"For whatever reason, the initial release typically overstates "
Hmm. Perhaps the people who publish the statistics have figured out that first impressions matter a heck of a lot more than revision and corrections and that this systemic overstatement acts as a from of prozac for a market that needs constant reassurance.... By initially overstating and subsequently revising downwards, we create the perpetual growth machine.
thanks. That was not meant to imply that you were trying to obscure the results, or overstate them. You can always add the text values over the green bar, which would for example say (-5%) as the change from each final result from the initial value. Then we could see the trend in that over time as well. Or you could just put together a line graph - three lines, for each of the three revisions, with each time period a measure of % of initial value. Or you can just do what you are doing. Hehe.
The overstating at first has definately made things look better during this downturn. Headline comparisons are for the first stab at the number vs the previously revised number, so the comparison month to month is the highest number for this month vs. the lowest for the previous month.
I'm not too concerned about downward revisions. I seem to recall that new home sales are reported at the time of a contract being signed rather than completion of the transaction, so downward revisions make some sense as there are inevitably cancellations.
Which brings me to the second point. CR noted that the downward revision over during the previous two years was about 5 percent when all was said and done. Keep in mind that all took place in a rising housing market. Considering the rate of cancellations being reported now, shouldn't we expect a much bigger downward revision?
I don't want us to get ahead of ourselves, but shouldn't the change in the economic environment have some effect?
If you repost that graph with the y axis minimum at 800k, it's much easier to see the effect. Otherwise, thanks for the useful chart.
"For whatever reason, the initial release typically overstates "
Hmm. Perhaps the people who publish the statistics have figured out that first impressions matter a heck of a lot more than revision and corrections and that this systemic overstatement acts as a from of prozac for a market that needs constant reassurance.... By initially overstating and subsequently revising downwards, we create the perpetual growth machine.
Rejoice!!!!
Any guess on when new homes sales fall below 1.000?
Geoff, yes, that would show the revisions better. I was trying not to overstate the revisions.
I also checked more data, and historically revisions can go either way - although negative revisions are more common.
Johnson, My guess is sometime later this year.
Best to all.
thanks. That was not meant to imply that you were trying to obscure the results, or overstate them. You can always add the text values over the green bar, which would for example say (-5%) as the change from each final result from the initial value. Then we could see the trend in that over time as well. Or you could just put together a line graph - three lines, for each of the three revisions, with each time period a measure of % of initial value. Or you can just do what you are doing. Hehe.
Why not restrict the chart data to the most recent rev. no.?
All data is "release"; all data is "1st revision"; et cetera?
Wow, I'm famous now:-)
Thanks CR
The overstating at first has definately made things look better during this downturn. Headline comparisons are for the first stab at the number vs the previously revised number, so the comparison month to month is the highest number for this month vs. the lowest for the previous month.
Two things,
I'm not too concerned about downward revisions. I seem to recall that new home sales are reported at the time of a contract being signed rather than completion of the transaction, so downward revisions make some sense as there are inevitably cancellations.
Which brings me to the second point. CR noted that the downward revision over during the previous two years was about 5 percent when all was said and done. Keep in mind that all took place in a rising housing market. Considering the rate of cancellations being reported now, shouldn't we expect a much bigger downward revision?
I don't want us to get ahead of ourselves, but shouldn't the change in the economic environment have some effect?