I was looking at especially by 2011... prices in Irvine for newer 2500sft SFRs started rebounding in 2010-11. By 2012-13, they were already at or above 2005-06 prices.

I already detailed this for you... even the quicker recovery of my Irvine homes prices compared to your IE properties.

You conveniently forget this to push your narrative but a search on TI will show anyone the truth.

Liar Loan said:
Of course, there were also the thousands of Irvine residents that lost their homes. I'm sure those people are glad they listened to your sage advice.
Click to expand...

Not from my advice... you forget I drank the Kool-Aid that Irvine prices were going to fall hard (even though I had some doubt)... but history proved otherwise. That's why from that point on, my advice is if you can afford it and you can stay a while. That's what it has been from 2012+... which I reinforced in 2018 when you and a few others were against me. Now all those people who you told not to buy in 2018+ are stuck with high rates, high prices, and low inventory making it almost impossible for them to buy a home. You bought but didn't tell anyone to buy (so as not to look bad ignoring your own advice)... so the people who really lost is anyone who listened to you.

I guess it's only okay when you decide to buy, everyone else you denigrate.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
Sorry... not in the homes I was looking at especially by 2011... prices in Irvine for newer 2500sft SFRs started rebounding in 2010-11. By 2012-13, they were already at or above 2005-06 prices.
Click to expand...
Ah, so your advice to hold for at least 5 years only applies to that narrow, limited segment of homes you were tracking in 2008. Got it. :rolleyes:
 
Liar Loan said:
Ah, so your advice to hold for at least 5 years only applies to that narrow, limited segment of homes you were tracking in 2008. Got it. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
If that makes you feel better.

As I said, anyone can cut something up to favor their opinion but in general you have been so wrong it's becoming a running joke on TI and you don't even know it.

Let's get back to the point of this thread... a starter SFR in Irvine is over $1m. What was that in 2022? 2020? 2018? 2013? 2011? 2008? Even 2006?

I believe those are all points in time where you claimed buyers would be "knife catchers", "in pain", or whatever colorful hot button word you wanted to use.

The reality is if they could afford it and held... they would be fine and not suffering from listening to you.

And for those people who bought in 2006, other than having to move, why would they have to sell in 2011? Mortgage rates were sub-5, even lower if you were in an OARM. You always leave out the other variables and that's why you fall on your face.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
And for those people who bought in 2006, other than having to move, why would they have to sell in 2011?
Click to expand...
This question betrays all the other shuckin' and jivin' you're doing. Holding for five years was not enough to come out ahead in Irvine historically.
 
You're the only one dancing on all the threads you've been wrong on.

Show the numbers of % who actually bought in 2006 and sold in 2011 in Irvine and what their loss was or else you're just shuckin' yourself.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
You're the only one dancing on all the threads you've been wrong on.

Show the numbers of % who actually bought in 2006 and sold in 2011 in Irvine and what their loss was or else you're just shuckin' yourself.
Click to expand...
Goalposts moved. You started out saying "anytime is a good time to buy if you can hold on for at least 5-10 years". It didn't work out that way in the 90's or the 00's. Now you're saying "show me the losses" after spending years complaining about Larry's incessant posts doing exactly that.

Thousands of Irvine residents lost their homes to foreclosure and short sale. That means they had negative equity, otherwise known as a loss.
 
I'll do a Liar Loan... I wasn't on TI in the 90s.

Read what I wrote... are you sure English is your first language?

BTW: A percentage of Larry's posts didn't always end up in losses. Squatting and kick the can stymied that and for every Larry post, there were buyers who stayed put and made out. Otherwise the percentage would have been much greater than your suspect 28%. It's okay... you can't prove that "thousands" of people lost after 5-10 years because it didn't happen. Just accept it.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
I'll do a Liar Loan... I wasn't on TI in the 90s.

Read what I wrote... are you sure English is your first language?

BTW: A percentage of Larry's posts didn't always end up in losses. Squatting and kick the can stymied that and for every Larry post, there were buyers who stayed put and made out. Otherwise the percentage would have been much greater than your suspect 28%. It's okay... you can't prove that "thousands" of people lost after 5-10 years because it didn't happen. Just accept it.
Click to expand...
Abject denial of reality. This is a textbook case of cognitive dissonance.
 
I feel like a strong earthquake can scare people and a bunch of collapsing houses can cause prices to come down really fast. I understand holding long term is best but if you have all your money invested in this one large asset you are putting yourself in a very risky position as you are not diversified and a collapse in the housing market prices can make you lose everything.

Just as quick investors put money into real estate they can be just as quick to pull money out as they may have invested few years ago and taking a no loss no gain situation is better for them even if they bring down prices by dropping home prices quickly but if you have purchased at the point when the bubble will burst you are out of luck and will suffer the greatest loss especially if all you made in life is put into a house and then you are living pay check to pay check.

There have been no recent large earthquakes but I feel earthquakes can scare people to leave the state and even cause people to not buy homes that may have minor damage from earthquakes. Investors who park their money in real estate can see the values dropping and want to exit quickly even with little to no profit as they are quick to think and not caring about long term settlement in their home but rather looking to maintain their wealth.

Would like to hear what others think and if earthquakes especially a strong one can bring down prices.
 
Last edited:
agp2572 said:
I feel like a strong earthquake can scare people and a bunch of collapsing houses can cause prices to come down really fast. I understand holding long term is best but if you have all your money invested in this one large asset you are putting yourself in a very risky position as you are not diversified and a collapse in the housing market prices can make you lose everything.

Just as quick investors put money into real estate they can be just as quick to pull money out as they may have invested few years ago and taking a no loss no gain situation is better for them even if they bring down prices by dropping home prices quickly but if you have purchased at the point when the bubble will burst you are out of luck and will suffer the greatest loss especially if all you made in life is put into a house and then you are living pay check to pay check.

There have been no recent large earthquakes but I feel earthquakes can scare people to leave the state and even cause people to not buy homes that may have minor damage from earthquakes. Investors who park their money in real estate can see the values dropping and want to exit quickly even with little to no profit as they are quick to think and not caring about long term settlement in their home but rather looking to maintain their wealth.

Would like to hear what others think and if earthquakes especially a strong one can bring down prices.
Click to expand...
I would imagine a place like Irvine would be largely unaffected by a major earthquake, given that the majority of homes were constructed with updated building codes related to earthquake tolerance. Plus, Irvine lays in a spot where any earthquake impacts would be minimal, due to the geography surrounding it and the distance from the major fault lines. There wouldn't be widespread destruction in Irvine. Elsewhere in CA, absolutely. LA is positioned for mass destruction if the San Andreas unleashes the Big One.
 
brergnat said:
I would imagine a place like Irvine would be largely unaffected by a major earthquake, given that the majority of homes were constructed with updated building codes related to earthquake tolerance. Plus, Irvine lays in a spot where any earthquake impacts would be minimal, due to the geography surrounding it and the distance from the major fault lines. There wouldn't be widespread destruction in Irvine. Elsewhere in CA, absolutely. LA is positioned for mass destruction if the San Andreas unleashes the Big One.
Click to expand...
Agree even if homes survive I feel the sentiment of people would be different. People would see LA homes destroyed and people from out of state thinking to move and buy would not. People in the state who live in LA who would move to OC for home would change plans and move out of state as well. I know there is no major earthquake since North Ridge earthquake but such earthquakes damp the whole selling and buying sentiment unless you are actively closing on a property. People who have a lot of equity in their home would even consider moving out of state to Texas or another state where they dont have to take out a mortgage and be fine with selling their home to buy in cash elsewhere. This could dramatically increase supply. Right now people dont move as they prefer to live in SoCal and if they buy another home in SoCal they would need another mortgage. I feel earthquake does change the dynamic and not being able to predict a large one can change the whole strategy of buy and hold for a lot of people.

I am not saying another big one will happen and people to be scared but just like COVID, no one being prepared for such an event, I feel such an event can impact house prices. Also if people are buying they would also avoid a large number of home because they have some crack or issues due to earthquake and don't want to deal with home issues that may happen later on in after moving in.
 
Last edited:
People move out of CA to Texas only to find higher property taxes, monthly utility expenses, occurrence of other natural disasters, harsher weather extremes… the grass isn’t always greener on the other side.
Irvine also has a good percentage of all-cash buyers, many of whom are foreigners. The appeal of Irvine is too great given the city checks all the important boxes in terms of highly ranked school system, neat aesthetic, low crime rate, diverse cultures whereas many other cities in SoCal may have one or two of these checked off, but not all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top