Weekend Open Thread
This is your open thread for the weekend. Please post random links and off-topic discussions here.
Off-topic comment? Interesting link?
Head over to the forums, or click here for open threads.
Head over to the forums, or click here for open threads.
59 comments:
Looks like the air is getting sucked out from the California equity refugees. Looks like the Seattle Housing Bubble's going to be runnin' on the reserve tanks throughout the remainder of the year...
Doesn't look too bad really:
“This is an important trend to watch, but doesn't strike us as ominous,” DataQuick President Marshall Prentice said in a news release. “The increase was a statistical certainty, because the number of defaults had fallen to such extreme lows. We would have to see defaults roughly double from today's level before they would begin to impact home values much.”
I wouldn't worry until defaults double...
Well defaults have already doubled in the Bay Area and San Diego, two of the Seattle-eque housing markets in California. 95/96' was due to a significant downturn in the SoCal defense industry and economic recession. This is something new, something different. Back then ARMs where what attached hands to shoulders not a proliferated doomed-to-failure mortgage product. This spike in foreclosures isn't even attributed to job loss!
What's going to happen when the RE based economy nose-dives and recession is all but assured? Are foreclosures going to miraculously sustain themselves?
Its going to really ugly, quicker than I thought.
Here's the July #s from the MLS.
NWMLS® Statistical Report
This is a detailed report...it'll be a little clearer what's going on when the summary is posted.
Overall, looks like business as usual. Low inventory and rising prices.
Overall, looks like business as usual. Low inventory and rising prices.
I'd say that assessment is a stretch, at best.
(King | Residential)
Active listings: Up 19.3% YOY
Pending sales: Down 13.1% YOY
Median Price: Up $50 from June
No, that's not a typo. The median increased just fifty dollars. So yeah, prices are technically "rising," but inventory is up, and demand is down, for the fourth month in a row.
I'll have a full post on this later today or tomorrow.
Defaults not all that high.
http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/2006/08/california-housing-default-notices-vs.html
Tim...you must be reading the #s wrong.
King Res. Pending June
Median: $429,950
King Res. Pending July
Median: $434,00
Sorry my friend, it is you that is reading the numbers wrong. The median price that is consistently quoted in the media and is included in the "recap" summary sheet is the closed sales median, not the pending sales median.
Median Closed Residential Price
June 2006: $434,950
July 2006: $435,000
I should mention that 2005 also saw a complete stagnation in median closed price from June to July. $375,000 both months.
Again, what I find most interesting is the continuing trend of increasing inventory and decreasing sales. I'll save any other comments for my upcoming post.
Median Price: Up $50 from June,
With a 7.3% year to date return, my mutual fund portfolio is kicking butt when compared to Seattle's housing "investments."
Hi Tim...I assumed you're were talking about pending since you quoted the pending #s sales. If you are talking about closed sales you need to indicate that.
The Pending #s are a much better indicator of what's going on anyway...and they show over 4K increase MOM.
Ultimately, YOY #s tells you the most. And those are still off the charts.
Median Pending July 2005: $379,950
Median Pending July 2006: $434,000
Over 50K appreciation in 1 year. Not bad....
I should mention that 2005 also saw a complete stagnation in median closed price from June to July. $375,000 both months.
That's pretty normal...Spring is when most of the appreciation takes place. A new price gets set and then it sort of stays there more or less till next Spring. That's why the YOY #s tell you the most. But it's still interesting to try and find a trend in the MOM. But it's usually to small a sample to make a real conclusion.
I'm just using the numbers that the NWMLS includes in the monthly recap reports. The same numbers that the media reports on every month. The recap report includes the following items:
# of Active Listings
# of Pending Sales
# of Closed Sales
Median Price of Closed Sales
If you think that the median price of pending sales is a "much better indicator of what's going on" then perhaps you should take that up with the NWMLS, not me.
All I'm saying is that every single time in the past that we have bandied about "median prices," it has been the Closed Sales value that we have referred to. Why would we suddenly start referring to the Pending Sales median now?
Why would we suddenly start referring to the Pending Sales median now?
Because now we have access to it...so it's important to discern what you're talking about.
Also, it's worth mentioning that the median closed sales prices didn't change at all from June 2005 to July 2005:
Median Closed June 2005: $375,000
Median Closed July 2005: $375,000
So we're basically on the same track as last year. And 2005 was the hottest year on record (and we beat it be $50!)
BTW, those are the Residential Median closed prices for 2005.
On page 6 of the NWMLS report, new construction pending volume ($) was essentially the same in July as it was in January ($482M) after peaking at $721M in March.
Odd? Isn't the spring and summer the peak construction season?
Meshugy,
Thanks for the link. Do you know how to access any earlier reports?
What I find interesting is the increase in home prices outside of King County. Like chasing a bubble. King's tapped out, inventories damn near 20% more than it was a year ago and prices are sluffing off... Just need to knock the legs out of the credit-bubble with interest rates and tighter lending standards and this party is over rover.
inventories damn near 20% more than it was a year ago
that's not saying much since we currently have about half the normal inventory for King County....it needs to double just to be a more balanced market. It need to triple to see a buyers market.
We still have a very, very tight market controlled by sellers. I think this will gradually change over the next year to a more balanced market. But there's clearly no signs of crashing yet.
Thanks for the link. Do you know how to access any earlier reports?
I have that and a lot more. But because of the constant personal attacks and Tim's unwillingness to control it, I'd rather not share at this time.
...we currently have about half the normal inventory for King County...
You keep saying that as if it's established fact. All I've seen you provide to back up that assertion is one or two random news articles from the mid-90's. I'd like to see actual "active listings" figures from the 70's to the present before I accept any assertions about what is a "normal" inventory level.
But because of the constant personal attacks and Tim's unwillingness to control it, I'd rather not share at this time.
Dude, give me a break. You keep complaining about persecution, but you have yet to point out a specific post that you feel was a personal attack on you. I take exception to your "unwillingness to control it" remark. That's just flat out false. Probably half the comments I delete are personal attacks on you.
Here's an excellent snippet I pulled from a link on the Marin Bubble blog, describing the illusion of rising median home prices in the face of declining sales and rising inventory. The article uses the Bay Area as its reference but it summed up the dynamic best by this quote from a realtor...
the under $400K buyer is squeezed out due to rising prices and higher interest rates. The high end is holding up a little better, because the ripple effect has not yet made it to the high end, and the low end has weakened MORE than the high end.
Therefore when you see the wave of under 450K's with the ubiquitous 50K haircut, this is a good indicator of what's really going on.
Median and Mean House Price Appreciation for King County areas 2004/2005
Average annual five-year price change
1. West Bellevue/Medina - 15.7%
2. South Park/Georgetown - 14.6%
3. West Kirkland - 13.6%
4. Central Bellevue - 13.5%
5. Central/Capitol Hill - 13.5%
6. Northgate/Maple Leaf - 12.7%
7. Green Lake - 12.6%
8. East Ballard - 12.5%
9. Queen Anne - 12.4%
10. Rainier Beach - 12.3%
most sluggish five-year price change: dominated by south snohomish county, with only Newport Shores/Kennydale representing King County, the lowest at 4.8%. Indeed, it is the only area where the average price change for 2004-2005 was negative.
Lots more tools and datas here
How do accurate to people here find zillow's zestimates to be? I ask because here in my neighborhood on the plateau, the zestimates seem to be low. Again, just last week, another house in my neighborhood sold in less than a week. The same thing happened 2 weeks ago. I don't know the sold prices yet, but the asking prices were more than $100K (20%+) over zillow.
Earlier this spring, 2 houses in the neighborhood also sold for more than 20% over their zestimates. These are houses built in the mid-60s and are generally between 2000 and 3200 square feet. They are in good condition and many have been updated.
On a separate, yet loosly related note, I wonder how the housing downturn will play out for people in developments where every 3rd house is the same? Seems to me those are the people who will drive the price declines. If your neighbor's house with the same floor plan is priced $10K less than yours, you're going to have to drop your price to be competitive. Older neighborhoods where the houses are unique may fare better...?
the under $400K buyer is squeezed out due to rising prices and higher interest rates. The high end is holding up a little better, because the ripple effect has not yet made it to the high end, and the low end has weakened MORE than the high end.
That may be true in the Bay Area...but the NWMLS Price Range/Bedrooms report shows that most closed sales in July are in 200-400K range:
The biggest amount of sales (1,522) were 3 bedroom houses priced between 250-349K.
The next highest amount (993) were 3 bedroom priced 350-499K.
The 500K and over sales were much, much less. The bulk of sales are right around the median,
Like I said, that was from the Bay Area/SoCal with prices a good 150K-200K above Seattle and King County... Just adjust the 400K median down to what's appropriate for the make-or-break foot-in-the-door crowd and its the exact same dynamic... rising median, slower sales, more invetnory
Whew, I just drove by Bellevue and my eyebrows got singed!
About 20 high-rises are under construction or planned, and they'll take their place alongside the city's tallest building, Lincoln Square's 42-story south tower, which opened last fall.
mmm, yeah!!! Can you say Miami?
P.S. I love the smell of Heloc's in the morning...
Meshugy,
"I have that and a lot more. But because of the constant personal attacks and Tim's unwillingness to control it, I'd rather not share at this time."
Not wanting to share the data that you were diligent enough to find and compile is your prerogative. It seems to me, however, that getting this out there might help take some of the heat off you, since—up until just recently—empirical evidence of a slowing market in Seattle was only wishful thinking. Although there are lots of theoretical reasons why the market should be slowing, evidence of a slowdown has not been apparent in the data.
I hope you reconsider.
Although there are lots of theoretical reasons why the market should be slowing, evidence of a slowdown has not been apparent in the data.
Actually it is. And meshugy has already shared that
source of that data right on this open thread. (Thank you!)
Inventory is up over last year, and most of King County have higher average DOM (days on market) -- source, page 41 New Construction Residential (five areas reduced DOM), page 40 Residential (eight areas reduced DOM). The exception is condos, page 42, in which six areas have markedly rising DOM: North Seattle, Leschi/MtBaker/Seward Park, Redmond/Carnation and the East Side south of I-90.
“the under $400K buyer is squeezed out due to rising prices and higher interest rates. The high end is holding up a little better, because the ripple effect has not yet made it to the high end, and the low end has weakened MORE than the high end.”
You need data about how the housing mix is changing over time to figure this out. If you use number of bedrooms as a proxy, houses with 2 bedrooms can represent the low end of the market.
Since the Aug. report does not provide historical data, we can use pending sales to represent last month and closed sales to generally represent a few months before that.
-------------------- 2br 3br 4br 5+br
Closed (before) 24% 48% 24% 4%
Pending (after) 25% 47% 24% 4%
As you can see from this crude table above, the proportion of low end homes is not decreasing, at least in the short time span represented by July closed and pending sales.
Generally, I agree that weakness at the low end will eventually be an important component of the impending loss of price support. However, I don’t think that this has happened yet in Seattle for the simple reason that, as the bus advertisement says, you can still get a $300K loan for $758 a month. Until that changes, downward price pressure is mainly going to be driving by the slower processes of loss of affordability and creeping interest rates.
By the way, the new loan qualification standards are supposed to come into effect September 1.
One interesting this is that New Listings went way down in July.
New Listings:
July: 16,261
June: 17,622
May: 17,705
April: 15,288
Obviously less people are putting houses up for sale now. If the market were in panic mode we'd see the # going up.
If the market were in panic mode we'd see the # going up.
I don't think anyone is arguing that Seattle has reached "panic mode" yet. Just that the numbers are currently steadily trending toward a softer market, and we're a few years behind most other markets across the country (only a few of which are even in the beginning stages of "panic mode").
I think we have to get beyond "initial slowdown" before getting talking about panic.
I focus on the Snoho numbers, but July new listings are on par with typical levels, while May and June were higher. Those earlier months probably stole new listings from later months, including July.
One thing that I have noticed this year is that everything seems to be accelerated compared to the last few years. Spring appreciation happened really early as did the seasonal rise in inventory, and things generally seem to be winding down now instead of the Sept-Oct timeframe as expected. We'll have to wait a few more months to confirm this though.
Just that the numbers are currently steadily trending toward a softer market, and we're a few years behind most other markets across the country (only a few of which are even in the beginning stages of "panic mode").
Yes...that's pretty much what I see. A gradual softening. But how far will it go?
But how far will it go?
My prediction? all the way...
If anyone missed the story about Vancouver BC's sales slowdown
Somerville said there are other factors that could potentially trigger a a slowdown in housing, such as the decline in United States housing markets that is dampening demand for Canadian lumber.
Apparently the decline in US house construction is being felt (or is expected) in the building materials sector.
Matt,
I like how you think (X-Cal influence).
Just about everyone in California can not recall a time where real estate took a meaningful drop in price. Sure, there were the Lancaster/Palmdale people that got gutted in the DoD bust of a decade ago, but those that held for two years, were made whole.
If California equity takes a major dump, it is going to be as confusing as a sunrise in the Western sky or a suspension in the law of gravity. There are simply too many people that can not fathom a meaningful drop (-30%) in RE prices. So, when it happens, there is absolutely no roadmap for how these people will react.
My question for my fellow X-Cal conspiracy theorist is...
If a Californian owns his primary OC, Brady-bunch tri-level, and two or three second/investment/vacation properties in the Western US (Aridzona, Nevada, Oregon, Taderho, and Washington), will that person sell the secondary properties in order to keep things going on in California, or default on the California home and move to one of the second homes?
My guess is they will sell the secondary properties to protect the flagship California property. If they wanted out of California, they already would be gone.
Still another reason that when California inverts the rest of us in the echo-bubble will really be screwed to the wall.
There will be no limit to just how much this will suck.
Here is the latest data from my weekly spreadsheet showing growth in listings since May 7:
Date / Listings / Delta / %
7-May / 7302
15-May / 7486 / 184 / 3%
21-May / 7665 / 179 / 5%
11-Jun / 8099 / 434 / 11%
18-Jun / 8154 / 55 / 12%
24-Jun / 8352 / 198 / 14%
1-Jul / 8417 / 65 / 15%
8-Jul / 8758 / 341 / 20%
15-Jul / 9057 / 299 / 24%
22-Jul / 9139 / 82 / 25%
29-Jul / 9044 / -95 / 24%
5-Aug / 9059 / 15 / 24%
Quick summary of listings from other counties from 5/7 to 8/5:
Pierce - up 27% (4943 to 6284)
Snohomish - up 21% (3557 to 4291)
Whatcom - up 23% (2221 to 2559)
Interesting that all 4 counties I track had a decrease in listings from the previous week the last week in July. Talking to a friend who is a realtor, I was told that this point in the summer traditionally represents the "get a house locked down before school starts" push. Hope she is right.
I am seeing a lot of homes sitting and sitting...something that was unheard of a year ago.
I predict that the "wine and cheese party" is just about over here in this last bastion of "illusory wealth".
I wait for the fall.
"Just about everyone in California can not recall a time where real estate took a meaningful drop in price."
I lived in Huntington Beach from 1985 to 1995. Here is the price history of a townhome I bought in 1987.
1987 - $220K (buy)
1988 - $290K
1989 - $350K
1990 - $350K (top)
1991 - $330K
1992 - $290K
1993 - $270K
1994 - $250K
1995 - $230K (sold)
1996 - $210K (bottom)
The top and bottom numbers I remember well, the rest is extrapolation (estimate).
59% appreciation from purchase to top.
35% depreciation from top to sale.
40% depreciation from top to bottom.
I remember both the elation on the way up (RE's knocking on my door saying "I've got a buyer if you are selling") as well as the denial of 1991 that prices were (gulp) going down. I had no idea they would drop the way they did. I barely made it out with any appreciation. But it was my "home" and I did not think of it as a "stock" and stuck it out until I was transferred to TX in 1995.
This was a "regional bubble" (collapse of SC defense industry) as it did not impact the whole U.S. (nor the world for that matter). Compared to this bubble, the runups were not as great, the fundamentals were not as rotten (suicide loans/HELOCs/loose lending/etc.), and there was little or no speculation.
You can cut it any way you want but I see a train wreck coming of monumental proportions.
"Just about everyone in California can not recall a time where real estate took a meaningful drop in price."
Hawaii had the same issue from 1990-2000, basically because of the Japanese economic troubles (Japanese buy a lot of the vacation properties there). I had a friend who bought a place in 1995 and came out way under (like $20k less sales price) when he sold in 2002.
Syracuse, NY saw a 30% decline in prices during the mid 80s to late 90s (and that's not adjusting for inflation).
My father-in-law lived through the huge bust in Texas in the late 70s, early 80s. Everyone there got screwed.
Moose - I'm as worried as you are about the state of the US economy, and certainly believe houses could fall that far. I just don't believe it's a certainty, and I think it may end up like a lot of bubbles, localized to the places where appreciation was out-of-the-norm (that includes, ahem, Seattle).
Interesting that all 4 counties I track had a decrease in listings from the previous week the last week in July.
I've been tracking King County and Seattle all summer....it was growing up till the last two weeks or so. It seems to have pretty much flat lined...the inventory in Seattle proper hasn't charge much for over a month.
I think when we look back on all this a year later we'll see that we saw a pretty normal Spring/Summer rise in inventory. Slightly more then 2005...way less then previous years. As always, it will shrink during the winter months.
If you look back at inventory over the past years...we are still very very low:
King County Active Listings Res/Condo
July 06: 8,545
July 05: 7,066
July 04: 9,833
July 03: 12,143
July 02: 11,416
July 01: 10,698
We're not even back to 2004 #s yet...
July 03: 12,143
July 02: 11,416
Interesting stats, and good for me :-) I bought right in between those two points (highest inventory recently). Paid 10% less than the reduced price (which was 10% less than the original price).
Still don't think inventory will be the only number that has an effect on prices (positive or negative). Low inventory can be the result of mortgage prices/rates high enough that they lower demand to the point were people just don't sell/move. I think you could still see declining prices in the face of static/normal inventory.
Jcricket, Moose,
Sure, there are people that can remember a meaningful drop in prices, but they are few and far between. In California, just about everyone either did not experience the SC bust, or has forgotten, or thinks that it was a one time occurance (ala Great Depression).
Look around. Just about everyone IN THE MARKET thinks they are bulletproof. It is not a matter of risk management, but a matter of religion and faith - California RE can never go down.
The same can be said of many places in the PNW. Bainbridge Island is one such place. Many aquaintances in their early 30s to early 40s are trying to save for their kids' education by buying overpriced properties, and renting them to scum like me for a monthly loss.
Why do they do it?
They can't time the stock market, and at the paltry rates of return in most of the indicies, they can't project a high enough return to make their financial goals.
Their careers are good, but not enough to afford the high-rolling, upper-middle lifestyle in the Western US.
They believe they can maximize risk (because there IS NO RISK) in real estate, and show big returns. If you can make $75K on one property, then 10 properties is 10X as good. Rising prices (a real estate Article of Faith) will liquify any hiccups that occur along the way (negative cash flow, repairs, bad renters, sticky markets, etc...)
It is not hard to see why. In any model, if the parameters are: aggressive behavior brings high reward, and the more aggressive the behavior, the less the risk, then it should be no surprise that people will dive head-first into the most risky endeavor you can find.
Normally, this is called a "bubble."
The risk-reward feedback cycle has been short-circuited. This condition is always temporary.
Stocks, Pokemon, and Beanie Babies...We have been there in the very recent past.
Here's a good one:
More homeowners facing foreclosure
How a raccoon caused me to become a homeless bum…
1) David Liarreah and Leslie Appleton Young are driving along a road at night
2) They are speeding to get to the next rah rah session to stem the tide in CA
3) As they round a bend in the road there in the middle of the road is a raccoon
4) LAY is driving and swerves to avoid the animal
5) They both die as the car runs into the granite countertop of a new McMansion
6) NAR loses its two biggest mouth pieces and nobody is there to spin the bubble burst
7) Without all the rah rah the news becomes more bearish on RE
8) House prices fall and people just walk away from their homes
9) Consumers stop spending
10) Layoffs
11) The stock market crashes and my 401K is just a fraction of what it was
12) FED starts stoking M3 and dollars become worthless
13) Foreign investors panic and pull out of U.S.
14) Banks start going bellyup
15) The bank where I have my 200K from the sale of my house goes bellyup
16) I am left with only 100k (insured by government) after the bank collapses
17) Government defaults on insuring money in collapsed banks (I lose my remaining 100K)
18) My company goes out of business
19) Company pension fund was maxed out in RE holdings and is gone
20) The government decides to up the “War on Terror” and cuts back SS payments
21) I get a small monthly SS check and a bit from the ruins of my 401K
22) But by now we have Argentina style hyperinflation and my dollars are used to stoke the fire in the refugee camp where I now live
23) My friend who bought gold coins to barter with is followed home and killed for his gold coins
24) Microsoft announces Vista service pack update 12….but by now nobody cares
25) Hillary Clinton wins the electon (5% turnout) and promises a “piece of bread and a cup of soup for all”
And all because of a dirty old raccoon……
Well what a surprise. New law from BushCo to do away with pensions in favor of "forced" 401Ks.
With the potential massive selloff of equities by the baby boomers as they start to retire, you can bet the boys at the top of the pyramid here in the good ol USA will do anything to keep the stock market from looking like yet another big fat ponzi scheme.
Click on my name for article.....
For those of you who own...did you receive your assessment yet?
Just got mine...appreciated much more then I had anticipated. My house was valued at $322K last year...jumped to $388K this year! . A 66K increase....which correlates with the appreciation I've seen in my area. Houses have gone up about 50-70K since last year. (fortunately the assessed values trail substantially behind market values. The market values went from around 400K to 475K)
However, this is exactly why I want to go back to more healthy 3-6% appreciation. Over double digit appreciation really nails you come tax time.
However, this is exactly why I want to go back to more healthy 3-6% appreciation. Over double digit appreciation really nails you come tax time.
Not really, it doesn't track that linearly. Because of I-747 King County can only increase their total "take" from all property taxes by 1%/year. Your taxes could go up a lot, or almost none, depending on how they decide to apportion out that 1% increase over the entire home ownership base. New homes, homes that appreciate more than yours, etc. dilute the effect of your assessed increase.
My home went up last year by far more than 1% (according to KC), but my property taxes actually went down (like .05%).
Yes, it's very strange, and yes, blame Tim Eyman for convincing people their individual property taxes could only go up a max of 1%/year.
Seattlemoose,
LOL!!!
Your racoon scenario is almost word for word out of one of my caffeinated rants.
There are two of us out there.
Very, very scary.
E
just see something interesting, any comment?
Price Increased: 04/26/06 -- $342,950 to $344,950
Price Increased: 04/27/06 -- $344,950 to $349,950
Price Increased: 05/07/06 -- $349,950 to $354,950
Price Increased: 05/10/06 -- $354,950 to $359,950
Price Increased: 05/15/06 -- $359,950 to $364,950
Price Reduced: 05/26/06 -- $364,950 to $349,950
Price Increased: 05/26/06 -- $349,950 to $364,950
Price Increased: 05/26/06 -- $364,950 to $369,950
Price Increased: 06/03/06 -- $369,950 to $372,950
Some of my anecdotal observations from the last week.
The Bellevue/Redmond area still has lots of "for sale" signs, and have added a few more to my regular routes lately. I'm starting to see "for rent" signs as well. Some of these sale signs have been up for months.
Went to visit a friend in Wallingford and we walked about 6 blocks to dinner. I noticed a distinct lack of "for sale" signs, as in not a single one.
Driving through Bellingham yesterday there are "for sale" signs everywhere, as many if not more than I see on the eastside.
So there's lots of numbers posted in some of these threads on many different topics -- inventory, closed sales, pending sales, etc. Has anyone thought about consolidating all this to a single website with tables and graphs? Maybe broken up by county and/or city? Does such a thing already exist?
I thought about doing it, but I already have several other ongoing projects I can't seem to find the time for. Dunno what makes me think this would be any different. =P
There is a pretty good web site/blog with tables and graphs at Altos Research
One category is specifically Seattle posts.
You may not agree with their conclusions, but the data sure is thick/useful/interesting.
Thanks for the link, but WTF? Bellevue median single family list price is $937,475? Is that some kind of adjusted dollar value? or does this mean something different than it sounds like?
or does this mean something different than it sounds like
Looked at that again - could be an outlier month (couple of huge spendy new listings) or just something incorrect in their spreadsheet.
It's not just Bellevue:
Black Diamond: $584,925
Carnation: $697,000
Fall City: $875,950
Woodinville: $700,000
The prices in that chart seem at least double or more what I expected the current median to be, even at the current overvalued (IMO) prices. That's what makes me wonder if they are in adjusted dollars or something, or if what they were measuring was something other than what I've come to expect for "single family" property, i.e. single family homes.
Don't ask me dude. I doubt they post incorrect numbers with regularity (since they get paid for their research accuracy), but feel free to contact them or comment on their blog posts.
Post a Comment