455 Lark Rd, Wrightwood, CA 92397
—Apr 28, 2017 Price Changed $229,000—Jan 13, 2017 Listed (Active) $239,000—Mar 29, 2010 Sold (Public Records) $126,000 -21.7%/yr—Feb 1, 2010 Delisted (Expired)—Dec 29, 2009 Price Changed—Dec 7, 2009 Price Changed
—Nov 13, 2009 Price Changed—Oct 23, 2009 Price Changed (Active)—Oct 1, 2009 Price Changed—Sep 9, 2009 Price Changed—Aug 18, 2009 Price Changed—Jul 29, 2009 Listed (Active)—Jun 6, 2006 Sold (Public Records) $320,000 +6.0%/yr—Sep 23, 1988 Sold (Public Records) $115,000
One property and the entire cycle on display. +6%/yr for the 18 years 1998-2006. -22%/yr for the 4 years 2006-2010.
A similar situation:
https://www.trulia.com/property/3056442245-1063-Twin-Lakes-Rd-Wrightwood-CA-92397
| Date | Event | Price | Source | Agents | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/29/2011 | Sold view detail | $112,000 | Public records Public records | |||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| 10/25/2004 | Sold view detail | $280,000 | Public records Public records | |||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| 10/28/1998 | Sold view detail | $112,500 | Public records Public records | |||||||
20 comments:
I don't understand the second one.
Needed work in 2011. A good price but not out of line with then prices.
Good morning. I just watched the 'porn' house ad from previous thread. You west coasters continue to amaze me. thanks.
Good morning . It rained here again.
The house porn wasn't very long. Had no guys.
Do those ladies clean? Or pull weeds?
Morning all. Looks like I will have to put up an oil post soon. Let's see if the overnight carnage continues.
In case tou didn't click through the second house in this post is asking $269,900 and ~$240/sf for a modified A-Frame. Seriously? It was these wishing and sitting properties that warned me last time. If i believed it I'd be buying 50x100 lots for $40k and dropping $120k construction to replicate them all over town.
Could be worse. $300/sf.
https://www.redfin.com/CA/Wrightwood/1681-Ross-St-92397/home/3613665
Unemployment. Down to 4.4, U6 8.6. Close to full employment cr say coyly So what IS full employment cite me figures, somebody!!
Black unemploymen dropped rather stunningly to 7.3%. So if all these figures dropped another .4, and other things equal, would that be full employment?
It's hard to know when we *are* at full employment. History shows, thanks to the business cycle, we don't seem to stay there very long.
We will know when we *were* at full employment though, because highly compensated economists will once again publicly tell us there's no need to panic over employment reports, while secretly panicking in private.
I could be wrong of course. Perhaps the unemployment rate can level off and stabilize at an optimal level forever. Maybe the Fed has finally figured out how to permanently put a stop to recessions. Maybe this time, unlike their nearly 20 previous failed attempts since their creation, it's different. ;)
Mark! Hi!
Hours worked up a tick, but still low. Today's UE report is a positive mixed bag especially the wages and drop in participation rate. could be worse. 🎶😎
Hey Mark. Yeah, economists make astrology look like a hard science.
It's the wages now. Clearly no limited supply upward pressure and keep in mind the number of large minimum wage hikes that should have spiked the y-o-y increases.
Well at what point should lower unemployment rates push wages up?
Once the UK figures it out, perhsps they'll let us know!
UK unemployment is as low as 1975 – but why aren't wages rising?
P.S. Hi! :)
Productivity stopped being shared in the low to mid 70s. Unemployment for the year 70 or 71, now I forget was 3.9, the following.year it went up to 5.9. I therefore hypothosize that if the rate went down to 3.9, and the U6 to 8.1, and black unemployment to 6.8%, we would see productivity shared and wages rise. Actually black unemploymen would prolly go lower.
Until capital costs no longer encourage automation I doubt wages will be supply driven.
New post.
Well, hopefully, we shall see.
Liars, damn liars, and statisticians
Post a Comment