Is this a good time to buy?

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Spring is usually the peak pricing, but probably also when there is the most inventories. Price starts coming down in the summer and even further in the fall. Mortgage rates had also been shooting up recently, so I would say now it's not a good time to buy.
 
CalBears96 said:
Spring is usually the peak pricing, but probably also when there is the most inventories. Price starts coming down in the summer and even further in the fall. Mortgage rates had also been shooting up recently, so I would say now it's not a good time to buy.
Click to expand...
Makes sense, probably will wait until late summer.
 
You have to take LL responses with a grain of salt. He’s anti-Irvine.

It’s nonsense that anyone who can afford their home and stay put for a while (which indicates job stability) will lose their home. If that’s the case, that’s not just Irvine.

Buy within your means and for the long haul and you should be fine. Of course there are outliers like all things and you should also consider rental parity. For some people, renting might make more sense than buying.
 
Last edited:
EatatAnteaters said:
Were they unable to pay the mortgage? We're also concerned about the job market.
Click to expand...
This forum exists basically because people "bought what they could afford" in the early 2000's and then lost it all. The predecessor to this forum was the Irvine Housing Blog which was one of the earliest to call the 2007 housing bubble and then chronicled as thousands of Irvine home owners lost their homes.

The lesson from that era is that the price you pay for a home matters. Nobody thought their home values would decline, but they did, while at the same time many people lost their jobs and couldn't sell because their homes were underwater.

If you need a mortgage to buy, as most people do, then you really are not buying "what you can afford". You are using debt to buy which means you should be mindful of where we are in the housing cycle so you don't get caught holding the bag at the peak of the cycle, with debt that will magnify your losses.

The people on the forum saying "buy when you can afford to" have a vested interest in maintaining Irvine values. Some are real estate agents, and others are recent buyers who need prices to at least stay flat. IrvineHomeOwner acts as a pro-Irvine cheerleader on this forum. His net worth depends on Irvine home values staying high. I'm the only one who questions the official narrative that Irvine is always a good investment.

Here is the two year chart for Irvine so you can see there's certainly no rush to buy. And renting for half the monthly cost of owning is probably not a bad idea.

1774040020692.png
 
This is misleading because those buyers really couldn't afford those homes (and again, not just in Irvine) due to deceptive lending practices.

For those who could, they made out like bandits... but you always ignore that. There are probably many more thousands of people in Irvine who bought in the late 2000s, stayed and even as early as 2012, had an equitable recoup (I know a few).

And why would I want to maintain Irvine values... it's stupid expensive right now.

Just because you were wrong on so many occasions doesn't mean you need to take it out on the facts.

Post more disinformation like how Irvine had thousands of foreclosures while ignoring that surrounding cities had more % wise.

I don't want to get in more pointless arguments with you but you can't just keep posting lies.
 
Liar Loan said:
Please post your data.
Click to expand...
If you were actually following trends back then, everyone knew other OC cities were having higher foreclosure rates but here is some AI data for you:

📊 Foreclosures vs Housing Units (2007–2013)​

CityEst. Foreclosures (2007–2013)Housing Units (≈2010–2015)Cumulative % (2007–2013)
Irvine~1,400~85,000–95,000~1.5% – 1.7%
Tustin~900~28,000~3.2%
Anaheim~4,000~100,000~4.0%
Santa Ana~4,800~74,000~6.5%
Newport Beach~500~38,000~1.3%
Aliso Viejo~900~20,000~4.5%
Laguna Hills~500~11,000~4.4%

Does 1400 = "thousands"? Based on that data, Irvine didn't even reach over 2000 foreclosures until 2018 (from 2007) so not sure how IHB chronicled "thousands" in about 4-5 years because there's not even 2000 days in 5 years if Larry posted every day.

This is where you apologize or go silent for a while (you always choose the latter).
 
You listed only six cities and cited only foreclosures, while ignoring short sales and other non-foreclosure REO's. Bottom line, Irvine was only 40th percentile when it came to homes lost during the GFC.

Here’s the most complete, evidence-based ranking of Orange County cities by GFC distress severity (≈2007–2012), synthesized from:

  • City-level distressed listings share data (2008 peak)
  • University of California, Irvine foreclosure cluster analysis (relative severity across OC)
  • Cross-checking with known housing characteristics (subprime exposure, price tier, ownership stability)

🏆 Orange County Cities Ranked​


Lowest → Highest Distressed Sales During GFC​



🟢 Tier 1 — Ultra-Low Distress (Best in OC)​


(Clearly lower than Irvine)


  1. Seal Beach
  2. Corona del Mar
  3. Laguna Woods

👉 ~3% distressed listings at peak (extremely low)
👉 Only Seal Beach cluster was below regional average entire period



🟢 Tier 2 — Very Low Distress (Elite Coastal / Wealthy)​


(All lower than Irvine)


  1. Newport Beach
  2. Laguna Beach
  3. Dana Point
  4. San Clemente

👉 High equity, low subprime exposure
👉 “Proportionally few foreclosures” in wealthy coastal clusters



🟢 Tier 3 — Low Distress (Affluent Inland / Stable Suburbs)​


(Mostly lower than Irvine)


  1. Yorba Linda
  2. Los Alamitos
  3. Villa Park
  4. San Juan Capistrano

👉 Larger lots, older ownership, less speculation



🟡 Tier 4 — Moderate-Low Distress (Near Irvine or Slightly Better)​


  1. Laguna Niguel
  2. Aliso Viejo
  3. Mission Viejo


🟡 Tier 5 — Mid Tier (Baseline: Irvine)​


  1. Irvine

👉 Middle of OC:


  • Better than most
  • Worse than coastal + elite enclaves



🧠 Big Picture Insights​


1. Irvine’s true position​


  • Roughly top 40% (good, but not elite)
  • Outperformed most OC cities, but trailed all coastal luxury markets
 
Like I said thousands of homes lost.. Sad really.


Final Estimate — Total Irvine Homeowners Who Lost Homes​

During the Great Financial Crisis (≈2007–2012):​

CategoryEstimated Homes
Foreclosures~1,850 – 2,000
Short sales / other distressed~2,000 – 2,500
Total distressed home losses~3,800 – 4,500

🧾 What that means in context​

  • Irvine had roughly 70,000–80,000 housing units at the time
  • So:
👉 ~5% – 7% of all Irvine homeowners lost their homes
 
If you have cash, Irvine is always within reach. If you are financing… probably not.

Not going to lie… I hope we get another crisis and prices get cut 25%+. I know what that means… and I don’t care.
 
Liar Loan said:
This forum exists basically because people "bought what they could afford" in the early 2000's and then lost it all. The predecessor to this forum was the Irvine Housing Blog which was one of the earliest to call the 2007 housing bubble and then chronicled as thousands of Irvine home owners lost their homes.

The lesson from that era is that the price you pay for a home matters. Nobody thought their home values would decline, but they did, while at the same time many people lost their jobs and couldn't sell because their homes were underwater.

If you need a mortgage to buy, as most people do, then you really are not buying "what you can afford". You are using debt to buy which means you should be mindful of where we are in the housing cycle so you don't get caught holding the bag at the peak of the cycle, with debt that will magnify your losses.

The people on the forum saying "buy when you can afford to" have a vested interest in maintaining Irvine values. Some are real estate agents, and others are recent buyers who need prices to at least stay flat. IrvineHomeOwner acts as a pro-Irvine cheerleader on this forum. His net worth depends on Irvine home values staying high. I'm the only one who questions the official narrative that Irvine is always a good investment.

Here is the two year chart for Irvine so you can see there's certainly no rush to buy. And renting for half the monthly cost of owning is probably not a bad idea.

View attachment 10861
Click to expand...
Why data from only 2024-2026? Why not 2016-2026?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top