Seattle Bubble has moved! Redirecting...

You should be automatically redirected. If not, visit http://seattlebubble.com/blog/and update your bookmarks.

Off-topic comment? Interesting link?
Head over to the forums, or click here for open threads.

Monday, November 02, 1981

Thursday Open Thread

This is your open thread for today. Please post random links and off-topic discussions here.

18 comments:

Peckhammer said...

Productivity slows, wage pressures mount

"The productivity of American workers slowed to a standstill in the summer, while wages were rising at the fastest clip in more than two decades - a combination likely to raise inflation concerns at the Federal Reserve."

Richard said...

Cash out re-fi's alive and well

"And the borrowers as a group refinanced to loans with higher interest rates than their old mortgages;"

Matthew said...

Slow-market crisis: Stuck with two homes-
Imagine you buying your dream home only to discover you're unable to sell your current one.

site

Matthew said...

BTW, has anyone noticed that the SHUG sitings are getting rarer and rarer these days?? And when he does show, he throws out an unsubstantiated piece of erroneous data and when called out on it, he doesn't reply. Looking more and more like the pro RE TROLLS on this forum are having a harder and harder time trying to defend that there is not a bubble.

Ardell DellaLoggia said...

Matthew,

I have taken on the very tedious chore of breaking down the King County Stats, to find out what is really happening.

It will likely take me many more hours before I am finished, but for those who want to watch it as it happens, you can stay tuned at www.searchingseattleblog.com

I am posting as I run the stats, so even I don't know where it is headed. But so far I'm not seeing any market weaknesses. So far no one can buy something better in 2006 than they did in 2005.

So far what I am seeing is that people got just a little too greedy in the last six months, and their efforts to achieve an appreciation factor of up to 80% over the last 18 months, is not being well received by the buying public...not should it be.

If a one bedroom condo sells for $140,000 instead of the $180,000 they are asking...the same condo that sold for $100,000 in mid 2005, should we cry that they only gained 40% and not 80%? I don't think so.

meshugy said...

Here's an interesting report:

Seattle Real Estate Price Trends: October 2006

The number of properties lowering their price has grown to 43%, which is comparable to San Jose. Single family homes in San Francisco are holding up significantly better, with only (!) 27% having lowered their prices.

Some other interesting tidbits about the homes for sale in Seattle:

* Despite the signs of market cooling noted above. Prices are not generally falling through the floor. In fact the median prices have hovered around a plateau for a full six months. We may be seeing the weak cyclical trend ("the burst") interacting with a typically strong seasonal market ("summer buying season"). The net effect is prices haven't moved. Watch as the winter comes on to see if convergent seasonal and cyclical weakness impacts prices more noticeably.
* Our Trend Indicators for the broad Seattle real estate market see plateaus in other market measurements as well, for example Days on Market has held steady.
* The highest priced properties (the top quartile) went through a 20% correction earlier in the summer but appear to have stabilized in the last few months, price-wise. The following chart, while a little boring, illustrates the key part of the market that's moving.

Seattle Homes for sale - Real estate price trends in four market segments. 90-day rolling averages.

Middling results to be sure. The housing market bears call look at these signs and call it "just the beginning of the housing market crash." The bulls (are there any real housing market bulls these days? Maybe what we have is "Bear" and "What, Me Worry?") read these signs as "less damage than expected."

meshugy said...

BTW, has anyone noticed that the SHUG sitings are getting rarer and rarer these days??

Hi Matt...sorry, just too busy. Business has tripled for me AND I'm having another kid this month.

Peckhammer said...

Ardell DellaLoggia said in her blog:

"Personally, while I clearly do not wish for the market to drop significantly, I would like to see a return to the time when one can readily buy a two bedroom condo in a decent location for less than $200,000."

Ardell, I couldn't agree more. The only problem is that in Seattle that would require a 50% to 60% decrease in current pricing.

MisterBubble said...

"I am posting as I run the stats, so even I don't know where it is headed. But so far I'm not seeing any market weaknesses."

Ardell, if your statistical skills are as sharp as your rhetorical skills, I have no doubt that you will fail to find a problem.

"So far what I am seeing is that people got just a little too greedy in the last six months....If a one bedroom condo sells for $140,000 instead of the $180,000 they are asking...the same condo that sold for $100,000 in mid 2005, should we cry that they only gained 40% and not 80%? I don't think so."

Ah, yes....A 22% drop in prices doesn't count as weakness, so long as prices are still higher than they were last year.

Ardell, you inspire me. Truly.

rentalbliss said...

"The Peelers are among the increasing ranks of "tweeners," or people who've inadvertently ended up juggling the costs of two homes as a result of the slowing market. Many victims of this fearsome financial trap have been wooed by the upsides of the new buyer's market: increased choice and better prices."

Oh now the sellers are the victims! what about the buyers of the last few years who were raped by home prices?

wreckingbull said...

I have noticed a growing trend in Ballard, mostly in the in the 500-700K range. I am seeing houses get listed on the MLS for about 1-2 months, then are mysteriously delisted.

The interesting thing is that the for-sale sign stays up, and brochures continue to be refilled.

Anyone else seen this sort of thing happening? Pretty much makes the 'listed on' field of the MLS record useless.

I at least have to concede to Meshugy that most of the shacks (and I mean it) priced at around 500K are still moving pretty fast. These are the people that will really be hurting when the soggy bottom falls out. They not only will be upside-down, but will be upside-down on a real P.O.S.

PugetHouse said...

I am seeing houses get listed on the MLS for about 1-2 months, then are mysteriously delisted.

The interesting thing is that the for-sale sign stays up, and brochures continue to be refilled.


Here's a plausible hypothesis, nothing more: the NWMLS recently changed the way it counts cumulative days on market (CDOM). If a listing comes back on the market, the previous period now counts toward CDOM. The tricksters may be trying to make their listings look younger by inactivating them. Older listings are more apt to get lowball offers. They may also hope to attract buyers directly, in order to keep the entire commission for themselves.

Thanks for the alert, wreckingbull. That's worth watching!

Ardell DellaLoggia said...

Pugethouse,

Don't assume the lister is trying to keep that 3%. More likely that 3% is needed to get the property sold.

In the last 30 days I did both sides of one listing for 2% and recently dropped the total commissions for both agents to less than 50% of the stated amount in the contract.

Sometimes you have to work the commissions down in the fall, for both the buyer and the seller to come together.

PugetHouse said...

Ardell,

In the above context,

entire commission = listing agent commission + selling office commission

Geon said...

I see, probably every other day, old listings being listed as new, with a new mls. The reatlors, who've been warned from what they tell me, still are relisting stagnant props.

But look what popped up today, a "new on the market" that has been on the market 197 days. I don't know how they did it, but they are using the same mls.

http://www.johnlscott.com/PropertyDetail.aspx?GroupID=33706896&ListingID=12720915&Sort=0

I usually keep a list of 50+ properties on my JL Scott's fovorites and at least 80% sell at a reduced price. New properties are really taking a slashing, old one's just sit and sit and sit.

emcityjill said...

Wreckingbull:
Hi! You are describing a phenomenon that many of us have also observed quite some time. On Queen Anne alone I've been tracking three houses that have appeared and reappeared on the MLS over the last FOUR months! It's the same old house popping back up on the MLS with a shiny new MLS number and a "reset" back to zero days on market. They don't even bother to tweak the description. I didn't think this was even legal. Oh, and on a couple of them, the price starts high then is reduced and reduced in 10K increments until the listing disappears... only to pop up again a week or two later with the original higher asking price. Real genius, if you ask me (insert sarcasm here).

Ardell DellaLoggia said...

Pugethouse said "...houses...are mysteriously delisted...but the sign stays up and brochures are refilled".

If the listing was 6%, it drops to 3% once "delisted". There is no promise to pay a buyer's agent if it is not in the mls.

Do you see a price change on the flyer once it is delisted?

Wanderer said...

All of this talk about relisting properties should be interesting when the October numbers come out. If we see a spike in new listings (very abnormal for this time of year) do you think the REC will come out and say, "There really aren't that many people putting homes on the market... It is partly due to our agents relisting old properties." I don't know how big of an issue it is or even if it is illegal, but I am sure the REC can't grasp at that particular straw.