The new MB Market Update spreadsheets are available: download the 5/15/08 update by clicking here, or at any time by using the link at the upper-right corner of the main MBC page. Information in this update closed May 15.
We now split up the discussions of our 3 areas west of Sepulveda into separate articles. By necessity, we'll be short on text and pics this round. As always, you can click on a highlighted address for pics & details on active listings via Redfin.
Total SFR inventory west of Sepulveda was at 108 on May 15, just +1 from the end of April. It is, nonetheless, another new inventory record in MBC's year-plus of public market tracking.
In the whole of our subject region west of Sepulveda, we recorded 14 new listings in this 2-week period and 14 sales (new escrows). Nice balance. Some listings returned – some had gone on hold or had sold but fell out of escrow. One listing canceled.
Onward, then, to the details...
Hill Section
There were 21 active SFRs as of May 15.
There were 3 new listings, dreamers all, some might say:
114 N. Poinsettia is a pricey, beautiful, newer home starting at $7.750m. Credit the writeup for labeling it "Andalucian" rather than, say, "Spanish." Someone has been test-driving the home for about a year – oh, that's the agent, too;
- 619 9th is a Cape Cod-style remodel with charms like a beautiful yard & pool, good space, but surprising layout and general need for updates, starting at $4.195m; and
- 1015 Boundary, reluctantly wearing the crown of "most delusional" among new listings, that being the clear choice of MBC readers after it began at $2.480m for 3br/3ba and 2400 sq. ft. on an alley.
One sale (new escrow): 869 3rd, last at $3.750m. This one began at $3.995m last Summer (see "Two Views from the Hills").Sellers paid $2.437m in May 2004, so this looks like a sweet payday of $1m+ when the sale settles out.
A few price changes worth noting...
First, a more traditional move on the new home at 218 N. Dianthus – began at $6.75m, chopped $455k to $6.295m after several weeks with no takers.
Less traditional actions – 2 listings increased their prices:
- 923 1st, on market 4 months, retracted a previous price chop from late April to $7.375m, rising back to $7.595m (see "One Up, One Down"); and
- 312 S. Dianthus, on market only a few weeks, jumped to $3.749m from $3.490m, no doubt reacting to the recent sale at 869 3rd.
53 comments:
yaaaaawn.
I see only 96 active sfrs west of sepulveda, a lot less than reported here.
The listing numbers can be deceiving. The MRMLS shows 234 listings for all of MB and the GSB shows 236. The GSB numbers are up over 40% YOY. Quick question for the realtor types; What is the average percentage of homes listed for sale that are "open" on weekends during a normal buying/selling market? With open houses running over 100 per weekend, that computes to about 45% of listings being open. Is that the norm? It seems high to my totally inexperienced eye. Especially when so few buyers are out there walking around. Not to mention what a pain in the butt holding an open house is for the owner/renter/realtor.
anon 6:49, typically, there is about 30-35% open on a given weekend, but new contruction skews that figure up when there is more of it on the market (like now, for example) because it is easier to hold open without disturbing the owners.
As for your comment about so few buyers walking around, please keep that quiet. We don't want anyone to tell the sellers at 2112 Magnolia who are rumored to have fielded around 13 offers on their pad. Maybe the buyers aren't actually "walking around," but they're getting out somehow.
Anyone ever hear of Melissa Data? It offers a database of zip codes on floppy disks for use on p.c.'s which enables you to easily view monthly sales/purchase prices in any given year for any zip code. It is amazing to see the level of real estate sales/purchase prices recorded at present compared to prior years. What an eye opener! For example, look back at the stats for 2002: Jan to June monthly sales were 316, now contrast that to 2008 Jan to June sales (note we have one week left to go this month) 90 (round up to 100 to be fair.) Also, compare the Average Purchase Price from then to now: 2002 average $826,000.00, 2008 average $1,654,000.00.
In just 7 years, sales of real estate in MB (90266)
tripled, and the purchase price doubled! This certainly contributed to my more "bearish" leanings regarding MB real estate and real estate in general.
Here a condensed sample of the dataset for 90266:
Month/Year Sale # of Sales for Month Av. Price
05-2008 18 1.646
04-2008 26 1.556
03-2008 12 1.717
02-2008 9 1.679
01-2008 25 1.671
05-2007 53 1718
04-2007 54 1.754
03-2007 47 1.736
02-2007 21 1.635
01-2007 33 1.586
05-2006 55 1.782
04-2006 37 1.791
03-2006 51 1.970
02-2006 29 1.777
01-2006 33 1.453
05-2005 63 1.399
04-2005 63 1.510
03-2005 54 1.380
02-2005 34 1.459
01-2005 29 1.274
05-2004 28 1.289
04-2004 44 1.192
03-2004 70 1.519
02-2004 43 1.216
01-2004 36 1.852
05-2003 68 1.058
04-2003 82 1.103
03-2003 59 896
02-2003 50 1.051
01-2003 43 986
05-2002 47 893
04-2002 91 809
03-2002 63 893
02-2002 50 708
01-2002 65 825
Interesting about 2112 Magnolia...MBW I realize this is not considered West of Sepulveda RE but, it does put into perspective the declining market, and what sells first in a declining market: This is a very nice 4/3 family home that has been maintained beautifully, with a newer remodeled interior, that sits on a wonderful 5000 sft. lot with a lovely pool and I suspect the 13 offers may have something to do with the $506 per square foot asking! Nice house with pricing marked to market will always sell first but, only really defines the next step down in this correction. Those who wait to buy will be rewarded with even greater savings.
Mrs. MBC wanted to pick 2112 Magnolia last week, but I stuck to W-of-1 for that round. Woulda been a good one. She liked it bunches and, yes, $1.3m was an aggressive (i.e., good, not absurd) price. They meant to sell.
10:34 - That data isn't acceptable to Costanza so in essence, it is worthless. After all, he will only use metrics that suit his bullish stance.
That being said, thanks for the additional color. I appreciate this type of data and once again, it points to a declining market. Anybody see the existing home data today? 11.2 months of inventory on the market for the US. I know, MB is immune, we are our own micro market, RE is local, blah blah blah
Mookie, not one beach city has more than 5 months supply. Yes, it is VERY different here if the national average is 11.2 months.
You might be right on the beach cities if you have current information, 11:17.
End of April (Trendgraphix): Greater South Bay: 10.6 month inventory; MB: 5.8 months
GSB tracks the national average. MB lags but had been tilting toward a buyer's market. Sales in May might help us back away from the brink.
whoops! was addressing 11:42
GSB - Thanks for the clarification. Like I've said, the Cult of Costanza follows their slogan - "It's not a lie, if you believe it."
11:42 - Don't fight the trend my friend. 5.8 months today, I'm guessing that we'll be at 8 months by the end of summer. Oops, should have posted that one as anonymous, now you can actually track my comments.
Costanza, care to comment on this one? Or would that be going out to far on the proverbial limb? I know you don't want to tell the blog how overpriced a given house is, perhaps you can comment on inventory and where you think it's going.
Mookie, to say that inventory will be higher at the end of the summer is like predicting the sun will set. Sure, it's probably true, but because it goes up in the fall every freaking year!
Current actives in MB: 183
Current in escrow: 57
Currently 3.21 months of inventory using the most widely accepted method for caluclating the stat. Debate it if you wish, but you're really just arguing about where it is relative to all of those other data sources. We're on the low end folks. Greater LA is on the high end. Real estate is local...still.
speaking of trends, here is the inventory level in Manhattan Beach for the past few months:
January 1: 4.2
February 1: 6.3
March 1: 4.2
April 1: 4.1
May 1: 4.3
Today: 3.2
Sorry, Mookie, but I only respond when addressed as Karl "The Swede" Hungus. Am trying to do the exact opposite and not respond to the cluelessness of the COTC. Besides, 3:16 and 3:23 said all that needs to be said (good work, btw).
Cult of Costanza still not catching on, Mookie, (you really do feel the need to emulate me, don't you? I regard that as a compliment). Anyway, don't let me discourage you from trying to get support for your labeling me and the other rational thinkers on this board as a cult ("Kettle? Pot calling - You're black"). Maybe your comrade in cluelessness, "eyeglass boy," will chime in with some support.
3:23, your inventory/months' supply number for April is markedly different from that posted earlier by "GSB is average." That one cited a source, but you didn't. Also is your listing by month for the end of the month or the beginning?
Not questioning your numbers; I don't know if the Trend Grafix numbers offered are really theirs. But I do wonder what possible sources of difference might be.
MBC, those numbers are from MLS reported properties at the beginning of each month (that's why they are dated), with the exception of today.
Hey look at that, dates are right there. Must be Friday :).
I have no capacity to guess why the Trend Grafix data would be at odds with the MLS by such a substantial margin. (TG: 5.8 mos. at end of April, MLS: 4.3 mos. on May 1.)
Do you have those TG numbers? Any theories?
Aren't May and June typically the best months to sell your home? I predict the new escrows go way down again come August...
another astonishing prediction. Wow, you guys are bold.
to say that May and June are the best months to sell is an overstatement. It depends on what you are selling, who your target buyer is, what your price point is, how well-located your home is, the list goes on. Yes, May and June are good months, but so is September! February is another good one.
Mookie: Were you numbers based on your fanastic use of technical analysis on home prices again? That is some skill you have. You have University of Charles Schwab written all over you. I guess those that cannot afford always cast stones. I bet you're the fat guy that blames all your friends for being too skinny...
Yesterday there was a funny fat joke. That wasn't.
Mookie says he's pushing 160 lbs. Probably needs to eat more meat, or stop running marathons. Of course, he could be fat if he's 3' 2".
Speaking of whether financial issues are hitting MB or not...
...I understand there is a major hill property coming on the market due to financial stress of owner who just completed the home one year ago..asking $10M
(i prior posted this to the wrong string - should be in Hill)
PROPAGANDA ALERT!
4:37 is continuing the COTC's propaganda about how everyone who owns a home here is in financial stress, over-extended, etc.
Why don't you COTC loons give it a rest? No one believes that you or Mookie or any of your cohorts in cluelessness have any inside info on the finances of MB homeowners. Plus the fact that there are VIRTUALLY NO FORECLOSURES (or NODs) here is strong evidence that you don't know what you're talking about.
Of course, 900 Pacific (the home to which you are referring) is one of the finest homes in all of Manhattan Beach not located on the Strand so methinks envy and sour grapes are at the root of your speculation.
MBW, Mookie is metaphorically fat. Is that really disputable at this point? Moreover, Huggy and Mookie are Zeppelinesqe fat in their postings. If Mookie and Huggy continue to post at their current levels, their fat assness' will begin to grow at an alarmingly exponential rate and could envelop Hyperion (our local crap factory). And no one wants that. The upshot being, let's try to control crap whenever possible.
To quote Mookie from his senior year at Polk: "You don't want to mess with crap...because crap can be really messy." I doubt truer words were ever spoken.
Huggy- You realize you are arguing with a bunch of 20 somethings that cannot afford to buy a house even if there was a 40% drop in prices.
It's ok, 20 somethings you'll eventually be able to buy, just give it a rest already with you ridiculous posts.
So Costanza, let me get this straight. Inventory has gone down from about 6 months in Feb to only 3 months today, yet prices have declined. Shouldn't it go the other way? Decrease in supply typically means an increase in price. What's going on here? When we ratchet up to 8 months by August I'd hate to have my home on the market then. Thanks for the clarification.
Mookie,
These are not ordinary times. We are in a changing market. Just because supply is down doesn't mean prices will rise nor does the 8 months supply that you project mean prices will fall. I would also be willing to bet that for every property you cite that shows a drop, I can name another that shows an increase. OVER ALL, prices are not rising or falling presently. You will see segments like Tree Section new construction that are getting crushed, but other areas are flourishing like walkstreets West of Highland.
I am new here, but you really seem to be wishing this market into a tailspin so that you can afford something, but the worst is likely behind us...and it wasn't all that bad. I suppose you also think that if nobody buys gas from Shell, Exxon and Chevron for a day that you will affect their profits...Ha!
Mookie- You just don't get it. I'd hate to have you as my stockbroker recommending dog-sh-t stocks. Why do you think everything has to be formula/quant driven. You really live in a box. 5:40 couldn't be more correct in saying that for every price drop he/she could show you a price increase. Not sure if the worst is behind us. If some houses have lost 7-8% in value from peak(I know mine did as I just sold in April). An older tree section home. I really don't think it will decrease another 30% to which you seem to think. Nobody knows, but would be really surprised to see more than another 10-15%. Will that allow you to afford a place, probably not if any of your clients read your comments here which really offer nothing.
5:40 - The thing about RE is that you can't show me prices that have gone up or gone down from a given date, except when they were purchased or sold. Individual homes are not valued everyday and prices aren't quoted in the paper. Yes, I agree, you can show me hundreds, even thousands of homes in MB that have gone up in value since they were last bought/sold. But what you can't show me is that they've gone higher or lower from 30/90/365/730 days ago, unless again, there was a transaction that took place on that home. So when a home sells today for $3mm and the last transaction took place 3 years ago at $2.5mm, that obviously is a 20% increase. What nobody can tell us is whether the house's value is higher/lower since June 8, 2007, or Feb 13, 2008, for example. 6:05 says he sold his house at 7-8% below the peak. How does he know? How does he know it isn't 20% from the peak price he could have received? Did Costanza tell him that?
6:05 - I prefer Wealth Manager. Please use that in the future. Picking stocks... that is so Merill Lynch or Smith Barney. by the way, I've never said prices would decrease 30%. Please support your statements. It's not a lie, if you believe it. You think that only 10-15% additional decline is in the cards? Where did you pull that % out of? Is that just your gut feeling? Let's say that happens... Since you're saying we're already down about 7-8%, another 10-15% takes us down approx 20% overall. On a $3mm home, that makes it $2.4mm. From your mouth to God's ear, I'll take that any day of the week and will wait another year if need be.
Many of you are so, so gullible. Don't you realize all Costanza and I do all day is try to get you to think outside the box? We have opposing views, we respect each other (at least I respect him), and we try to challenge your conventional wisdom. Conventional wisdom is a prison and typically it is neither conventional, nor wisdom. 5:40 and 6:05, you're probably the same people who vote for a political candidate because of the way they look or speak. Think differently, do some research, support your posts, it will make them much more valid in the future.
mookie said: "Many of you are so, so gullible."
What a loser you are. If I ever break a window in my house, I will invite you to stand it its place.
Keep renting, baby. That's all you got. Too bad NY didn't work out for you. I guess that is why you are so bitter. Didn't make a dime there in RE.
Mookie- I think I know what my house was worth in the peak times. There's a little thing called comps and there were quite a few on my street and a block or so away. But good try there... thinking that maybe it could have been 20% more. And you're posts are all supported. Haven't seen one yet. All you do is whine, whine, whine.
9:23 is so right. Things must not have worked out for you. You need to blame others for your shortfalls, and there really appears to be many. Good luck Bud Fox.
at 5:18, mookie said, "Inventory has gone down from about 6 months in Feb to only 3 months today, yet prices have declined."
To which I replied at 5:40, "Just because supply is down doesn't mean prices will rise nor does the 8 months supply that you project mean prices will fall. I would also be willing to bet that for every property you cite that shows a drop, I can name another that shows an increase. OVER ALL, prices are not rising or falling presently. You will see segments like Tree Section new construction that are getting crushed, but other areas are flourishing like walkstreets West of Highland."
Then after several cocktails, mookie decided that you can't tell if the market is going up or down when he wrote, "The thing about RE is that you can't show me prices that have gone up or gone down from a given date, except when they were purchased or sold. Individual homes are not valued everyday and prices aren't quoted in the paper. Yes, I agree, you can show me hundreds, even thousands of homes in MB that have gone up in value since they were last bought/sold. But what you can't show me is that they've gone higher or lower from 30/90/365/730 days ago, unless again, there was a transaction that took place on that home. So when a home sells today for $3mm and the last transaction took place 3 years ago at $2.5mm, that obviously is a 20% increase. What nobody can tell us is whether the house's value is higher/lower since June 8, 2007, or Feb 13, 2008, for example."
So, you really nailed this one. Now there is no way to prove a price increase or decrease! You're a genus, mookie! Either that or a freaking moron.
Just had a massage and am looking forward to a relaxing memorial day weekend so no heavy real estate theory this evening from yours truly. However,
Anon 7:39 said, “BTW, I am not bitter or a "Doom & Gloomer".
Uh, actually, you are. How else to explain your apoplectic over-the-top responses every time I chime in with a little logic and balanced thinking? As Mookie says, don't be a hater.
Amazingly, Mookie actually favored us with his weight (no former high school athlete's self-consciousness there) when he said I go about a buck 60.
That's from the waist down, right?
7:48 – another trip down memory lane. That Phyllis Diller, what a character (she’s dead, right?).
Mookie, I too am perplexed by your 9:02 post. Are you seriously stating the obvious, ie, one can't tell what has happened to a particular home's value from one date to the next unless that home was the subject of two sales on the dates in question? That was never the issue on this blog. The discussion here has been in terms of general market conditions. But one can, as 9:50 says, use comps to get a reasonable approximation of your home's increase or decrease in market value from one point to the next. I've done just that in arguing for a lower assessment during the early '90s downturn. Just because there are no home value quotes in the business section doesn't mean that it is impossible to get an idea of what one's home is worth without actually fielding an offer from a buyer. What do you think appraisers do?
Put another way, you, as a one-time homeseller, certainly know about using comps to set a list price.
Ooops, I guess 7:48's tales of Karl "The Man Grappler" Hungus was on the previous day's thread. The jury's still out on whether 7:48 is a talented and creative mind or just disturbed (it's a fine line).
Hold on, so you are telling me that we do use comps to sell homes in MB? Well, I think you better tell many of the current sellers that as well. Especially 30th St, as I've obsessively pointed out a number of times on this site. Or 473 31st. Or 468 33rd. Or 429 27th...
Comps are exactly that, comps. I grant you it's the best way to value a home, but there is little in regard to exact numbers. That bird who said he was down 7-8% based on comps? I disagree, I looked at his house and say he was only down 5.2%. My wife saw it and she said it was down 9.4%. Get it, comps work in generalities. Again, I realize that is the best you can do in RE.
As for appraisors being the best judges of RE values... Do we really want to get into that one? Based upon the bogus appraisals that took place around the country, including MB, over the past 3 years, I think we should probably lay off that discussion.
Costanza - read my last paragraph again on my 9:02 post.
Mookie like bananas, bananas good.
Mookie no like real estate, real estate bad.
PROPAGANDA ALERT!
The Shorewood Mafia strikes again.
Mookie aka Bud Fox to star in Wall Street sequel. Oh wait, Mookie isn't smart enough to be able to work at a Hedge Fund. Go back to pitching those stocks, Bud.
Hey Bud- I'll trust my gut any day over you. Is your crystal ball any clearer than mine? Just a prediction based on history that we could be down 25-30% just like the 1990s. Why would one expect it to be a whole lot different this time around? I'm actually trying to figure out where we are in this cycle as you should be rather than wasting time posting worthless negative unsupported comments on this blog.
I'm not telling you to buy a house now. Where do I say that anywhere in my post.
Blue Horshoe loves Annacon Steel...
Karl Hungus vs. Bud "Mookie" Fox... Now that would be great tv.
Mookie, you need to re-read my comment, and, as I always admonish, read for comprehension this time, something you and your fellow COTC seem averse to doing.
We talk about real estate in generalities - that's painfully obvious to everyone so why make an issue of it? That doesn't mean that someone who carefully tracks comparable home sales in his/her neighborhood can't make a statement about his/her home's value relative to another point in time. Don't be ridiculous. While you can't prove such a statement with the exactitude of historical stock quotes, that doesn't make a studied evaluation of comps invalid.
And I didn't say appraisers were the best judges of real estate but what are you saying? That a good appraiser's estimate of value is no better than throwing darts at a set of random numbers. Again, ridiculous.
I'm coming to the conclusion that your commentary lacks a certain maturity. Basically, you insist that everyone with a home to sell see the market as you see it, from the buyer's point of view (and I'm really stretching the meaning of the word 'buyer' to include you), which means that they accept your biased point of view and be ready and willing to hand over the keys to their homes to you at mid -'90's prices. That's not going to happen and as soon as you grow up and realize that, the less angst you'll exhibit on this blog.
Sure, there are unrealistic sellers just as there are unrealistic buyers. If you're truly in the market, the best you can hope to do is look for a home that appeals to you, make an offer you feel comfortable with and if it works out, great; if not, move on. But don't get so emotionally attached to the process that you have to come on here and vent your immature frustration that a particular homeowner with a home for sale isn't doing what you want them to do so you can get out of your rental. It is a free market, after all, a fact that no doubt grates on the COTC's nerves every day (if this blog is any indication).
I'm curious as to why you think that if you spot a home you like, the seller should immediately knock $500,000 off the sale price just for you. If that would make the home an exceptional value, others besides you will see it and the home will attract multiple bidders, even today. Witness 2112 Magnolia which came out at $1,299,000, attracted 13 offers and is pending at well over $1.4 million. How would you have reacted if you were one of the bidders in that situation? I imagine we'd be hearing you rant about that for the next several months.
Bottom line: You need to accept the fact that whatever you think about a home's true 'value', it's still the market, not you, that makes that determination. Unrealistic sellers will learn that in due course just as unrealistic buyers will keep renting.
Oh, and 9:11, I agree - that would be good tv. I'd welcome a grassroots movement to bring The Man Grappler back. I know I'm biased but they really don't make tv like that any more.
9:03 - What does Bud Fox and Hedge Fund have to do with each other. Go back and watch the movie. Gecko ran an LBO fund. Very clear difference, but thanks for exposing yourself for the true "expert" that you are in the finance world. That comment alone claims you as a clear wannabe.
9:11 - I'm going to guess that you're 10:08pm and one of the earlier Anons I responded to, but now you are saying 25-30% bc you don't expect it to be much different. Wait, is it 20% or 25% or 30%? You stated prices are already down 7-8% and that anonther 10-15% could happen. Now you're at 25-30%? Ok, I'll take that. The $3mm home goes to $2.1mm. Sounds good, let's bank that. And what is your rationale for RE not declining more than the last time we ramped up big (assuming you mean the 90s correction). I'm going to go out on that limb again and say that you probably shouldn't base your gut instinct on what happened in the past. I guess you would have been the guy who bought after a decline of 20% in the stock market during the 2000-03 correction bc in 1987 that is what roughly occured. That's what you're basing your logic on? Wow, thank God you aren't in the investment business, whether stocks, commodities, RE, tulips, etc.
George, now I know what you mean when you refer to the people on this site as clueless. I feel for you.
mookie, you know as little about real estate as 9:03 does about your biz. Stick to your expertise and I'll stick to mine. You are in way over your head on the real estate scoop, and your national and regional stats that you love so much are obviously differnt than what we are experiencing locally. Note that I am not claiming immunity. I am only saying that what we are experiencing is far different that the huge run up in inventory (12+ months) and overwhelming foreclosure and distress that plagues some other areas of the country.
Hey Mookie, I believe you are correct that Gekko ran an LBO firm, but Bud Fox technically never worked for him. Bud wanted to work for Gekko and engaged insider trading to impress Gekko in a bid to become Gekko's protege. Bud actually worked at the Merrill Lynch-type brokerage firm where he was arrested. Bud's firm came across as a kind of meat and potatoes mutual fund house where nothing exciting happens. Am I wrong about this? Also, I seem to recall a mention of junk bonds at Bud's actual firm.
I'm in your business, so I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Sorry Mookie, I meant to say at the end "I'm NOT in your business, so I'd love to hear your thoughts."
Thanks,
Mook!
Mookie, Once again you are clueless. Yes I am the one calling you Bud Fox, but now I can see that would be a very big compliment for you. And the sequel to come out is supposed to be about a hedge fund guy, dumbass. So you're right, I know so little about your business.
Once again, you've proven how clueless you really are. But keeping pitching those dogshit stocks, Bud Fox.
For you Mookie, COTC as Huggy refers to you and since you love cut and paste articles so much....
The producer of the 1987 film, Edward Pressman, has signed a deal with Hollywood studio 20th Century Fox to develop a sequel. It will be entitled Money Never Sleeps, after one of Gekko's two-a-penny maxims, alongside "lunch is for wimps and "greed, for lack of a better word, is good".
Pressman declined to reveal details of the plot, other than to reveal that Gekko would now be working on a global scale in the hedge-fund era.
LOL. The Wall Street comments are great. Here is the funny part. Bud Fox got that check for $1mm and thought he hit it big. Anyone in the business knows that this wasn't a lot (even in 86) and wasn't a start of a career...EXCEPT mookie. $10 says, mookie got that $1mm check, thought he hit it big, sold his house flat in Rye, and moved to the big leagues only to find out that the big leagues here are...well, bigger. He just didn't realize that his 5% commish on that annuity he bought with that cool $1mm couldn't get him a home in MB.
Time to go back to NY, stare at the sunrise, and say to yourself, "Who am I?" in that Bud Fox voice. Sorry bro.
Great one 2:43. I would imagine the sun would say back you are Mookie who peaked in HS, scored 4 Tds and lit up his tiny little gymnasium for 30 points. Too bad, there were only 30 people in the stands to see it.
Has anybody ever been to Rye, NY, which I think is where the mook says he is from. It is near Greenwich, CT and the prices put MB to shame. You should try another angle.
That was probably my wife who posted that - but true anyway.
6:17, I didn't post 2:43 even though I agree with him, but it looks to me on realtor.com that prices are pretty comparable to MB. Of course, it looks like you can get a 4,000-5,000 sf house for $2M-$3M on probably close to an acre lot, so really wouldn't compare MB to Rye, even though it looks like a great place to live. So you're pretty much puts MB to shame is probably a fallacy. Two completely different areas and lot sizes. But then again the clueless think they know all.
Post a Comment