Another reversion!!! Say it ain't so!
2123 Garnet AveSan Diego, Ca. 92109
This is a conversion that was purchased in 2005 for about $2.7 million. The developer who purchased it has since been doing a renovation (that isn't completed yet) on all the units in the complex and just put them up for sale. They now have granite countertops, stainless steel applicances, w/d in each unit. In short, he did what he could to make the places seem modern. The things that really tell you that it was a conversion are as follows:
1. Only 1 parking space for each 2bdrm
2. Small units (550 and 750 sqft'ish for 1 and 2 bdrm respectively)
3. No pool/spa/weight room
I'm a little surprised that he was able to do the conversion considering having only 1 parking space for a 2bdrm condo. I was under the impression that a restriction was placed which didn't allow this anymore.
Doing the math on this complex, he has 4 units that are 2bdrms which he is trying to sell for an outstanding figure of $450,000 each and he has 4 1bdrms that he's trying to get $325,000 for. This means that if every single unit sells for his asking price, he'll get about $3.1 million (and he's using some of the space for his own office, so it's not a total loss). This may look like he's trying to make a $400,000 profit, but it's not that simple. With all the construction costs, permit costs, commissions, etc.., he'll be lucky to break even on the deal.
I doubt he'll sell for what he wants/needs to sell for. You can get a 1bdrm condo in pb for the 200's and a 2bdrm in the 300's. (closer to the water and not on friggin Garnet Ave) Evidentally, he shares my sentiment as he is now offering the places for rent as well. He's attempting to get $1300 for the 1bdrms and $1650 for the 2bdrms. (the 1bdrm price is too much, the 2bdrm is on the high end)
This is interesting because it gives us a direct buy-rent comparison that we can then plug into a rent vs own calculator to see what we get.
For the 1bdrm:
I used the following figures:
Rent - $1300/mo
Annual rent increase 3% (inflation rate, rounded up)
$325,000, 6% fixed mortgage with all closing costs paid for by the developer (100% financed, but no PMI)
Flat home appreciation (that's closer to the NAR's estimate, not mine. I think it'll go down)
$2712/yr HOA fees
Selling costs 6%
28% tax rate
Using these figures and the developers own prices, it would take 16 years of owning before you would have an advantage to owning.
Note that this is conservative because it expects the following:
1. You do NOT invest the difference between renting and mortgage. You put it in a 0% checking account or in a shoebox.
2. Your property does not depreciate. (I mean it never happens... right?)
3. No maintainence is necessary.
4. HOA fees don't go up.
| Sell After | Renting | Owning | Sale | Advantage of |
| Year | Cost | Cost | Gain | Owning |
| 1 | 16,068 | 24,727 | -15,509 | -24,168 |
| 2 | 32,618 | 49,524 | -11,272 | -28,177 |
| 3 | 49,665 | 74,393 | -6,773 | -31,502 |
| 4 | 67,223 | 99,340 | -1,997 | -34,115 |
| 5 | 85,307 | 124,370 | 3,073 | -35,989 |
| 6 | 103,934 | 149,487 | 8,457 | -37,096 |
| 7 | 123,120 | 174,697 | 14,172 | -37,405 |
| 8 | 142,882 | 200,006 | 20,240 | -36,884 |
| 9 | 163,237 | 225,420 | 26,682 | -35,501 |
| 10 | 184,202 | 250,945 | 33,521 | -33,222 |
| 11 | 205,796 | 276,588 | 40,783 | -30,009 |
| 12 | 228,038 | 302,356 | 48,492 | -25,827 |
| 13 | 250,947 | 328,258 | 56,676 | -20,635 |
| 14 | 274,543 | 354,301 | 65,366 | -14,392 |
| 15 | 298,847 | 380,494 | 74,591 | -7,055 |
| 16 | 323,881 | 406,846 | 84,386 | 1,420 |
How about the 2bdrm:
I used the following figures:
Rent - $1650/mo
Annual rent increase 3% (inflation rate, rounded up)
$325,000, 6% fixed mortgage with all closing costs paid for by the developer (100% financed, but no PMI)
Flat home appreciation (that's closer to the NAR's estimate, not mine. I think it'll go down)
$3072/yr HOA fees
Selling costs 6%
28% tax rate
Using these figures and the developers own prices, it would take 19 years of owning before you would have an advantage to owning.
| Sell After | Renting | Owning | Sale | Advantage of |
| Year | Cost | Cost | Gain | Owning |
| 1 | 20,394 | 33,555 | -21,474 | -34,635 |
| 2 | 41,400 | 67,205 | -15,607 | -41,412 |
| 3 | 63,036 | 100,957 | -9,378 | -47,299 |
| 4 | 85,321 | 134,816 | -2,765 | -52,260 |
| 5 | 108,275 | 168,789 | 4,255 | -56,259 |
| 6 | 131,917 | 202,884 | 11,709 | -59,258 |
| 7 | 156,268 | 237,107 | 19,623 | -61,216 |
| 8 | 181,350 | 271,467 | 28,024 | -62,092 |
| 9 | 207,185 | 305,972 | 36,944 | -61,843 |
| 10 | 233,794 | 340,631 | 46,414 | -60,423 |
| 11 | 261,202 | 375,454 | 56,468 | -57,783 |
| 12 | 289,432 | 410,450 | 67,143 | -53,875 |
| 13 | 318,509 | 445,631 | 78,475 | -48,647 |
| 14 | 348,458 | 481,007 | 90,507 | -42,042 |
| 15 | 379,306 | 516,591 | 103,280 | -34,005 |
| 16 | 411,079 | 552,396 | 116,842 | -24,475 |
| 17 | 443,806 | 588,435 | 131,240 | -13,390 |
| 18 | 477,514 | 624,723 | 146,525 | -683 |
| 19 | 512,233 | 661,274 | 162,754 | 13,713 |
Me, I'm not sure I'll live that long.

10 Comments:
Also notice that for the first 7-8 years, the loss from owning grows because the interest on the loan amount isn't being sufficiently offset by rent.
These calculations are with a 30/year fixed mortgage. I use a rate of 6% because assuming you have absolutely perfect credit and get an 80/20 loan to avoid PMI, your primary loan will be at a tasy 5.6% ish rate while your secondary will be about 6.5% or so. If your credit is tarnished in any way, or if you have to do a stated income loan, you will have to pay a higher rate, and it will take even LONGER to see a benefit in ownership.
Note that I don't mean to assume the developer WILL pay closing costs. I just used that for the calculations. If you have to pay closing, the number gets a little bit worse.
By
Sven, at 1:30 PM
Great find. Thanks for sharing. :) The poor guy who paid 2.7M for this is probably going to take a million dollar bath all told.
By
pv, at 2:25 PM
Yea this location is absolute garbage. You can get newer and cheaper condos off of Garnet and closer to the beach...so why would anyone buy or even rent these? Parking in that area is a bitch as well.
Keep up the good work Sven!
By
Craig, at 2:26 PM
That calculator shows an interesting phenomenon: the assumption you put in for appreciation can make even the most bonehead buy seem reasonable. You said you put in a flat appreciation, but it still looks like the calculator has a hefty Year-over-year increase.
By
irvinerenter, at 2:36 PM
I just shot-up the Q3:2006 reports for Orange County, Inland Empire and Ventura
Also on the blog you can access a plug-in-play rent vs. own calculator that takes 'everything' into account.
thebubblebuster.com
By
AnalysisGuy, at 12:35 AM
Yeah, I think I need to write my own calculator. I'll throw one together and get it posted for you guys. Let me know if there's any special factors you want included into the calculations.
By
Sven, at 3:13 AM
Somehow the calculator should account for inflation.
Part of what makes the Yahoo calculator misleading is the impact of inflation. Rents rise with wages and inflation, so when you put in a rental increase factor, you are putting in an inflation adjustment on the cost side. House appreciation has also tended to rise with inflation, so when this number is put in, it inflates the resale value numbers on the revenue side. So when you look at the "resale gain" number it is inflated relative to its future buying power.
What it really needs is a discounted cashflow analysis. When you properly discount the out-of-pocket costs up-front and factor in the "gain" several years in the future, you will see inflation has a dramatic impact on the breakeven crossover point. I would use the inflation factor as the discount rate because you could invest the rental vs. ownership savings in T-Bills and at least match inflation (generally).
By
irvinerenter, at 9:49 AM
After a bit of further reflection I believe there is an easy way to factor in the discounting. In your post you mentioned that there was no allowance for investment of the rental savings: Add one. Keep a cummulative total of savings and apply an investment growth factor or simply use an inflation factor. This will push the breakeven crossover point several years down the road, particularly when there is a big disparity up-front. This would show how bad an investment residential real estate usually is, and it would help dispel the myth of "throwing away your money on rent."
When you really look at the rent vs. own calculator on Yahoo, the "gain" occurs because the accumulated paid principle on your home is a forced savings account. Its like saying your tax return is a "gain" when in reality it is a government controlled forced savings account. If you have the discipline to save and invest the rental savings, and I suspect there are many that are doing that right now, the rent vs. own calculation looks a lot different.
By
irvinerenter, at 11:13 AM
2 questions:
Where can I get a condo nearer the beack i PB for 200-300k?
You should factor in tax savings with the loan calculator or are you?
By
Anonymous, at 11:21 PM
The calculator automatically adds in the tax savings. (that's why you have to enter in your tax bracket in one of the options)
The way it works is when it reports interest paid, it automatically takes off whatever your tax rate is from the interest payments. On the renting side, it also accounts for this by investing that much less money in those years. Obviously, The principal portion payment is not tax deductible.
As for getting a place near the water for 200-300. You have a lot of options.
4015 Crown Point Dr #105 (crown point villas) is right on the bay and they are asking for 299k.
1855 Diamond St #228 (the plaza) is going for the same price.
3933 Jewell was just converted and has a couple of units for sale in the 200's.
I wouldn't buy just yet though. San Diego just had a record setting drop in housing prices last month. Wait till the downward momentum cools off.
By
Sven, at 12:24 AM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home