Real Estate Bubble, look out below - Posted by Jeff, Ca

Posted by David Krulac on July 01, 2002 at 20:24:13:

Chrysler built a car factory in Pa. bought the land developed the property built the buildings, and the state even built a new highway to the plant. There the plant sat with its dirt floors. People bought land on the promise of thousands of new jobs. Even after the plant was built, Chrysler never came.

Later VW did come, but the number of jobs never reached the expectations of Chrysler. After several years the VW plant closed. Later came Sony into the same plant out in the Pa. countryside.

With each good news of a big influx of jobs, people bought land with the hopes of making big money is developing and land speculation. Some few people did make money, but some people that I know still own the property that they bought 2 decades ago. One parcel is now for sale and has been for sale for at least 2 years without a single offer.

Sometimes the rumors don’t happen, and sometimes even when the rumors are true the end result is no bonanza for the land owners either the old timers or the newly arrived.

David Krulac
Central Pennsylvania

Real Estate Bubble, look out below - Posted by Jeff, Ca

Posted by Jeff, Ca on June 29, 2002 at 18:38:45:


I?m interested in how many of you believe residential real estate here in California can continue to rise at at such a rapid rate without a serious decline before moving up again? For instance in my City Roseville, Ca median home prices are at $263,750 source and median incomes for Placer County areas is floating in around 64,244 source or a purchase price to income ratio of ratio of 4.1. This ratio is historically out of whack. The saying is the fair value of real estate is what it will sell of, but if more and more buyers are being price out of the market, WHO WILL BUY?

An another measure of when prices are out of whack is the rent to buy ratio. The current mortgage, taxes, Insurance and PMI payment on the above home with 10% down ($26,375) at today?s rate of 6.75& would be $2,034.14 where the same home would rent for $1,200.00 or a ratio of 1.7. I don?t remember where I seen this ratios mentioned but, when income to purchase prices are over 3 and mortgage payments to rent are over 1.5 look below.

Another measure of a market top is building permits. I called the eight local building departments in my county to inquire about demand for new residential building permits puled by large residential builders. I was told the demand has taper off significantly from last year. These large builders are not gonna stuck with homes they cannot can’t sell in a softer market, so builders reduce the number of permits they pull.

Lastly, I subscribe to services that provide NODs, Trustee Sale and REO for three counties I buy in. NODs are up 32% to 47% from this time last year, whereas California as a whole is up only 4.3%

What are your thoughts?

Re: Real Estate Bubble, look out below - Posted by Janice

Posted by Janice on June 30, 2002 at 15:02:38:

Another student of statistics and fellow (bigtime) southern California investor is Bruce Norris.

Bruce wrote the mid-1990’s book “the california comeback” which predicted the current boom.

I’ve heard hime speak a few times recently and his research leads him to feel that there is still quite a bit of gas left in the California appreciation gas tank.

I don’t want to misinterput or steal his thunder, but I will list a few highpoints of his presentation as I recall them…

The affordability index is still pretty high (30+%), as long as people can afford the housing, prices will creep upwards.

Positive net immigration, newcomers need a place to live.

Low housing starts, coupled with net population growth. Basic imbalance between low supply & continueing demand.

Low interest rates, historically low rates fuels the desire to move up.

Of course your local conditions may vary.

Here is a view from sunny Orange County - Posted by randyOH

Posted by randyOH on June 29, 2002 at 23:03:48:

CA seems to be a special case. I posted a message on 6/28 asking for suggestions for a course or strategy on how to make money in the Orange County market. Take a look, absolutely NO responses. I think that might tell us something, although I am not sure exactly what. I tend to agree with you that we may be getting close to some kind of top in prices. Most of your indicators point in that direction. However, I would disagree with your interpretion of the drop in building permits. That is actually positive for future prices, because it means less supply. When supply goes down, prices go up (not down). But anyway, an indicator that I watch is the affordability index. This is a factor that measures the percentage of households that can afford to buy the median priced house. As of April 02, this factor was 56 for the U.S., 23 for OC, 17 for the SF Bay area and 14 for Santa Clara County (Orange County Register, 6/7/02). I can recall this factor getting down to 20 for OC sometime prior to the last market crash. A friend of mine says it went even lower, but I have not been able to confirm that. So that would tell us that prices could go at least a little higher on the basis of affordability at least here in OC. And, of course, even if we hit a top in prices, that does not necessarily mean the market will crash. It could just go sideways for a long time. However, the history of CA does seem to one of boom and bust. We seem to have a reputation for high appreciation in RE prices, but if you look at the past 15 years, the appreciation appears to be rather modest. For example, we bought our house brand new in 1986 for $262,000 with absolutely no landscaping. We have easily spent $100,000 on landscaping and other improvements. I doubt our house would sell for $500,000 today. That may sound like a lot of appreciation, but if you work it out, it is only 4.4% per year and that is ignoring the improvements. But, of course, that only tells part of the story. After we paid $262,000 in 1986, the market took off and the house was worth about $475,000 by early 1990. Then the bottom fell out and by 1995, the house was only worth about $350,000. And now, seven years later, it is worth maybe $500,000. So where do we go from here? I wish I knew. I think it probably depends mostly on the economy. If the economy continues to recover and stays strong, I think we could have another two years of fairly high appreciation (5-10%). But beyond that, I think the affordability factor will choke off any further price appreciation and the market will go flat for a long time. Just my thoughts for what it is worth.

Re: Real Estate Bubble, look out below - Posted by $Cash$

Posted by $Cash$ on June 29, 2002 at 21:36:07:

I have been buying and selling properties in Nevada and Arizona as a Private Investor for several years.

Several months back I heard about a house in Santa Cruz, CA through a friend of mine. He told me it was on a small river that led to the ocean and in a great area. I thought it really sounds great, so I bought it from an estate sale sight unseen for $240K. I figured how bad can it be the comps came in resonably close. I could always fix it up or whatever and sell it, or maybe use it as a get away from this blasted Nevada heat.

I went up to Santa Cruz to check the house out, When I arrived at he house, I thought you really didn’t do this. The river looked like a drainage ditch. The same house in Las Vegas would go for around $60,000. The neigbors were so close I could here them whisper.

I immediately pulled a House for Sale sign out of my trunk, taped it to the front window. I put my Vegas cell number on the sign and left for lunch.

I didn’t even get to a small deli in the area when my cell started ringing. I returned to the house and I had people waiting for me. The first gentleman I met said what’s the bid on the house? I had no idea what he meant. He explained to me what he meant and I immediately got out my yellow pad and started taking names and bids on the house.

I sold it in three days for $450K. California has my vote…buy …buy…buy. However, I did have to pay $15K for some tax I never heard of to the State.


Dissertation: Crystal-Balling, CA-Style. - Posted by Ronald * Starr(in No CA)

Posted by Ronald * Starr(in No CA) on June 29, 2002 at 20:24:02:


I am impressed with the work you are doing to get accurate information upon which to formulate your view of what is going on in CA.

I wonder if you have any similar statistics for counties other than Placer? Like maybe San Fran or Marin, or, my county, Alameda? I have not done analyses such as you have done, but I would suspect that you will find the ratios even more out of whack here in the San Fran Bay Area.

I work from the assumption that we have to work with a basic economic model and concern ourselves with the supply-demand balance. I have never seen a model of how high residential property prices can go. I have never seen a model, which shows the limitations. However, it certainly would seem that the average person’s income would be related to what they can afford to buy.

Maybe that is why more than one-half of the families in Oakland are renters. They can’t afford to buy. But, the houses are almost all filled up. They are not sitting around empty.

The demand? There are projections for the population of CA to grow mightily over the next 15 to 20 years. And many of those newcomers will not be able to afford to buy a home in Coastal CA. Where then, will they settle? Mainly, apparently in the vast central valley, in which Roseville is located. There may also be pretty high population growth in what I call “The Rim,” which is in the foothill of the Sierras at about 3000-4200 ft elevation. High enough to be cooler in the summer than the valley and above the tule fog in the wintertime. Also, low enough down so that there is not a heavy snowfall burden with which to struggle.

Actually, some of the current residents of higher-priced Coastal CA are the ones who are moving into the less-expensive Central CA areas. Some are people cashing out of their expensive homes and using the money to buy lower-priced homes and investing the rest, or starting a business with some of it. Some are younger people who are renters and cannot afford to buy homes in Coastal CA. So, desiring to own homes, the move over to the lower-priced areas.

When people move out of the Coastal area, that leaving housing units for newcomers. Some of the newcomers are wealthier than the people moving out and so can afford to buy the expensive houses. Some are immigrants who are poor. From what I have observed in Oakland, many of them live very densely in rental properties. Many are younger, unmarried and fill up apartments and houses with several sleeping in one room. And somebody sleeps in virtually every room.

Now, since you are such an analytical person, you might want to study the population projections closely. If you do, I would love to hear your observations on them. I’m sure that the people who do the projecting make some assumptions about the CA economy and the economy of the country and the world overall. Which might be wrong. Maybe there will not be as much growth as they project.

There may be some good statistics available from The Center for the Continuing Study of the California Economy, which is located in Palo Alto. I’m sure they have a website. I remember looking at some of their statistics once.

Supply. For the past 10 years, or perhaps more, there have been fewer housing units built in CA than is needed to provide housing for the new members of our population. My understanding is that this continues and looks like it will do so into the near term future.

If this were so, one would project even more pressure on the existing housing stock and the new units that are being created. Then, we might expect that the prices will continue to go up for the foreseeable future.

I think that the big developers work on the basis of short-term projections of the demand for new units. If they don’t see a lot of sales in two-three years, they will cut back. So, I suppose your local developers are projecting some easing of demand. Do you know if they are starting to build in other areas? Such as Yuba City/Marysville, Chico, Oroville, Redding, Red Bluff? If so, maybe they are projecting more growth in the other areas. From talking to real estate agents in those areas, I know that the demand for housing is intense, especially in the “lower-priced” properties–those under $200K.

But think about this. If there is more demand than the builders project, there will still higher prices, since they don’t build enough to supply all the demand. You may well see increased prices in your area over the next two or three years.
This is my projection: still more appreciation.

How do people pay for their expensive housing? They demand more money from their employers. They spend less money on other things. They move away. Their parents help them out with loans of down payment money. Some of that money comes from refinancing or selling the parental houses, which have huge amounts of equity. Why? Because of the big run up in housing costs, right?

I think that there is one other figure that one may want to study besides the new building and the increased population. That is the median family income, the figure that you find interesting. If professional economists or soothsayers project increased family income, I think that is positive for more expensive houses into the future.

In the past people have said, “The prices can’t go up any more.” And they were wrong. They might not be wrong in the future. I don’t really know. But then, they might well be.

California is attractive for climate, scenery, cultural activities, and a robust, diverse economy, which continues to provide more jobs.

Unless we have a strong recession, I think the population will continue to grow. There is no reason that to believe, as far as I know, that the rate of supply creation will increase. So: higher prices into the foreseeable future.

For some reason, people are always concerned about a “bubble” in real estate prices. When it comes to family homes, it seems to rarely occur. When we have a deep recession, we may find a pause in prices or even a decline. It has happened in the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 1990s–when the recession was the most severe since the 1930s. So I suppose it could happen in the 2000s.

But I am amazed by the strength of the CA economy. Agriculture was dismal in the mid 1980s, and there was the big bust in Silicon Valley around 2000. And still housing prices have gone up. There is a lot of vacancy in commercial and research and development properties in the Silicon Valley, San Fran Peninsula, San Francisco, and here in Oakland. However, there was a recent newspaper article that said that the commercial market, while slow, did not plummet over in Contra Costa County. And, from what I know of the central valley: Sacto, Stockton, Modesto, Merced, there does not seem to be problem with commercial real estate there.

I think you might find it interesting to study the US Labor Department’s projections of which careers or jobs will grow the most in employees over the next couple of decades. I think you will see that CA has a disproportionate share of these industries.

Ok, maybe I am a cock-eyed optimist. And I am sure one can point to negative aspects of the economy in CA. But, I expect that the high-tech industries will grow, and fuel a booming CA for at least several more years, probably 10 or 15, perhaps more. The computer hardware and software people have been hurting for maybe four or five years, if I recall correctly. But, there are signs of increasing demand for their products and services. The biotech field is still chugging along. The 1700s and early 1800s were the years of great discovery in physics, followed by new technologies: trains, automatic looms, telegraph, and phone and electricity.

The late 1800s and early 1900s were the years for chemistry. We have plastics galore, pesticides, and fertilizers, new UltaTide.

Biology has been on the ascendancy–in creative ferment–since about 1950 or 1960. That is when the structure of DNA was first understood. We see continuing huge advances in understanding plants and animals. Now we are getting new genetically-engineered food plants, medicines that make us feel better, live better, work more, and create more. Better pest-control measures.

My view is that in a couple of decades we will look back at the medicine of 1950 to 2000 and be either horrified or laughing uproariously at how primitive it was. I am already doing so.

And, if you look, you will see that CA has a lot of the electronics industry, a lot of the software industry, and a huge proportion of the biotech industry. This augers well for the CA economy for the next 20 years, I would argue.

What technologies will be following on after the biological? I predict the psychological, emotional, human interactions, personal happiness. I think we will see better understandings of how to live a better life. How to interact with people to get more of what we want. Probably better management of government agencies and private businesses. Increased productivity.

Who will be the people that pioneer this new technology? How about those goofballs in Marin County and at Escalon? How about all the soft-brains in the universities and colleges in CA?

Will this be happening in five or ten years? I doubt it. But maybe out 15, 20, years or more. Did you know that the IQ was developed in CA? Lewis Terman at Stanford developed the Stanford-Binet IQ test in the 1920s and 1930s. What if there were to be better measurement of how people fit together into work organizations? There would be better selection of employees, with consequent lower turnover, less cost for training, more productivity. How about if we could reduce mental distress with medicines, chemicals, and ways we interact with people. Could there be more people working harder, being more productive? Might that boost the economy? Of CA, the country, the world?

Well, you asked for my views. Here they are. Any more of your thoughts you would like to share?

I better get going. Got to eat and get out my post cards to try to buy more real estate in Sacramento and the San Fran Bay Area. I want to own more properties to hold for the future. How about you?

Good Investing and Good Investigating***Ron Starr

Re: Here is a view from sunny Orange County - Posted by Jeff,Ca

Posted by Jeff,Ca on June 30, 2002 at 18:00:30:

Hi Randy,

First I?d like to say, I sure hope I?m not coming across as a pessimist. I have always been very positive about California real state. I?m only concerned in the short-term for investment purposes. What concerns me and a large number of real estate professionals is affordability. We have had a lot of investment money come up here from S.F. and Silicon Valley. Many of these investors are cashing in their 401Ks, profit sharing plans and buying rental properties site unseen. As an example, an investor from Fremont, Ca called a agent friend of mine about a home in my sub-division. The asking price was 225K the investor paid 239K he put down 40K has a monthly commitment of $1,761 but only has it rented for $1,325 or a negative cash flow of 400 plus dollars a month. This is just one of many stories I?ve heard. A lot of people of have given up on the stock market, now that equities are approaching reasonable prices and are now throwing money at real-estate like it?s guaranteed to make you a millionaire.

You write ?However, I would disagree with your interpetaion of the drop in building permits? Ask yourself this, if the demand is there why not continuing building?

You write "That is actually positive for future prices, because it means less supply. When supply goes down, prices go up (not down)? Who will buy the supply? The product has to be affordable. No buyers and supply goes up, prices go down

Demand is only there if the product can be purchased readily. You mention your track the affordability index, so do developers for the reason of not over building and getting stuck with millions of dollars of inventory.

Developers such K&B, Centex and Putle to name a few have very deep pockets, for market research. Who am I to second-guess them?

The latest for April 2002 kind scary huh? Main Street Roseville, Ca is up over 20% alone in May

The return key is a wonderful thing. - Posted by Janice

Posted by Janice on June 30, 2002 at 14:44:32:

The return key is a wonderful thing.

Steve wants to know more. - Posted by Ronald * Starr(in No CA)

Posted by Ronald * Starr(in No CA) on June 30, 2002 at 21:26:05:

I received the following via e-mail. Seeing no problem with privacy, I post here for others to see and perhaps comment.

----THE E-MAIL-----**-*

Greeting to you Ron,

I read your comment in response to Jeff?s Stats from placer Co. I am thinking to get into duplexes or 4plexes up there. The concerns that I have is if their rental is stable and demand remains the same for coming years. Do you have any properties up there? Would you do anything up there at these junctions of hot seller?s market environment? Where else in central would focus? I hear there will be a University in Merced. I also understand there will be a big theme park in some where in central that shows the population growth is in that direction.

Any thoughts or directions will be appreciated.

Happy investing

Steve, Ca


I have properties in Sacto County, nothing in Placer, Nevada, El Dorado. Have a house with a partner in Calaveras County. Now that prices are up, I’m suggesting we sell it. I’d rather use the equity for some other investments that I have.

Please see my other response to Jeff titled “interesting.”

I think that each person has to have an investment program that fits that person. Uses the resources that the person has. Jeff has special knowledge about housing tract development that he used to advange in making his purchase decisions. Not that he has explained it, perhaps other people can duplicate his success in their areas.

If you are in Sacramento, I don’t know why you don’t invest there. There is a huge base of properties. There is likely to be continued appreciation there, limited only by the prices of new houses. So, I’d recommend that you figure out some approach that you like and that will extract profits for you in your area.

I think pretty much the whole of the Central Valley of CA will go up in value over the next few years. There may be some areas that will do better than others. You might want to study up and put your bets on two or three of those areas.

Yes, there are plans to build a new UC campus near Merced. But people have known this for years. It is not news. And you have no exclusive information that gives you some advantage over other people. In fact, when it was first rumored that the new campus would be near Merced, people rushed to buy up land nearby. That was many years ago. My impression is that their land declined greatly in value during the great recession of the mid 1990s.

If you want to speculate on future appreciation being driven by some particular event, I suggest that you do so with income-producing rental properties, residential, commercial, industrial, not vacant land. My brother Roger in about 1989 or so bought, with some other fellows, a berry patch which was right next to the old drivein movie site at Woodburn, Oregon. The drive-in was closed and the huge retailer Fred Meyer was going to build a store on it. My brother and co-owners figured they would make a killing when the store opened, selling off their property to somebody who wanted to be next to Fred Meyer. In Oregon the economy tumbled downward starting about 1980 or 1981. Bottomed probably in 1996 or so, has gone up since about 1997. The Fred Meyer store was never built. My brother and cohorts had to pay annually on the mortgage on undeveloped vacant land they owned. Eventually they sold the property, about 1999 or so, if I recall correctly. I think they made a very small profit.

But, it is difficult to make the best investment moves when you are operating on public data and public information. Unless you do better analysis and have a better understanding than do the other investors against whom you are competing. You might try getting detailed information about where the University will be sited. Then study the maps of the area carefully. You know that the immediate area will be impacted greatly. But so does everybody else. And they may overbid you for good investment properties in that area. You might want to study and maybe drive the area yourself. Try to think of some of the impacts that are not too obvious. Maybe a little further away. Where will students live? Where will faculty live? Where will staff live? Will there be commuting down from some part of the foothills, because the back roads will be less crowded than Highway 99 and other major routes near the University? You may not be the only one making these calculations, but there may not be too much competition in this thinking.

Think about secondary effects of the University. Will there be so much demand for new goods that some of the rundown areas of the old parts of Merced will be in demand by companies? Could there be some play there?

Could there be a demand for more airplain flights into the city? And for a bigger airport to handle more flights or larger planes? Is there some way to profit from this? Are there houses that could be bought for rentals that are likely to be needed if the airport expands? If so, you probably will get a superior price when you sell out to the airport authority. Or, will they just use the existing airport more intensively? And that might make some neighborhoods noisier and thus less attractive to renters. So you would want to be sure to avoid buying in those neighborhoods.

The big theme park is proposed for San Joaquin County. I believe the location is West of Lathrop. Again, there is public knowledge of it. If you though there might be some money to be made from changes in the area due to it, you might want to check with the county planning department and find out the status of the proposal.

Oh, and there is another proposal for a Country Music Center North of Red Bluff–similar to Branson, MO. If this occurs it will surely have some major impacts on Red Bluff. Again, you could check with county planners and the government authorities in Red Bluff as to what is going on.

If you are planning to buy duplexes and fourplexes, I assume that you are planning to hold for the long term. If that is so, you buy when you can. It is hard to buy in the past. You can buy in the present. You could wait and buy in the future. This would be particularly advantageous to you if you knew that property values were going to decline to below where they are now sometime in the future, when you might want to buy. Do you know such a thing?

My projection is for continued increases in values over the next two or three years, perhaps longer. Perhaps not as strong of run-ups as recently. But, if I am correct–and I have no crystal ball–you would be better off buying now rather than in the future.

Mortage interest rates are very low now. Getting a low fixed-rate loan could be good for you. It is unlikely that the Fed will hold interest rates down where they are now for a long time, in my view. That means loan rates may be rising in a year or two or a bit more. So, it may better to buy now.

Understand, that while I try to understand what is happening with real estate, I am not endowed with some superpowers forbidden to you ordinary mortals. Careful study of governmental projections and listening to a lot of different opinions can help inform your model of the real estate future. I don’t mind giving my views when I have them. But a lot of the time I don’t make projections on things. Right now, I have read enough to convince me that upward prices are with us for a while in CA. So, I’m convinced. Is there any way to know if I am right or not? Sure – check in with me in five years and I’ll tell you if I was right or not.

To the extent that you can predict better what will happen than most investors, you can take advantage of opportunities that others are missing. One way to do this is to become a specialist in some locale, type of property, or investment approach. There are riches in niches. You do not have to make projections for the whole state of CA, or even for all of Placer County. All have to do is try to understand some small market area and do as well as you can in buying in that area.

I gave you some of the foregoing ideas as demonstrations of how to think about picking areas in which to invest. I can not assure you that the specific ideas I have thrown out are sensible or useable. But, the way of thinking is useful, I feel.

Good Investing************Ron Starr******************

Re: Dissertation: Crystal-Balling, CA-Style. - Posted by Jeff, Ca

Posted by Jeff, Ca on June 30, 2002 at 24:45:52:

Hi Ron,

I value your opinions and I?m in no way predicating a collapse in real estate prices in Placer, El Dorado or Sacramento counties, but I believe the probability of a decline is more probably than an increase over the next few years. I agree that California will continue to grow rapidly, but I think the trick is to buy where the growth is. The last projection I saw was that we would have a population of 34.4 million in 2005 and 41.3 million in 2015. We too are looking at Calaveras County as well as Kern and Tulare Counties for investment purposes. We these counties will grow the fastest over the next five years. K&B and Centex are just starting to tear up it in Kern County. You might find this link or interesting

I come from three generations of builders, my Grand Father was a Area Superintendent for Dinwiddie Construction Co. Dinwiddie was responsible for constructing many of the high-rises in San Francisco a couple examples are the Transamerica Pyramid and the Bank of America Center. My father was a Superintendent for Ponderosa Homes here in Northern California and I to was a Superintendent for Warmington Homes for eight years and have since semi-retired.

I?m sure you have heard the saying ? If you build it, they will come? Well they will if it?s affordable and profitable.

Because my Grand Father and Father where in upper management and attended many builder conferences they had learned when a developer/ builder would elect to make a large capital investment in an area. My Grand father learned that the DEMAND for real estate can be valued much like a stock/security using a discounted cash flow analyses or a simple price to earnings ratio.

The idea here is that large residential developers pour millions into market research such as income levels planned highway construction projects, industries trends etc, before they commit a dime. If the income levels are stable and the income to purchase price is not out of whack, then it makes sense to build.

I very simple but, yet successful strategy my Grand father taught me. Is to buy single family rentals in a new sub-division of 100 plus homes, where the first phase of homes built exceeds 15% of the total project size. As an example, I bought my first investment property in 120 home sub-division. The builder built 32 homes in the first phase in Tracy, Ca in 1984 for $46,500. When the builder started the second phase of construction the price for the same home was $52,000 just four months later. In the last phase our model was selling for 56,500 about a year later. At the time of our purchase the income to purchase price was about 2.5 . My point is the builder knew the demand was there, so we just took advantage of their research. We have acquired many properties using this strategy. In 1999 we bought three identical 3/2 homes in Lincoln Ca in 1998 for 146,000 today we figure they are worth $260,00. At the time of our purchase the price to income ratio was 2.8 kind of high, but there was no signs of new home construction slowing. All you could see was hundreds of new homes being constructed with now signs of slowing. I should also say that buying this way you very unlikely to cash-flow for a year or two , but with the write offs for interest payments and deprecation, it?s wash.

Re: Here is a view from sunny Orange County - Posted by randyOH

Posted by randyOH on June 30, 2002 at 18:45:05:

Your points are well taken and I think you and I are pretty close in our views of this market. Definitely some downside risk and not a whole lot of upside potential because of the affordability problem. All in all, probably not a bad time to sell and put your money somewhere else. Interesting topic, keep us up to date on your thinking.

Okay, I hear ya. nt. - Posted by randyOH

Posted by randyOH on June 30, 2002 at 16:46:45: