Shopping at Amazon?
Wait! If you click on the Amazon banner link at the top of the page first, HCN will get a percentage of anything you purchase for 24 hours!
Open predictions
Our local book authors
User login
Who's online
There are currently 38 members and 178 guests online.
Currently online
- Bad Dawg Bobby
- nova
- Mike in Long Island
- Rajesh
- RATM
- steelhead
- Lobbyist Ben Dover
- dr munch
- GiezCubed
- Citizen AllenM
- MattFea
- BarleyReturns
- Antipodes
- 1 currency now -yogi
- josap
- JBR
- aleister perdurabo
- Blackhalo
- sdtfs
- robin-lv
- staunch
- shill
- Dickeylee
- NorthStar
- traderwalt
- CitizenPither
- Gary
- eek
- wafdof
- Tom in AZ
- gabyjan
- Former Idealist
- mhdoc
- skk
- MaryAnn
- picosec
- Tom Stone
- curious
Yeah
Damn CR, you are quick.
I bet they regret touting the "increase" in February now . . . makes March look even worse in comparison.
"According to NAR, inventory decreased to 4.058 million homes for sale in March. "
Lenders - Let that PENT UP SUPPLY LOOSE!
I think you have a typo:
According to NAR, inventory decreased to 4.058 million homes for sale in March.
Or I cannot read a graph. It appears that the inventory on the graph is higher.
OR NAR cannah read a graph.
also:
Months of supply decreased to 9.9 months.
But the graph looks to have an uptick.
cjc
Marching on.....
--
NEW U.S. MONTHLY HOUSE PRICE INDEX ESTIMATES 0.6 PERCENT PRICE INCREASE BETWEEN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY
OFHEO price series is by far the worst (Case-Shiller and Radar Logic show steady 1.5-2% a month decline). You should see the price graph shooting up like a rocket in the OFHEO report.
So much for the govt involvement in Pushing Debt on housing. The whole American economy has been criminalized but there is nothing American People can do. They just have to lie down and get screwed. Who really benefit from Fannie and Freddie?
The idea that America is based on principles is a fraud, or a lie. It is a way to use nationalism, as Nazis did, to get support from the populace for the evil deeds of those in power. Crooks are fully in-charge and they are abusing whatever principles exist for their own devices. It is always men that rule (make and enforce laws and rules) and not principles. America is now firmly ruled by evil men.
Jas
I agree, I think there are typos, or I am confused.
You wrote:
According to NAR, inventory decreased to 4.058 million homes for sale in March.
Total housing inventory rose 1.0 percent at the end of March percent to 4.06 million existing homes available for sale
don't these two contradict each other?
later on you wrote
Months of supply decreased to 9.9 months.
I think that should be INCREASED to 9.9 months.
Remember it was a leap year and weather patterns were not conducive to home selling.
Sadly that is the best Lawrence Yun impression I can do.
America is now firmly ruled by evil men.
There's still an outside chance that, come November, we can look forward to being ruled by an evil woman instead.
I'm actually intrigued that the housing data looks THIS GOOD.
in my own little thought experiment, it seemed that everybody and anybody who wanted to buy a house bought from 2003-2007.
so who is left to buy houses?
thus, I had thought that RE sales would really plummet.
it is true that they are plummeting compared to the boom years...
but they seem about the same in numerical terms as they were in the later 1990's, hardly a time of economic woe.
thus, it seems we've only dropped down to a so-called "normal" level... no 'overcorrection' yet, is there?
(I guess these aren't adjusted for population, but still...)
Another day, another can of consumer whoop ass:
Crude hits new intraday high of $118.47 a barrel
(I guess these aren't adjusted for population, but still...)
You also have to adjust for household size, I think.
Crude hits new intraday high of $118.47 a barrel
yeah, I think I'm going to be physically ill.
Wonder if horses are cost effective?
cjc/YTL,
I was about to post the same comment.
Maybe CR has just fallen into the same trap that we routinely excoriate the MSM for; cutting and pasting last months comments, then changing the numbers but forgetting to check the directionals.
Somebody's gotta sue these bastard analysts claiming MOM figures are rising there it means the bottom is in for real estate.. Enough is enough.
I just looked up an archived number, and sales in January of 1998 of existing homes were 4.4 Million (NSA)
this is well below the "horrific" numbers we saw this January as example...
anybody have the data for SAAR and NSA home data from 1998-2004?
YTL@10:52,
I do know that dataquick was reporting last week that in CA the February-March delta was half the normal rise.
Maybe CR has just fallen into the same trap that we routinely excoriate the MSM for
Cut CR some slack. Do you know how early he has to post these things from his coast? All for basically nothing except now, some abuse.
Time to go into the tulip business
Outsider,
I hope my amused remark didn't really come across as abuse.
I have myself made that error many, many times . . .
I'm looking at months of supply and trying to guess whether the March to April increment is typically a percentage of homes on the market or just a percentage of households. I'd guess households, but if it works more as a percentage of homes on the market (a secular decrease in average years between moves?) then somebody might soon be able to say "This one goes to eleven (months of supply)"
If you cannot be polite to the hosts, leave.
Yearning to Learn | 04.22.08 - 10:52 am |
As bleak as RE is in SW Florida,homes are selling. We actually had a decent March. Think snowbird rush before heading back north. A friends wife has been unloading REO with no price minimums and she gets a straight 20% commission to do with as she pleases. He mentioned she closed 6 properties last month. She did a total of 3 in all 2007. It seems there are people from up north buying but the price point is right at 250k...and most will not touch condos because of the insane fees.
Chris
P.S. - April is looking horrible though. 160 REO/180 sales through yesterday.
ozajh:
yeah, don't get me wrong, I know the numbers are pretty bad... but only in the way that our freaky wall-street world has made them.
it is an example of the NEED for our economy to grow at any lengths in order to avoid collapsing.
I would GUESS (again, i don't have the data) that if you put the SAAR and NSA existing home data out there and include 1980-2008 (instead of 2005-2008) you would see this year as a pretty darn strong year.
even if you adjust for population
(again I don't have this data)
but given that our economy is predicated on growth, and leveraged up as well, we can't have flat or even up and down. A boom MUST be followed by a bigger boom.
So going from 3 to 3.5 to 3.75 to 4 is ok
but going from 3 to 5 to 4 is devastating.
(FWIW: I'm not critiquing CR here... I'm critiquing the instability of our financial system)
The amazing stat from the report was that 18% of homes for sale have flat or negative equity. When you think of the amount of foreclosures for the rest of 2008, that 18% will explode.
I look forward to the day when CR says "maybe that call for a depression isn't so bad after all".
Inventory has a problem similar to that of unemployment data (which can't tell you how many people have stopped looking): it doesn't tell you how many people have taken their house off the market.
I suppose if the servicer FC'd your ass back in October then you've lost the option to wait until the Spring selling season to put it on the market. So that puts a bit of a kink in the normal seasonal trends.
Another low in the old bubble and another new high in the new one. Ho-Hum
All, I try to rush the graphs (that takes a little work) - and then go back and look at the data. Sorry about the typos ...
Best to all.
CR or others:
do you happen to have either
-the NSA/SAAR data for a "normal" year in RE, whichever year that might be?
or
-perhaps NSA/SAAR data by month, using a "median" for selected years (like 1988-2008 as example)
I'm just wondering HOW BAD these numbers are today compared to "normal" years (whatever that may be) as opposed to comparing to "bubble" years.
Thanks in advance, and sorry to be a PITA.
How do FSBO's work into this math? These numbers are based on houses for sale through NAR companies, no? But how about the sales side. Are they also NAR sales or do they come from public records which includes the FSBO sales?
Just wondering because that could skew the numbers. Less inventory than the reality compared to sales.
CR: no worries. you are the best. literally.
I only brought them up so that you continue to be by far the most accurate and nonpartial source of financial data available.
(it's the power of blogs... really... if this were the NYT we would maybe get a correction 1-5 days later on page Z-23)
also, I am often an idiot, and too dumb to understand half of what is posted around here...
you can delete my previous typo post!
Do we know how much the percent of home-owners with little or no equity changed in March? Is the growth of people with negative equity slowing down?
How do FSBO's work into this math?
I believe the NAR inventory stats are derived by aggregating MLS data from around the country. If a FSBO is in the MLS, it's counted. If not, no.
No idea on the sales numbers.
I mentioned this in the other thread - March was REALLY horrible because of Easter coming early this year. I'm not sure if they seasonally adjust for that.
But there are very few qualified buyers, especially at the jumbo levels. April is going to be horrible too.
That's my point Max. If they are counting only inventory from MLS's and then ALL sales, this is a bogus figure.
They should count either ONLY MLS figures or ALL inventory and sales figures.
I will venture that this is the bottom for housing. I am seeing a lot of activity in Tampa. Prices have fallen and homes are beginning to sell. We need to remember that many parts of the USA are not in a housing bubble such as Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, the mid-Atlantic etc. Once folks can sell their homes in the heartland, then demand will pick up in the sunbelt states. (I got my rose-colored glasses on today.)
btw - I think many blogs can become self-reinforcing venues of negativism. I hope I am correct in this view.
My guess based on what I am seeing in Phoenix is that less than half the transactions we are seeing represent fundamental underlying demand from people who need a house to live in.
We are still seeing knife catchers of all kinds. I have friends who are taking advantage of this "pause" in the market to move up to a bigger house at $100,000 less than last year.
Other transactions are failed flips being short sold to semi-unemployed contractors who happen to have a little cash and a lot of time on their hands. Then there are the deeds back to the lenders.
So there are still lots of people who have not been sufficiently burned, but not many of them really need a house to live in.
doom:
I TRIED to read the methodology for the NAR data, and am not sure I totally understand it.
however:
it seems to be based only on MLS sales.
methodology warning PDF
bsneath, if properties in Tampa are now selling at 3 times the family income in Tampa (on average), then you're right about Tampa. If it's not there yet, then it's a false blip on the radar, probably caused by relitters propping people to buy because prices have comne down.
Knife catching!
Yearning to Learn, thanks. If that's the case, then OK, I'll buy the numbers. It's apples to apples.
I have friends buying in San Diego - lots of selection and the prices have become "reasonable" for here. Our neighborhood is back to pretty much pre-bubble prices. Rates are low.
For those in good shape financially with good credit, this really is not a bad time to buy. Prices will probably drop a bit lower, but if you're planning to stay in a few years, doesn't matter so much. San Diego is typically first out of the drop, too.
Take a look at Q1 in the past 2 years. Used home sales improved, after seasonal adjustment. Head-fakes both times. Back in Q4 of 2006, we also had a period of steady sales, just likd Q4 of last year. The recent steadier pace of used home sales may be the end of the sharp slide, but there is no reason to think so, based on similar patterns in earlier years.
NPR had a report about firms that specialize in investing in really beaten down homes for clients. There may have been some selective data presentation to make the report more interesting, but there reoprter spoke of $30,000 and $40,000 and $100,000 houses in Detroit neighborhoods. NAR observed that buyers are circling, but not taking the hook. They are waiting for lower prices. The NPR report makes me wonder how low these folks want prices before they will write a check.
Is the growth of people with negative equity slowing down?
In the SF east bay area, we still have a lot of new mini-mansions in remote nicer areas (think Windemere) which haven't yet felt the full brunt of a declining market. They are in denial. I assume there are lots of option arms that may recast, and see a growing inventory of rentals and vacant houses which will probably be reos soon. These are houses people bought for $1.2m+ with little down. I expect we will see them in the $700-800s soon, for the potential of $500k in equity losses.
Net/net - this may slow down at the lower ends, but if we northern ca follows the pattern of southern ca, we will see some much bigger equity hits soon at the higher end.
Bsneath,
If you think its a bottom, buy a house. Better yet, buy a condo. Then every few months, update the blog to tell us how you're feeling and your equity situation on that purchase.
doom, I think the point is the data are assembled by the same methodology each time, and is useful for tracking trends and other comparisons.
A figure representing all homes for sale would lend clarity, I agree. That's not what we have and, so far as I know, that's not available.
Existing-Home Sales Slip in March
Yup.
it seems to be based only on MLS sales.
From the report:
The NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® existing home sales data are estimates
arising from a sample of Multiple Listing Service (MLS) sales. As time changes, so does the
relationship between any sample and the universe the sample is representing.
They do introduce some fudge factors based on survey data they collect on move-in dates vs purchase dates, as well as new house flipping.
I think the report is useful for its trend data, even if the actual values are suspect.
Not too many people I know that were in position to buy a home in the last few years that haven't already. Heck, even people who were NOT in any position to buy, did already.
I'm wondering how many are still out there? How many people with good credit, making decent money and with a down payment, that HAVEN'T bought a home yet.
I know they exist, but just how many compared to the frenzy that we saw during the boom. Supply up, demand down. Not good.
What is the rush to buy? Seriously, the housing market is quite illiquid and I don't see a jump in salaries coming.
CR
on your existing home sales and inventory graphs, why don't you add a YOY change line?
AIG, Fannie and Freddie Put the Crunch on Condo Mortgages -- Seeking Alpha
So who is going to buy a condo?
My take, cross posted from Zacks:
This morning The National Association of Realtors (NAR) released the March existing home sales data. As expected the downtrend continued, the little blip in February was just that a temporary blip, not the start of a reversal of fortunes for the beleaguered housing sector. Nationwide, sales of existing homes fell 2.0% from February to a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR) of 4.930 million. That was, based on SAAR down 19.3%. It is interesting to note, that on a non seasonally adjusted (NSA) basis, sales were down 22.7% from a year ago. It is my understanding that March was in the same season in 2007 as it was in 2008 so it appears what ever fiddling the NAR is doing with the seasonal adjustment factors is cushioning the apparent severity of the decline.
Since it is what the press with be using I will be suing the seasonally adjusted numbers in discussing the regional year over year changes, just keep in mind that they are significantly worse in every region on a NSA basis. For the month, the worst hit was the Midwest, where sales were down 6.5% followed by the South with a 3.5% decline. The two high priced regions, the Northeast and the West were both actually up 2.2% each. Year over year the West has seen the biggest decline at 22.3%, followed by the South (-20.0%), the Northeast (-18.8%) and the Midwest (-15.9%).
The inventory situation actually got worse. There are now 4.058 million existing houses on the market, up 1.0% from a month ago and 6.6% from a year ago. Combine rising inventories with falling sales and you get rising months of supply. At the existing sales pace, it would take 9.9 months to clear out the supply, up from 9.6 months in February and 7.5 months a year ago. Just a few years ago, 4.0 months was considered normal. On the bright side, we are still below the October peak in terms of months of Supply of 10.5 months, and the July peak in absolute numbers of homes of 4.561 million houses. However, the absolute level of inventories is seasonal, so look for the number to climb in the coming months.
consumer whoop ass
i think you meant consumer whip ass.
My take continued:
Pricing is still holding up better than volume of sales, with the price of a median home down 7.7% from a year ago nationwide. In the Northeast the median home price is actually up 4.6%. The worst hit is the west where median prices are down 14.7%, followed by a 7.1% decline in the South and a 5.3% decline in the Midwest. If measured by average (mean) prices, the story is much the same, down 6.6% nationwide year over year, with the Northeast (+3.1%) actually up while the West (-10.7%) has seen the biggest declines. The average price for a house is down 7.9% in the South and 7.1% in the Midwest. I would strenuously argue that we still have a long way for housing prices to decline since housing prices are still historically very high relative to both rents and incomes. At best this process is half over, and that is a very optimistic outlook, one quarter to one third over is more realistic.
Home price declines are the single best predictor of mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures. Stay away from any financial institution that has significant exposure to mortgages. That list would start with S&Ls like Washington Mutual (WM), Downey (DSL), First Fed (FED). It would include banks such as Wachovia (WB), Citigroup (C), National City (NCC) and Zion (ZION). It also includes the GSEs Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) and the mortgage insurers MGIC (MTG) and PMI Group (PMI). Those that have not cut their dividends are likely to, and the process of raising capital will severely dilute existing shareholders, preventing them from enjoying any eventual rebound in the market.
I would also avoid the major homebuilders such as Pulte (PHM), Beazer (BZH), Standard Pacific, Lennar (LEN), D.R. Horton (DHI) and Ryland (RYL). The market will not really recover until we see several of them write new chapters in their historys (the eleventh chapter).
doom, those people who waited are extremely discerning.
Beemer - I am doing very well living in a house that has fallen 25% in value, but is now fairly priced if I were to add 9 years of inflation to the price that I paid for it.
btw, has anyone looked into the "replacement value" cost of housing? By this a mean that, with the very high inflation rates of commodities and energy, I would presume that the increasing cost of building a new home today would be significantly higher than the general rate of inflation. Over time, shouldn't this provide a "floor" for housing costs and in turn support the price of existing housing once the current supply/demand imbalance is worked out?
It is true that land costs rose astronomically during the bubble, but , as Will rogers said, they don't making it anymore. Over time land costs have risen at rates higher than inflation and should continue to do so, imo.
I will venture that this is the bottom for housing.
That's too general a statement to be useful. It is fairly straight forward to do a rough analysis of a particular market: 3x average income in normal neighborhoods to 4x in fancy ones. Rent vs. buy calculators are widely available as well. Plug the numbers in, and if it works it works.
I think many blogs can become self-reinforcing venues of negativism. I hope I am correct in this view.
That is certainly true. The echo chamber effect can be quite pronounced (I'm a victim of it as much as anyone.) However, I would point out that the echo's in this chamber have been more correct than most.
Cheers,
prat
An old timer told me that house prices in NYC went down 70% during the 1982 recession. Don't know if this is true or not.
I do however remember my mother buying a house for $38,000 during that time and about 4 years later it was worth $250,000.
Dirk van Dijk, Very good advise. I would also suggest staying away from the investment banks. We have yet to see the various law suits and government actions that are sure to follow. The attorneys and regulators are sure to come in and bayonet the wounded after the housing bubble battles are over.
As bleak as RE is in SW Florida,homes are selling. We actually had a decent March. Think snowbird rush before heading back north. A friends wife has been unloading REO with no price minimums and she gets a straight 20% commission to do with as she pleases. He mentioned she closed 6 properties last month. She did a total of 3 in all 2007. It seems there are people from up north buying but the price point is right at 250k...and most will not touch condos because of the insane fees.
this is a well-known bear cave (which, as a bear, is why i like it) -- but i think people who wish to be well-informed rather than seek reinforcement should be prepared for the eventuality that lower prices can/will mean more transactions as the marketplace finds a clearing price.
this may not be the end of inventory growth -- this level is still ~7% higher than last march's, which was ~3.8mm -- and overhang is still a massive problem as cr has said. and that sales number is a plain disaster.
but -- at some point -- year-over-year inventory will start declining. and -- when that happens, maybe next month for all i know -- it would indicate that a price bottom in real terms may be some 8-12 quarters off.
Beemer, that 18% number isn't that surprising.
A few months ago estimates were that 8.5 million mortgages in the U.S. were greater than the value of the mortgaged property, and that estimate as of last week was something like 9 million or 10 million.
This of 50+ million mortgages in the U.S. (another 25 million or so homeowners have no mortgage).
Net equity, including those without mortgages, dropped to 48% in the first part of this year (having dropped below 50% for the first time ever in the last quarter of last year).
Anyway, 9 million underwater of 75 million or so total homes would get us to 12%, but its reasonable to assume that a disproportionate number of homes for sale right at any time are distressed, so 18% seems about right.
I'd look for that percentage of equity-less sellers to move up 50-100% faster than the percentage of underwater homes.
Over time, shouldn't this provide a "floor" for housing costs and in turn support the price of existing housing once the current supply/demand imbalance is worked out?
Only once supply/demand imbalances are worked out. This can take over a decade.
the other problem is that it's not just that we have an "oversupply" issue.
we have an oversupply of CERTAIN TYPES of housing. or a housing mismatch if you will
what we need:
modest housing in which to raise relatively small households (between 2-5 people), preferably that can be purchased for about 1-3x annual salary
what was built:
-huge mcmansions that are unaffordable
-condos and lofts which are often too small, and if not are very expensive (luxury if you will)
-most new housing is built at 4-10x annual salary.
so the replacement arguement is a little bit of a red herring...
cr -- do you take requests?
i'd love to have an analog chart to your NSA existing home sales for existing home inventory -- it would make YoY comparisons much easier.
as i'm sure you're not busy, i'll expect that chart later today -- lol!
OT: Whip inflation now!
So many made financial decisions based on tomorrow never coming, but it came anyway.
It's of some consolation to watch the gubment inflate the prices of things that were cheap while their original targets just keep on sinking.
One step closer to Idiocracy.
Bsneath,
All of us appreciate knowing what the local realtors are telling headquarters at NAR. Did your local Realtors headquarters give you the assignment to talk about how things are bottoming, or did you decide on your own it might help your listings?
Josh,
Thanks for the number crunching.
Home buying in an environment like this is just like a big drop in the stock market. People think its a good time to buy due to "bargain" prices and they make their move.
I assume nearly all buyers have no idea of the headwinds for housing in the next few years. I just hope they plan on living in that house for many years and don't look at it as a means of extra income or a retirement plan.
Dirk van Dijk, Very good advise. I would also suggest staying away from the investment banks. We have yet to see the various law suits and government actions that are sure to follow. The attorneys and regulators are sure to come in and bayonet the wounded after the housing bubble battles are over.
bsneath | 04.22.08 - 11:43 am | #
Agree with you there bsneath, just didnt want to make the post an endless list of tickers to avoid. On your earlier point about comoddities raising replacement costs, true in the case of copper, but not true for the most signifcant commodities in HB, lumber prices are down and the same with wallboard, mostly due to the slump in housing (and coming slump in CRE, although lumber less significant there.
The amazing stat from the report was that 18% of homes for sale have flat or negative equity
How does this differ from the last few years? Are there fewer people with negative or flat equity than in 2007 or 2006? What would be really interesting is to see if this is lower than in 1990 or 1980.
"what we need:
modest housing in which to raise relatively small households (between 2-5 people), preferably that can be purchased for about 1-3x annual salary"
Yep. I currently have a decent waiting list for rentals at 600.00/mo for 2/1's. I put a couple of offers in on duplexes that were short sales 2 months ago and the banks rejected them. They needed a decent amout of work. I can tell you that at 700/mo you will pretty much get zero calls...the short sales would be negative cash flow after repairs at 600/mo. Probably break even at 750/mo. Negative any higher. I can honestly see a second set of defaulters on rental properties in a couple of years if these dumbshits don't watch the entry price points...
Chris
bsneath | 04.22.08 - 11:14 am |
If i told how much of a loss a lot of properties were selling for in Charlotte County it would probably scare ya.
I don't know a single person I work with who could afford to buy a house in the neighborhoods most currently live in. Why is that pertinent? Employees here make well above median income. My friends in Tampa also fit this profile...
As a SWAG we have about 3-5 more years of drops before we level out.
There will be deals on the way down. You just need to make sure they are afforable to the purchaser before jumping in.
Chris
I hope my amused remark didn't really come across as abuse.
Oops! Sorry azajh. Chalk that up to watching the price of oil keep going up.
Marcus Aurelius, Praetorian, Gaius Marius -- what's with all the Romans?
Are you guys attracted to the scent of falling empire?
the short sales would be negative cash flow after repairs at 600/mo.
pimco's mcculley made that point last month too, cobra -- until the prospect of significant positive carry becomes a reality, the direction of prices must generally be down. the normal dynamic is for owners to be rewarded for the employment of their capital in housing by taking home the rent-cost differential, not to be punished by having to sink additional capital to make it up. it's silly to be an investor as these prices (special situations aside).
--
"There's still an outside chance that, come November, we can look forward to being ruled by an evil woman instead."
Shnaps,
You missed the point. Evil men are those who control the Fed and the President -- Financial Nazis of New York City:
"What sets ``Bad Money'' apart from a stack of recent books on these topics is its emphasis on the symbiotic relationship between politicians and big money. Solving the debt and oil mess will be tough enough. It will be made harder by the millions of dollars flowing from bankers and hedge fund operators into the campaigns of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain."
Phillips Slams Wall Street, Feckless Politicians in `Bad Money' - Bloomberg.com
Kevin Phillips is one of the best economic historians alive in America (I have read three of his books and Wealth And Democracy is the best; I am looking forward to reading Bad Money). We can be sure that CR and Tanta don't read much of economic history.
An American is bred to believe that evil leadership only occurs in other countries and our system is immune from evil men in top power. A perfect set up for evil men to take control! And they quietly have.
Jas
bsneath at - 11:38 am
Well, yes, they aren't making any more land, but they ARE making more home sites.
Within a 1/4 mile of where I live (near north side Chicago) in the last 2 years probably 30 or 40 dwelling units ( old townhouses and old walk-ups) have come down to be replaced by at least 15-20 times that number of condo apartments and a few condo hotel rooms.
Even in the classy north shore suburbs (cheapest SFH $800K), older commercial buildings have come down to be replaced by "luxury" town house and condo units.
Housing is a terribly complex thing to get your brain wrapped around. So don't listen to the experts, listen to the people who are actually doing it right -- Cobradriver for example -- and even he admits the timing is a WAG.
bsneath, you've got to be joking.... If you can't find dirt at $500 an acre in any state in the union, you're not trying. Lumber futures dove off a cliff many months ago and labor costs are flat to falling.
Are you writing from outside of the United States?
Wonder if horses are cost effective?
Outsider | 04.22.08 - 10:55 am | #
To eat, ride or both? Considering food commodity prices & energy commodity prices... its easy read something like that and be confused.
Home prices in Lotus-Land continue to levitate, despite the rise in inventory. Don't know what to tell you guys.
HousingTracker.net | Median Home Asking Price & Inventory Data for Raleigh, North Carolina
New seasonal and annual price highs in the 25th and 50th percentiles, and prices hold steady at the peak in the 75th percentile.
Affordability is still good at 3.3X price-to-income.
Housing Tracker
Sebastia
doom writes:
That's my point Max. If they are counting only inventory from MLS's and then ALL sales, this is a bogus figure.
They should count either ONLY MLS figures or ALL inventory and sales figures.
actually, the nar estimates existing home sales (see Page cannot be found
per nar:
"The methodology in calculating existing-home sales statistics is really quite simple. The monthly EHS economic indicator is based on a representative sample of 160 Boards/MLSs."
"Once the problematic data have been extricated from the sample, the aggregated raw volume figures are weighted to accurately represent sales activity for each region of the country. This is also called the non-seasonally-adjusted volume. The weights are benchmarked every 10 years to reflect shifts in regional demand."
there are large differences between many state association totals and the figures reported by nar. in the 2007 data for example, according to nar there were 286.4k ehs in FL; however, FAR reports ehs (sf + condo) of 171.7k. the nar figures are 1.67 times higher. in many states a similar large directional difference exists (when the data can be found). the only notable exception is CA, which the NAR underreports relative to Dataquick or CAR.
there are some data collection differences. for example in ohio, the state group will include some new home sales, which the nar shold not include as those are in new home series. in ny, the state group does not include condos/co-ops, while nar would. even with these items, it is hard to imagine that they would cause
a difference as large as 67%. so i cannot make ryhme or reason out of the way nar publishes these figures.
Wow Seb, you sure did a good thing buying your house. You ARE a smart guy.
Jas - I was being facetious. That book actually might be interesting, although I find 'symbiotic' relationships between those with wealth and those with political power are not exactly surprising - in any system of government.
And you can spare us the Illuminati/New World Order crap, plz thx.
doom and w,
My wife and I have been looking at homes since April 2006 in the DC Capitol Hill area. We figured out pretty quickly that the prices were way too high, which is when I found this blog as well as a couple of other sources, and started getting my education in the fundamentals of housing prices, historical trends, etc. It took me months to convince my wife that waiting was the right thing to do (a clue re. why there are so few couples with our profile...I was willing to fight the good fight with her).
Fast forward to now, and we have seen a price-per-square-foot drop from $560 in mid-2006 to $380 very lately, as in the past few weeks. So now we're willing to make offers, but only at the ppsf figure above, which is 33% off the peak. It helps our patience that we literally could not afford what we wanted at those bubble prices. We'll wait another year if we have to.
Also, we're very high credit score, have excellent income, putting 10% down, and want to live in the house we buy for 30 years. The only folks like us that we know, amazingly, are the couple living in the apartment next door to us. It feels like we're running a marathon sometimes, and others it feels liberating not to have been involved in this mess (like my sister and some co-workers).
By the way, I lurk here almost every day and I sometimes flame out on dryfly and ipodius (dryfly wastes my time with his persona trivia and ipodius is a self-absorbed fraud). I really like CR and Tanta, as well as mock turtle, ac, mp, LI Mike, Maxed Out Mama, and many others here. You've saved my wife and I a lifetime of trauma and regret, thanks.
Hey Seb, I note that the chart you linked to is for asking prices.
That data is utterly meaningless.
cd
Read the left side of the first graph and you will see sales in the 4 million range. If you go to data that shows entire years, you will find that sales never exceeded 4 million prior to the mid 1990's. We are living in a boom with collapsing prices in a boom. Wait until sales go bust and there are 2 or 3 years of inventory on the market.