January 15, 2008

SF: Your Best Investment?

With real estate looking sketchy, what’s the best investment in 2008? I have the answer, but you’ll have to wait for it. First I’m going to lead you there inductively by showing you some stats from San Francisco Schtuff’s excellent “Then Vs. Now” series. Redfin writer Susan Brady already highlighted the Noe Valley info, picking out the fact that a single family home in Noe in 1997 was $458,985; in 2007, the same sold for $1,503,412. You can see this data for other parts of the city as well, including NoPa, Pacific Heights, Potrero Hill, Bernal Heights, and most recently, Glen Park.

However, the Glen Park data are different. This time, instead of working with the 97-07 time frame, Schtuff extrapolated the digits (using the same rate of inflation and appreciation) to project from 2007 to 2017. Here are the results:

Glen Park
2007 2017
Average cost of a single family house $1,059,660 $3,274,349
Average cost of a cup of coffee $1.65 $2.73
 
Average cost of a Condo/Loft/TIC $833,878 $2,068,993
 
Average cost of a gallon of gas $3.25 $8.18
Average cost of a multi unit building $1,065,333 $3,123,467
   

I had been watching this data (hot tears of would- have-could-have-should-have blurring my eyes), thinking if only I had been more together in the late 90′s, I could have bought something then and today be one of the idle rich instead of a bitter renter. But even I could buy now, would the investment be the same?  Schtuff does not think so:

Not only do we doubt that the rate of appreciation will remain the same, but we hope with all our might that it doesn’t because not a damn soul will be able to afford a tank of gas let alone a modest house in Glen Park.

I have to agree: it just can’t continue; those halcyon days are gone with Kurt Cobain and the Dot.com launch parties (oh, if I only knew the open bars would end, I would have drunk so much more!) of the 90′s. So this brings me back to my original question: what’s the best investment now, if not real estate? Hopefully the answer is pretty clear, for it can only be…

time machine SF: Your Best Investment?

…a time machine.


  • anna

    David- thanks for the reminder. Takes the capital B out of my "bitter" renter status.

  • David

    Sure, I understand it's entertainment value, but it also shows that the appreciation rates are simply unsustainable. By definition, an unsustainable trend will stop.

    Oldrenter--you may have no real estate returns but you also haven't been paying maintenance, insurance, interest and property taxes, and hopefully have some savings that you are making money on.

    Trust me, as a former (and sometime future) homeowner, those things add up.

    D

  • anna

    Thanks, Garrett!

  • red and david. i completely agree with you. the strand of "then vs now" posts were strictly for entertainment and to create a little perspective. there are a ton of variables that must be considered to create accurate numbers, additionally, I could have chosen any 10 year period, but thought the last 10 years was somewhat pertinent.

  • anna

    old renter- you are preaching to the choir as far as I'm concerned. Maybe prices will take a dip with this bubble burst we keep hearing about. If so, and if you're looking for a TIC parnter, here she is.

  • Oldrenter

    I've been waiting for 13 years to finally buy, and every year, prices keep going up. I'm almost 40, and dread becoming a 40 Year Old Renter :(

    Marina, Cow Hollow, Pac Heights went up 10% in 2007, and looks to go even higher in 2008 with everybody getting paid.

    Renting sucks, and has returned me NOTHING after 13 years, and this is me spending my after tax money on rent.

  • me too, SA. I did see them, but it was late in teh game and Kurt was looking unhealthy. Let's go back to a bit earlier, when they were less well known and happier about it all. We're not allowed to change anything though, so don't try to save anyone. I think that's a time machine golden rule.

  • sa

    I wanna use that time machine to go see Nirvana live.

  • anna

    thanks, Red and David: you both bring up some interesting ideas. I am going to try to get Garrett from Schtuff to come by and drop us a line also.

  • David

    Can't just extrapolate trends in a linear fashion from a recent outlier. Things revert to the mean, i.e. home prices in the Bay Area being 6X income or 25X annual rent. Unless you think median income in 2017 will be over $500K.

    Notice from 87-97, all that 64% appreciation occurred from '87-'90. Kind of like '02-'05. Followed by 7 years of going nowhere...hmm...

  • anna

    Tha'd make things just about affordable for me! Haha...I think I need to think about moving.

  • David

    Or he could have used the prices from 1987-1997.

    On average all items went up in SF 40% from '87 to '97.

    Home prices?: Up 64%. Significant, but not more than doubling. Also from 1990-1997 SF home prices appreciated a grand total of 0%.

    I'm looking forward to 7 years of 0% appreciation here.

  • Red

    The numbers were even more alarming a year and a half ago, before values started dropping... so 1997 to 2007 isn't the best (worst?) 10 year period possible, but close.
    Actually, I'm just about sure we will have a repeat of the peak in 1990 to 1997; the value of an SF home went up .... 0. Seven years from the previous peak before homes were worth more. ( this comes from the Case - Shiller index for SF area, peak in June 1990, new high in Oct 1997) The bottom was in Feb. 1994, 12% lower than the peak.
    I bought my home in 1987, values went up 63% in the three years between then and the peak. Thought I was rich.
    Heres a link if you'd like some historical perspective.
    http://www2.standardandpoors.c...

blog comments powered by Disqus
close