11 thoughts on “Irvine Prices by Zip

  1. crucialtaunt

    39.9% and 35.7% – I wanna jump back into the condo flippin’ business again!!! 😛
    —–

  2. Anon1234

    The two zips with very high appreciation have very low unit sales. 12 and 13 data points are not enough. The statisical rule of thumb is to have at least 30 “samples” before one can gain an impression.

    Note that the two zips with 44 and 49 unit sales are both down…92620 rather significantly. I sure would hate to lose 16% on a very large dollar volume asset that is also highly leveraged. That is disaster for most people.

    92603 is Turtle Ridge/Shady Canyon/Quail Hill. Shady is what skews the price up on that zip so much. For those that don’t know, Shady is one of the most expensive estate communities in OC. In no way is it comparable to any other development in Irvine. I am surprised those Shady snobs did not demand their own zip. LOL.

    (Sorry…I run on the Shady trail and the residents there are rudest, most unfriendly people I have ever seen. My joke is that they HAVE to live in an exclusive community because the rest of the would would not want to be neighbors with them!)

  3. waitingtill08

    This looks like a flip to me — even though it says it is a corporate relocation (seems to be a lot of those lately) —

    35 Hidden Trail, Irvine, CA 92603
    (MLS S446750

    According to Zillow it was last sold on 07/13/06 for $2,250,000. It is now asking $2,150,000 — $100K less than they paid.

  4. waitingtill08

    Another flip:

    2 Bramblewood, Irvine, CA 92602
    MLS #: S472587

    Sales History:
    11/10/98 $530K
    07/05/06 $1,150,000

    Today asking $1,289,000

  5. waitingtill08

    And, another:

    7 Green Hollow, Irvine, 92620
    MLS #: S470910

    07/28/06 Sold for $1,230,000

    Today: Asking $1,249,900

    Interesting that the assessed value is only $393,762.

    Every random house I click on is a flip! Unbelievable!

  6. red

    waitingtill08,

    The assessed value hasn’t been adjusted if they just bought in 06. It was based on the previous tax bill.

  7. waitingtill08

    Red,

    Right. I thought it was interesting because it shows that this house originally sold for under $400K. Is it now worth 3X that? I don’t think so. Just goes to show the absurdity of this market.

  8. red

    Yup. that original owner probably bought in ’97 and surely make a ton of money now. Hopefully they will spend it wisely :)-

  9. irvinerenter

    I live in 92612. It is University Park. There is no new construction in this area to lift the prices. That 14% drop is all in the resale market.

  10. irvinerenter

    EasyE,

    You are right, I stand corrected.

    The 14% decline must represent the lower cost units being averaged into the mix. Interesting that an area with construction of new condos would show a 38% decline in sales. Theoretically, lower cost units should move faster in markets when affordability is a problem. Must not be affordable enough.

Comments are closed.