Shared Top Border
sdcia_head3.jpg (14795 bytes)
SDCIA Message Board
Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 7 of 7     «   Prev   4   5   6   7
Greg

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,054
Reply with quote  #181 
Quote:


He seems to make a big leap at the end of the article. The declines he mentions (like Vancouver) were driven by punitive taxes against foreign investors. Why is that going to happen globally?



daveklee

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 79
Reply with quote  #182 
Quote:


https://jeffvoudrie.com/independent-review-harry-dents-predictions-financial-advisor-jeff-voudrie/
Greg

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,054
Reply with quote  #183 


There is nothing wrong with posting the occasional hyper link. But it's more interesting if you at least post a comment about why you are posting it.
daveklee

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 79
Reply with quote  #184 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg


There is nothing wrong with posting the occasional hyper link. But it's more interesting if you at least post a comment about why you are posting it.


Sorry, the link I posted just shared an evaluation of previous predictions from Harry Dent, which the article folks were discussing was referring to.

 

GeorgeB

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 607
Reply with quote  #185 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg


He seems to make a big leap at the end of the article. The declines he mentions (like Vancouver) were driven by punitive taxes against foreign investors. Why is that going to happen globally?


I agree that Vancouver's decline is unique to itself. I haven't done any research lately, so I don't have a personal opinion on the subject.
JohnnyCash

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,617
Reply with quote  #186 
I believe there is a reason Harry drew his conclusion knowing that the initial reason for the Chinese and other foreign capital to have left Vancouver was due to rising property taxes.

If the Vancouver market (and by extension US market) had been robust with low vacancy, rising prices and rising rents from now into the foreseeable future then Chinese and other investors would have absorbed the additional cost of new property taxes.

What Harry is saying is that the Vancouver market is weak and all it took to prove the point was a modest rise in property taxes.

So the increase in property taxes, a relatively small amount when compared to purchase prices or monthly rental income, was all it took to push the Vancouver market negative for investment purposes.

Implied in Harry's analysis is the inevitability of the crash in Vancouver home prices. He is saying we were only one uptick in property taxes away from the top in the Vancouver market. If it hadn't been increased property taxes it would have been something else that exposed the top.

The increase in Vancouver property taxes gives a numeric measure of how close the market was to a top in dollar terms.

It's the old straw that broke the camel's back proverb. It could have been any straw, the point is that the market was fully primed for a crash.

The Vancouver situation reveals a brewing problem in Marin County. Remember about a year or so ago we noted that 2/3 of the high end properties listed failed to close! See Deflation...Inflation...Stagflation.

__________________
"Nothing knits man to man like the frequent passage, from hand to hand, of cash." Walter Richard Sickert
JohnnyCash

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,617
Reply with quote  #187 
Ahem.... As I was saying above  ---- (I read the following story AFTER posting the Dent response above)


The top end has hit a peak, not just in Vancouver.

Are we running out of flight capital?

The implications abound!


"I’ve Never Seen Anything Like This Before" - The Housing Markets In The Hamptons, Aspen And Miami Are All Crashing

Tyler Durden's picture
 

One month ago, we said that "it is not looking good for the US housing market", when in the latest red flag for the US luxury real estate market, we reported that sales in the Hamptons plunged by half and home prices fell sharply in the second quarter in the ultra-wealthy enclave, New York's favorite weekend haunt for the 1%-ers.

Reuters blamed this on "stock market jitters earlier in the year" which  damped the appetite to buy, however one can also blame the halt of offshore money laundering, a slowing global economy, the collapse of the petrodollar, and the drastic drop in Wall Street bonuses. In short: a sudden loss of confidence that a greater fool may emerge just around the corner, which in turn has frozen buyer interest.

[hamptons%20house_0]

A beachfront residence is seen in East Hampton, New York, March 16, 2016.

We concluded this is just the beginning, and sure enough, several weeks later a similar collapse in the luxury housing segment was reported in a different part of the country. As the Denver Post reported recently, high-end sales that fuel Aspen’s $2 billion-a-year real estate market are evaporating, pushing Pitkin County’s sales volume down more than 42 percent to $546.45 million for the first half of the year from $939.91 million in the same period of 2015.

The collapse in transactions means that Aspen’s high-end real estate market "one of the most robust in the country, with dozens of options for buyers ready to spend more than $10 million" finds itself in its first-ever sustained nosedive, despite "dense summer crowds, soaring sales tax revenues and high lodging occupancy."

Like in the Hamptons, the question everyone is asking is "why"? There are many answers:

 
 

Ask a dozen market watchers why, and you’ll get a dozen answers. Uncertainty around the presidential election. Fear of Trump. Fear of Clinton. Growing trade imbalances with China. Brexit. Roller-coaster oil prices. Zika. Wobbling economies in South America. The list goes on.

“People are worried about all kinds of stuff these days,” says longtime Aspen broker Bob Ritchie. “I’ve never seen anything like this before.”

The speed of the collapse has been stunning. Until just last year, the local market was beyond robust, with Pitkin County real estate sales hitting $2 billion in 2015, a 33% annual increase driven largely by sales of homes in Aspen, where prices average $7.7 million.

This year, however, "a slowdown in January turned into a free fall." Sales volume in Pitkin County is down 42%, according to data compiled by Land Title Guarantee Co.

Almost all of that decline is coming from Aspen, where the market is frozen. Sales in the Aspen-Snowmass market in the first half of the year were the bleakest since the first half of 2009, and inventory soared to levels not seen since the recession.

[aspen%20house_0]
High-end sales that fuel Aspen’s $2 billion-a-year real estate market  are evaporating

The statistics are stunning: single-family home sales in Aspen are down 62% in dollar volume through the first-half of the year. Sales of homes priced at $10 million or more — almost always paid for in cash — are down 60%. Last year, super-high-end transactions accounted for nearly a third of sales volume in Pitkin County.

“The high-end buyer has disappeared,” said Tim Estin, an Aspen broker whose Estin Report analyzes the Aspen-Snowmass real estate market.

"Aspen has never experienced such a sudden and precipitous drop in real estate sales," according to the post.

Worse, it's not just the collapse in the number of transaction: even more disconcerting for brokers who have always trumpeted Aspen as a safe and lucrative place to park a huge pile of money: Prices are dropping.

In the first half of this year, the average price per square foot of Aspen homes dropped 22 percent to $1,095 from $1,338 in 2015. Recent Aspen sales also closed at more than 15 percent below listing price, a rare discount.

Some brokers suspect that the frenzied sales and pricing pace of 2015 was not sustainable. The present decline is a correction, they say. “I think a lot of people thought we would go to the next level in 2016. Take the next step up and that step got resistance from buyers,” said longtime Aspen broker Joshua Saslove, who just put an Aspen home for more than $10 million under contract. If it closes, it will be just the fourth sale above $10 million in Aspen this year, compared with more than a dozen by this point last year.

“I think a lot of developers thought they would push their, say, $5 million properties to $6 million this year, but no one is buying,” Saslove said. “I don’t see that nonchalance or cavalier attitude any more.”

To be sure, Saslove is hoping that a rebound is coming; that however, may be overly optimistic and first far more pain is in store especially if one considers what is taking place in yet another formerly red-hot housing market, where suddenly things are just as bad, because as Mansion Global reports...

Luxury condo sales in Miami have crashed 44%.

According to the latest report by the Miami Association of Realtors, the local luxury housing market is just as bad, if not worse, than the Hamptons and Aspen.

The latest figures out of Miami this week showed residential sales are down almost 21% from the same time last year. But as bad as this double-digit decline may seem, it pales in comparison to what’s happening at the high end of the market.

A closer look at transactions for properties of $1 million or more in July shows just 73 single-family home sales, representing an annual decline of 31.8%, according to a new report by the Miami Association of Realtors. In the case of condos in the same price range, the number of closed sales fell by an even wider margin: 44.4%, to 45 transactions.

The Miami housing market, and its luxury segment in particular, has been softening for the past year with high-end condos sitting on the market for twice as long as they did a year ago and sellers offering bigger discounts amid an increased supply.

[miami%20condo_0]
Number of closed sales for Miami condos priced over $1 million fell by 44%

In July, townhouses and condos of $1 million or more waited, on average, 162 days for a buyer, a 1.9% increase over a year ago and the longest time of any other price range, according to the report.

As in the previous two markets, the locals want something to blame, in this case the strong dollar, which has significantly increased the value of properties in other currencies, has been blamed, and perhaps rightfully so as sales to foreigners—an important client base, since international buyers  acquire more homes in Florida than in any other state, according to the National Association of Realtors - have tumbled.

Real estate appraiser and data expert Jonathan Miller said that Miami is behaving like most of the rest of the U.S. housing market, which is in fairly good shape overall “but soft at the top.”

As noted here over the years, In the case of Miami, like in other most other coastal markets such as New York and Los Angeles, the housing boom was heavily boosted by foreign buyers, who used US luxury real estate as their new form of anonymous "offshore bank accounts" courtesy of the NAR's exemption from Anti-Money Laundering Provisions. However, after the recent drops in commodity prices and the spike in the USD, they have scaled back their purchases.

“The international component is not as intense,” Mr. Miller said.

Depsite the slowdown deals are still being done, with cash the preferred form of payment of foreign buyers in the U.S., - some 43% of all sales in Miami in July were closed in cash, however down from 48.1% the same month last year, according to the latest figures.

Other potential buyers are also stepping back: cash sales for townhouses and condominiums, an indicator of investor activity, hit their lowest level in a year last month: 633 transactions, representing a 30.4% year-over-year decline, according to the report.

As for the forecast for the coming months, sales activity doesn’t look likely to surge. There were 1,272 pending sales of townhouses and condos in Miami in July, which means 25.4% fewer transactions waiting to close than in the same month in 2015 and the lowest number so far this year. Meanwhile, as a result of a building boom, luxury condo inventory is up 47.8% from last year, with 2,482 units worth $1 million or more waiting to change hands; this means that sellers of high-end condos will continue to face stiff competition, prompting even fewer transactions and/or lower prices.

So far, the collapse at the luxury end has failed to transmit to the broader market, less impacted by lack of foreign demand, however as we documented two weeks ago, it is only a matter of time before the overall US housing market suffers as well. The only question is whether the NAR and the US Census Bureau, who tabulate the "goal-seeked", seasonally adjusted data, will admit it before or after the presidential elections. The likely answer: it depends on who the next president is.





__________________
"Nothing knits man to man like the frequent passage, from hand to hand, of cash." Walter Richard Sickert
bennychav1

Member
Registered:
Posts: 1
Reply with quote  #188 
If you want good returns in real estate, check out this site:  http://landing.patchofland.com/utah
larrywww

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,076
Reply with quote  #189 
Jonathan Smoke of Realtor.Com has prepared a list of the 10 highest appreciating markets.

His conclusion is that these markets aren't in a bubble, but are showing signs of overheating.  I'm not going to get into a debate about that in the abstract because that may sound like semantics.

To me, the interesting thing is that they rank the appreciation from 2001 (on the theory that 2006 bubble was abnormal compared to a normal market, I guess, I don't know).

But if you want to look for overbuilding in the present situation, I think you need to look at submarkets.

1. Thus high rise condos may be overbuilt in certain cities, even though new home building still hasn't recovered in a lot of markets.

2. I have read that really expensive properties in New York may be tanking.  But I also read that if there is any property in the million dollar range, it is bought very quickly.

If what you mean by a bubble is something that means that investors can think about going back to buying mode full speed ahead like in 2009 to 2010, there is almost nowhere that I see that to be true.  If one defines bubble as an entire market tanking, I don't see that really, only maybe in certain price ranges or submarkets.

Anyway, he used 6 criteria to determine if there is a "bubble" (one of which is whether there is flipping going on).  Here is the website (for some reason I can't copy from it.) 

I'm not sure whether Bruce (who has a presentation in early October) would consider this flipping or speculation at this point.  But in any case,it looks like there is still some flipping that is going on even in this market).

Most of the current list offers no real surprises, but the inclusion of Fresno does seem rather interesting.  Usually during a run up the secondary and tertiary markets start to inflate because there is nowhere else to buy at reasonable prices----I would not have thought that Fresno made to the top 10, but there it is.

https://honish.com/top-10-cities-in-a-bubble/


The problem that I see of most "bubble" discussions on the web is that they aren't quite as thoughtful about criteria-----most of what you see on youtube is either an anonymous website or a realtor.  Tyler Durden, notoriously, is a nom de plume----and zerohedge is devoted to bad economic news--it's their stock and trade.  (There was an article not too long ago about someone who left the website and made some accusations about their approach.)

The other alternative for "bubble" discussions is the case Schiller index, which is now measured by Standard & Poor so that January of 2000 is considered the standard (not quite sure why)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case%E2%80%93Shiller_index.

I know Schiller himself (as opposed to his index, which he no longer manages) pretty much thinks that real estate flipping is evil and that the entire market should be taken over by Wall Street.  

Here is another website that shows price appreciation per state at various times----all the way back to 1975 if you are so inclined.   
http://www.estateofmindsites.com/subscriber_new/map.php?user_id=1

What I like about this website is that you can see appreciation (1) since 1975 (2) 10 years back (3) 5 years back (4) 1 year back and (5) last quarter.

Predictably, California shows the greatest price appreciation since 1975---followed by Washington State.


GeorgeB

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 607
Reply with quote  #190 
The Housing Cycle: Market by Market


http://realestateconsulting.hs-sites.com/the-housing-cycle-market-by-market?ecid=ACsprvvF8fesZ30Qu473e2TYaJGUOF3V9_urPwj8nlpYiYY2JD6_wsb5nzvM6qjW_oc9yXxMYNWr&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=34715937&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9mKz77BpSJGw0r5sPImmp8Q0bco-U3twdSM9T_jEk5U9fWZkWUfxJxo5qNKYVGkf30HVUykCRkNPbFUPwACTHP0SVZVA&_hsmi=34715937
larrywww

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,076
Reply with quote  #191 
Thanks, GeorgeB.

It's a very interesting graph and, of course, I really respect John Burns since they are the favored economists for making forecasts about home construction.

I wish I could see the data set that accompanies the graph----do they rank them within each Phase?  It seems like that is true.

I very much like their idea that each market peaks / crashes at their own pace---which I'm sure is true but no one has ever mapped out.

Does the fact that a city  appears earlier on Phase 3 mean that it peaked first?  I think that must be true, which means that Riverside / San Bernardino and Phoenix peaked very early---which explains why the hedge funds went their first.  

It says that San Bernardino / Riverside is still 20% to 30% below its former peak.  But since its former peak was a really artificial speculative one we may never see again, does that really matter all that much?

They mention 4 cities that are in the 7th inning---and investors are starting for the exit door.  I would have thought that it would have been more like the 8th or the 9th, but I don't base that on any figures, just given the amount of appreciation we have already seen.  Again, the fact that it hasn't reached the prior market peak doesn't mean anything since we no longer have pulse financing and other crazy lending policy to supercharge the market.

Chicago is still in the early recovery phase----the only such state?   Does that mean one would move one's chips to Chicago?  I don't think so, but I have heard that Chicago is slated to move to a more volatile state (like what you see on the coasts) rather than just a cash flow state.   Right now the state of Illiniois is an economic mess, can't even pass a budget, I hear it's a really bizarre situation.  But since it is suffering economically, I doubt an investor would want to go there.

If you read this graph this way (not 100% sure), but then it means that Los Angeles peaked very late.  

Does this mean that we should have gotten into a "peaked early" state and then transitinoed into a "peaked late" state?   To a certain extent, Bruce Norris may have done this by investing in lots near Orlando.   The question is whether the transactional costs would eat up all  your profit if you made this kind of maneuver---it's expensive going out of state.  I am not at all sure about this---I doubt I would want to go out of state again unless it was a truly killer deal, etc.

If what they appear to say on the graph is true, then Bruce Norris is categorized as the "dumb money" since he exited before the technical peak.  Not sure that is true----and given that the rate of appreciation has declined so much, I'm not at all sure those Phase 3 markets are going to hit the euphoria standpoint of the Bay area, etc.  I am not at all sure that Riverside is even going to reach the Phase 4 stage---it seems just as likely that the price rally will peter out.  The market will die "not with a bang, but with a whimper".

The other thing that is interesting is that they are advertising a book about economic data and demographic shifts----Big Shifts ahead---that looks very interesting.

I don't think that John Burns is appearing at I Survived this year, too bad, it would have been interesting to hear about the new book.


GeorgeB

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 607
Reply with quote  #192 
I have been following John Burns for a long time. They used to publish numbers way back, but they stopped doing that.

It appears that the MSA's are ranked, but one can't be sure. You might want to contact the author Rick Palacios and ask him.

I haven't done my own research lately, so I'm not sure how accurate their opinion is, but it's one more piece of the puzzle that helps. If Bruce Norris has
decided to sell, I would give that serious consideration considering his track record, and especially the reasoning behind his decision.

Their book Big Shifts Ahead seems to be similar to the work Harry Dent does. It would be interesting to see if they came to similar conclusions.
manatee

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 18
Reply with quote  #193 
Where do you think San Diego would fit in here? Close to OC in the graph?
larrywww

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,076
Reply with quote  #194 
I think your question is a good one, but I really don't have an equally good answer.

The graph surveys "the 20 largest new home markets"---which, I assume, means new home construction.

Should SD be within the top 20?  I would certainly have thought so.   I mean, they must at least beat Nashville, Charlotte and Raleigh since this is a much bigger MSA.

How to explain this? 

To make a long story short, however, I emailed the author and he replied that SD was just below LA on the graph.

Why they don't just put it on the graph?  Not sure.


GeorgeB

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 607
Reply with quote  #195 

The big cities with the most affordable rent prices are ...

https://www.aol.com/article/finance/2017/02/01/the-big-cities-with-the-most-affordable-rent-prices-are/21705061/?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000058&

larrywww

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,076
Reply with quote  #196 
Bruce Norris presented his 2nd radio show interview about his report---a really fascinating interview where he speaks (in part) about the current market, some comments about Las Vegas and San Diego (in answer to specific questions).

One of the interesting questions his report addresses is:

1) Normally, appreciation in California starts on the coast and moves inland.  It starts from Orange County / LA County, then moves to Ontario / Rancho Cucamonga, then moves to San Bernardino / Riverside, then to Victorville / Hesperia / high desert, then Barstow.

So what is wrong with the current cycle?  If you invested far inland you are NOT going to reach the kind of profit that one would normally see in a normal market.  This is why Bruce Norris isn't concerned about inland areas being overvalued---but he is concerned about whether they will hit their normal peaks.

This may explain why the Bay Area has exploded, but maybe Sacramento won't hit a normal peak, etc.

So the point of Bruce's report isn't merely a question of when these inland areas will peak---but maybe whether they will peak at all.

Which may dictate a change in strategy----maybe it is safer to invest in the coastal plain in California if one is seeking appreciation, even if the cash flow will be diminished.

Which is another way of saying that the current cycle is so unusual, unprecedented and baffling.

Some areas have only hit 50% of the previous peak, whereas others (50 miles away) are at 100% of the previous peak.

Las Vegas?   Bruce doesn't claim to be an expert on Vegas.  However, he indicates that he doesn't trust Vegas because it's a one-industry town, that doesn't have a solid economy.  And 2nd since Las Vegas passed a law outlawing foreclosures and making an artificial market.  For both of these reasons, Bruce believes he would avoid this market, doesn't really trust it.  (Sorry Bryce, I thought your hypothesis was reasonable.  Though the current market would have required alot of foresight several years ago to end up with a maximum return.  This does NOT mean that buying in Vegas is a mistake, you may very well see some serious returns.  But it's not a path that Bruce would recommend.)

San Diego?  Bruce wouldn't necessarily be in a hurry to sell in this area.

Bruce indicates that he has sold all his rentals in California and was able to 1031 into new houses in Florida which generate twice the rent.

In many ways, I think that even Bruce and his group received some unpleasant surprises from this market, to a certain extent.  I know that Rick Solis, his appraiser, invested in Victorville and the high desert, even though based upon what Bruce is saying now, this area may or may not hit the previous peak----and it sounds like an investment on the coastal plain (Orange County or Los Angeles County) would maybe have performed better---at least in terms of appreciation, though NOT rent.  

Not that Rick Solis---whom I consider a very smart investor----did not do well---since he bought tons of houses the extra return is probably more or less unnecessary to secure his financial future, etc.

But this aborted price rally came as a surprise, not only to Bruce, but to other investors as well---some of them very smart people.

Basically, those who invested in Riverside County, San Bernardino County and Sacramento County---and perhaps other counties----may NOT see the peak this cycle.


Which doesn't mean they did poorly, but maybe not as well as they would have done in a normal market.

So, in part, Bruce's report seeks to identify those area that would be guaranteed to appreciate the next time around.

Bruce also indicates that what will happen in the next year is insignificant, but that what will happen in the next 10 years is VERY significant.

As a post mortem, I think even Bruce Norris was baffled by this last cycle, even though he made serious money from it---and even though it did NOT follow the pattern(s) that most normal cycles follow.  

Indeed, given that Bruce Norris invested in Riverside County, he arguably was one of those who didn't see peak prices for his purchases---even though he clearly made alot of money this time around.  We seldom think about Bruce getting the short end of the stick---though if one had 20/20 foresight, I think the Bay Area (and other coastal areas) would have yielded more appreciation.

On Bruce's old model, one could wait for the affordability number for the entire state of California to hit before exiting.  We are now at 31% and probably not going to hit this number.  So the question is what are the characteristics of the counties that hit the #, even if some didn't.

There's also a double significance to the commentary on the county by county graphic.   The fact that Bruce says there is still room for prices to go up in Riverside, San Bernardino, Sacramento Counties is one sign that they didn't hit the peak---that it would have been better to buy elsewhere.  (And since a majority of the appreciation has been incurred, he is not exactly recommending buying at this time).

And what about Florida---where he could be 2 brand new house for each house from Riverside County that he sold?   Is it about a 1031 exchange---or is Florida the other market that Bruce is going to start studying?

I'm not quite sure what is meant by the 10 year time frame---but he does say emphatically that what will happen in the next year is irrelevant and that he is not afraid of the current market, in general.  (Although  he is building and buying in Riverside area, which never hit its peak.)  It sounds like general economic factors (which are harder to predict, BTW) are going to be pivotal for real estate moving forward.

Bruce also predicted a recession, at least within the next 2 years, and also a net migration loss to other states----and, for this reason, he doesn't believe that there is going to be considerable appreciation going forward---and doesn't advise anyone to really hang on until selling, unless for some reason they can't exit the market any sooner.

A very unconventional report for the unconventional times we live in, I suppose.

GeorgeB

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 607
Reply with quote  #197 

Spring housing: 'Strongest seller's market ever'


http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/24/spring-housing-strongest-sellers-market-ever.html
Greg

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,054
Reply with quote  #198 
I think this is the simplest chart to think about - San Diego Metro in real dollars. Although I don't remember prices way over $600K this chart is San Diego Metro, not the county like the Union Trib seems to track.

Is there a reason to think we won't at least match the 2005 peak?


san metro home prices.png 




http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/08/daily-chart-20




larrywww

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,076
Reply with quote  #199 
I don't know what "price in real terms" means---Is it median price?

One issue with the current market is that bottom has fallen out of it---there is no more entry level, the inventory at the bottom range of the market is vanishing.  

In any case, if it's median price, then it measures: (1) Change in price but also (2) change in inventory.  It may mean that the higher end properties are selling more frequently---they are frequently sold all cash----because loans are hard to get, and inventory is so low that a listing agent won't wait around for a loan in any case.


Greg

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,054
Reply with quote  #200 
Quote:
Originally Posted by larrywww
I don't know what "price in real terms" means---Is it median price?





I think they mean non-inflation adjusted dollars.

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

Policy