All Forum Posts by: Jason Ong

@Lupe Rodriguez Take the ferry during peak hours, ask the commuters and buy them drinks.

Except it's not that straightforward for the bay area market coz it could be 3mil before you get that 10% reduction. 

My 5 cents is there's really no real "good" time to buy here. It's just a matter of what one can afford to pay the price. Yes there's always a price to pay no matter what. Even if one can find a cash flow property, there's a price in one's time in maintaining and minimizing vacancies. 

I come from Singapore which is a similar market and was I glad to buy there what I could afford coz I've netted some significant appreciation before there's a slight adjustment. Those who own property always come out ahead in due time. 

@Matt R. @Matt K.

Maybe I'm paraphrasing that guy from the event wrong and maybe it was mentioned as a joking point in his presentation. 

It sounded like he said it was the observable common characteristic of neighborhoods in Sacramento that retained their value well during the last crash. 

Correlation not equals causation. Whether it's factual or a joke, it did open up my eyes to look at street trees when scouting neighborhoods. 

Thus far I seemed to catch myself saying, "Hmm... the neighbors seems nice. I could live here" when the streets are lined with nicely maintained mature trees.

@Terry Lao

I like your examples of how different economic buckets might spend that $500. Sounds like any Gov's wet dream - increased velocity on productive use of money.

Not sure about labeling the outcome... if one lives near a stream and get continuous clean water for free doesn't mean one's gonna take it for granted?

Anyways.... not to veer off topic...

I agree with most sentiments here... I feel like places like Vallejo/Stockton are long term bets... for the short term one might see some appreciation but they're a lot more sensitive to market corrections so one has to be prepared for that.

Speaking of corrections, someone at the Sacramento RE conference last year mentioned that the biggest signal if a neighborhood will retain its value during a downturn are those with healthy mature trees. I'm guessing there's a correlation between the economic make up of a neighhorhood and how well maintained the trees at the sidewalks are.

I went through the same process as described by @Wes Blackwell.

400k budget. Can't find anything in the peninsula that isn't paralysing.

Looked at Oakland. Anything within that budget feels unsafe.

Looked at Richmond. Like the gentrification upside but feels unsafe.

Looked at Pittsburgh / Antioch / Brentwood. Feels a lot safer. Suburbia. 

In the end I chose Vallejo. Feels a lot safer. Lots of potential upside. Closer to SF than Pittsburgh/ Antioch / Brentwood with multiple commute options - I-80, 24, 37-101 Marin, ferry.

Stockton was too far of a commute. Even if I can work from home it's still too far to exciting places other than Sacramento. But that's just me. Not a stay-at-home kinda person. 

Excellent topic. Reading posts from all of you succcessful people in this thread reaffirms some my philosophy on the subject matter.

There are many sides to wealth that I’ve observed:

- Health

- Community

- Mobility

- Climate

- Space

Some notes on my observations.

A healthy body is form of wealth in time - A person with only 6 days to live wouldn’t be able to do much.

Having a community is a store of relational wealth - We all need love and support and to feel needed by others.

Mobility is a form of experiential wealth - If I am not stuck in a particular location, I’m free to pursue my passions and my tribe.

Climate is a form of operational wealth - I’m more efficient and productive if the weather is optimal for me to carry out my daily tasks.

Space as a form of wealth in 3D resources - A city dweller has to compete in resources much more than a ranch owner.

I came to a conclusion that money is just a representation of all of the above as we’re currently using it as a currency to trade one for another.

Best case we have all 5 which then makes us very very wealthy. Worst case we have none which makes us dead in the water.

Most of us are in the middle where we’re trading one for another.

As a sidenote, here’s a fun projection of a possible sci-fi future?

AI and automation has taken over all aspects of our life. There’s no need for us to work. Living and entertainment has become so cheap that society has been de-monetized. We no longer trade in currency that we know today. Perhaps we trade in time, which is the only non renewal resource, to get what we want by using blockchain technologies to log, track and consolidate all of our transactions. 

I would make the lower plate fonts smaller so it says,

IF YOU CAN DREAM IT,

YOU CAN WORK HARD AND ACHIEVE IT

Not claiming exclusivity. Is you see this please take it and use it on your plates! :P

Did some quick googling and found some interesting links. 

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Oakland-hill...

https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/p...

http://web.holycross.edu/RePEc/hcx/HC1503-Kiel-Mat...

http://time.com/money/4035181/recovering-financial...

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/10/11/napa-and-sono...

TLDR;

- Exclusive properties in wooded areas with great views commanding a premium before the fire will get hit with a significant dip in the short term due to change in homebuyers priorities.

- Reconstruction takes a long time. Increase in demand for 2 bedroom rentals? Spillover to increase in construction prices due to demand?

- Napa tourism gonna be negatively affected. Could affect hotels and vacation rentals in nearby cities?

 Just ask any folks in Vegas... the house always wins but we're delighted by the surprises once in a while. :P

Gambling isn't bad if one uses play money and treats it as entertainment... Like my folks who visits casino every year betting a low hundreds on slot machines... Entertainment fee... kinda like me repeatedly spending $12 on movies that I have no clue what it's about.

Read a book titled "What I Learned Losing a Million Dollars" few years ago that defined the following profiles.

- Better

- Gambler

- Speculator

- Trader

- Investor

The gist that I got was the difference between investors and speculators are hold period and leverage. The following matrix from a Nobel Prize Stanford professor Dr William F. Sharpe seems to suggest so too.

By his definition, it seems like unless one buys assets in full cash without any leverage and can afford to lose it all, most of us RE "investors" are really just living in the grey area between "investor" and "speculator"...