Wanted: Construction Job in Seattle

Either this report is a fabrication, or the guys in question haven't been clued in to how special Seattle is...

Construction workers from across the country came to the Cedar Rim Apartments in Newcastle for a major remodeling project.

They worked for weeks but were only partially paid. Now, some are stranded and taxpayers are footing some of the bill.

Donald Gill and Marc Cox are now stranded thousands of miles from home with no money, no jobs, and no way back.

The men are two of 14 construction workers who answered a Craigslist ad offering good pay and plenty of work to come refurbish apartments.
...
Somehow the deal went bad and the workers were left to fend for themselves.

Gill says he worked for three weeks but was only paid for one.

Now, a month without money, he and Cox have resorted to food stamps, paid for by Washington taxpayers, to survive.

Somebody should tell those guys that thanks to Seattle's perma-hot real estate market, there are plenty of construction jobs out there building new homes in a futile attempt to meet our area's insatiable home-buying demand.

(Eric Wilkinson, King 5 News, 05.13.2007)

Spot the Fundamentals

Let's play a game. It's called "Spot the Fundamentals," and the way we play it is by looking at some of the "fundamentals" to figure out which ones are responsible for our area's high home prices.

The frequent condescending argument of the cadre of Seattle area housing bulls (real estate agents, "analysts," the press, and increasingly combative blog commenters—whom I suggest we all ignore) is that unlike most of the rest of the nation, Seattle home prices are firmly supported by strong fundamentals such as exceptional job growth, high-paying jobs, and increasing population, and as such will not decline.

Let's play "Spot the Fundamentals" to see how well that claim holds up.

Job Growth
The Seattle area has "strong job growth," right?

Click to enlarge (source)

Well sure, if you call 3% growth in the last year "strong." Of course, while Seattle was one of the few parts of the nation where housing prices rose double-digits last year, there were 85 Metropolitan Statistical Areas that had better "job growth."

Unfortunately for the Bull Cadre, a 3% increase in jobs does not account for an 11% increase in home prices during the same time frame. As we have previously explored in detail, job growth (and reduction) in the Puget Sound has had little to no correlation with housing prices.

High-Paying Jobs
Yeah, but even though the job market isn't growing by leaps and bounds, thanks Microsoft, salaries are shooting through the roof... right?

Click to enlarge (source)

Hmm, maybe not. In fact, income growth in the Seattle area was so slow recently that we made it onto a "lowest of" list. Somehow I must have missed it when that little news tidbit hit the papers.

Another swing and a miss for the Bull Cadre.

Population Growth
Well, people are moving here faster than ever, so that pretty much forces home prices higher, doesn't it?

County	2000 pop.	2005 est.	% chg.	%/year
King	1,737,034	1,793,583	3.26%	0.64%
Pierce	700,820	753,787	7.56%	1.47%
Snohomish	606,024	655,944	8.24%	1.60%

(source)

Not. If there actually were people moving here in droves, then yeah, that would explain home prices rising an average of 9.4% per year (King County SFH, 2000-2005). However, that clearly does not describe reality.

Looks like strike three for the Bull Cadre.

Fundamentals vs. Speculation
Here's a refresher:

Click to enlarge (source)

As I have demonstrated before, Seattle area rents (which are not subject to speculation) have indeed been tracking fairly well with "the fundamentals." Home prices clearly have not.

How anyone can (with a straight face) argue that "strong fundamentals" will prop up Seattle area housing prices, when they have so clearly been propelled by factors other than fundamentals, is completely beyond me. You can believe whatever you want to believe about where prices will go from here, but to say that they will be propped up by "strong fundamentals" is just willful ignorance, in my opinion.

If anyone believes they can explain how Seattle home prices have actually been tied to fundamentals since 2000, and wishes to civilly bring such an argument to the table, backed up by hard data (such as what is found in this post), then by all means be my guest. However, don't waste your time with one-liners, "bitter renter" put-downs, and simplistic observations of inventory and ongoing price increases, as they will be ignored.

(Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Dept. of Labor, 01.2007)
(Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Dept. of Commerce, 09.2006)
(US Census Bureau, Population data: 2000-2005, 2005)
(King County Budget Office, Affordable Housing 2006, 01.2007)

Thanks go out to reader Dennis O. for pointing out some of the data in this post.

Forbes: Seattle Job Market Middling

Seattle home prices can't possibly fall, because we've got one of the best job markets in the country! At least, that's how the argument goes... but according to the latest claims from Forbes, that argument might not hold much water.

Oklahoma has inspired its share of songs and one memorable musical. But it's not exactly a top destination for recent college graduates looking for work. Usually, 22-year-olds flock to cosmopolitan cities like New York and San Francisco, assuming that's where they'll find the most opportunities for work (and, let's be honest, a social life). But they might be heading in the wrong direction. Oklahoma City made it on to our list of the 25 best American cities to get a job. New York's ranking? No. 75.

Of course, if you want a job in finance, you should still consider New York--Warren Buffett notwithstanding. And while Oklahoma City surely has a thriving arts community, the major metropolitan areas are probably your best bet if you want a career in theater. Our list looks only at statistics; we don't focus on which areas are best for specific careers. And for the second time in a row, the big cities performed poorly. While Washington D.C. is fifth on the list (down from No. 1 last year), Chicago (No. 82), Los Angeles (No. 88), San Francisco (No. 86) and Boston (No. 83) couldn't even break the top 75.
...
So where should you look for work? We wouldn't rule out New York or Los Angeles; highly educated job-seekers should be able to find opportunities there. But the major metropolitan areas will probably never shine on this list. Despite high median incomes, they are generally plagued by unemployment, expensive housing and low job growth.

Coming in at number 34 on the full rankings, Seattle out-performed many of the larger cities. Keep in mind though that this is the same source that five months ago predicted Seattle home prices will shoot to the moon.

It should also be noted that #1 on the list is Raleigh, NC, home of Research Triangle Park. Raleigh is a strong competitor to Seattle when it comes to technology jobs, and if you put any stock in Forbes' calculations (which I'm not saying I do), they currently come out on top by a long shot.

Seattle's a great place with a strong job market (at the moment), but you're only fooling yourself if you think we're unique, special, and invulnerable to serious housing market declines because of it. The point I'm trying to make is that there are plenty of places around the country with job markets as good as or even better than Seattle. A good local job market obviously won't hurt the housing market, but it won't save it, either.

(Hannah Clark, Forbes, 02.16.2007)

Microsoft & Boeing: Seattle's Firm Foundation

Illustration: James McFarlane
Click to enlarge

Question: How many of the Seattle-area's much-vaunted Boeing jobs will fail to materialize with the collapse of a $2.2 billion order?

Question: Are predictions about Microsoft job growth perhaps just as "overly aggressive" as Vista sales forecasts (according to CEO Steve Ballmer)?

Just curious.

Condo Shoppers Lie Low

This article appeared on the front page of the Puget Sound Business Journal early this month. While typically not read by the general public, "Biz Journals" are widely circulated throughout the business community. Local businesses use the publication to keep tabs on their customers and competitors and to stay abreast of local business news.

I've posted the entire article with permission as it's currently only available to subscribers of the Journal. Enjoy!

Puget Sound Business Journal
February 2, 2007
by Justin Matlick

Walk into the "Trio" condominium project's Belltown showroom, and it looks like many other glitzy condominium projects rising in downtown Seattle. Many of Trio's units, when they're completed this fall, will feature bamboo floors and faux-granite countertops. Tenants will share a roof deck just a block from the new Olympic Sculpture Park.

But there's one key difference between Trio and some other recent projects: It isn't selling.

With a median price of $405,000, the project opened for presales in December 2005 and, as of Jan. 7, had sold just 28 of its 116 units, according to the Fat Report, a monthly newsletter that chronicles local condo sales.

Trio is among a growing number of struggling condo projects in Seattle. A downtown Seattle high-rise project at Fifth Avenue and Madison Street has sold about 52 of its 126 unfinished condominiums since September 2006 [sic]. Lumen, a 94-unit project in Seattle's Lower Queen Anne neighborhood, started selling in June 2005, and roughly a third of its units are still up for grabs. In Ballard, a project dubbed Hjarta, which started presales in October, had sold seven of 79 units as of Jan. 7, according to the Fat Report.

The stagnant sales could pick up once the projects are completed, and don't mean Seattle has been dragged into the condo tailspin now affecting markets in Las Vegas, Boston and other cities -- some recent local projects have sold out within days. Still, many local developers and real estate watchers agree that Seattle's condominium market is decelerating for the first time in years.

The reason: With thousands of local condos slated to go up in the next few years, buyers believe the recent period of rapid price appreciation is disappearing, and it's taking away the buy-now urgency that fueled the local boom with it.

"Buyers have a lot more to choose from and are playing a bit of a waiting game," said Mark Schuster, president and chief executive officer of the Schuster Group Inc., a Seattle-based real estate development company.

Nationwide, the condominium outlook is bleak in cities such as Washington, D.C., where a rush to build left the market oversaturated. In the fourth quarter of last year, developers in the Washington metro area switched roughly 5,900 projected condos into rental apartments, while plans for another 2,500 new condominiums were shelved, according to Delta Associates, a research firm based in Alexandria, Va.

While the Puget Sound region's housing market is slowing -- in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties, the Northwest Multiple Listing Service has reported falling home sales and rising inventories since last summer -- none of the real estate professionals contacted for this story were aware of any local projects being canceled or postponed, and most economists agree that the local market is well-insulated against a dramatic decline.

According to Dick Conway, co-publisher of the Puget Sound Economic Forecaster newsletter and Web site, the ongoing Boeing boom, a Microsoft hiring spree and strong demand for the region's exports from Asia set the stage for an ongoing population inmigration that should keep housing demand steady.

"We have very strong fundamental demand for housing because of population growth," Conway said.

The critical question facing local condo buyers: whether supply will outstrip that demand. While it's nearly impossible to predict how many condos are too many, it's apparent that the region's developers remain in the throes of a condo-building spree.

Developers in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties filed permits to build 8,300 units of multifamily housing, including apartments, condominiums and townhomes, in 2005, according to Conway. That number rose to 11,200 last year.

Meanwhile, developers are converting apartments into condos at a rapid clip. Roughly 7,000 apartments were transformed into condominiums in 2006, or were scheduled to hit the market soon, according to Dupre + Scott Apartment Advisors in Seattle.

The bevy of new projects "has probably put a little rain on the sales parade," said Lin Shih, a Seattle real estate agent who specializes in condos at Coldwell Banker Bain. "Buyers think that, with all these new developments coming up, they can be picky."

Another factor: a widespread belief that the days of rapid price gains are over. "When the market was hot, people knew they were buying today for ready-made appreciation," said Brett Frosaker, owner of Columbia Real Estate in Seattle and publisher of the Fat Report. "Now they're starting to wonder if today's condos are listing at tomorrow's prices."

According to Frosaker, a project's sales typically accelerate once it is completed, in part because buyers feel more comfortable seeing the actual units instead of showroom mock-ups.

Nonetheless, some projects have sold rapidly in the presale phase, especially lower-priced developments targeted at first-time buyers. The 251-unit Moda project in Belltown, for instance, came on the market for presales last summer and sold out within days, according to Frosaker. Many of Moda's condos were small units priced under $300,000.

Looking ahead, Frosaker believes this summer could be a ripe time for condo buyers to get good deals, especially as the bigger projects get closer to completion and their developers feel a greater sense of urgency to fill them up.

"With all these projects fighting tooth and nail," Frosaker said, "summer might turn into a great buying opportunity." Schuster believes demand will remain strong enough to support current price levels. "I don't see price drops being part of the equation even if there were a significant slowdown," he said.

What do you think? Pretty objective, no? Why aren't we getting this "fair and balanced" type of reporting from most of our friends over at the Times or PI?

What makes this article unbiased in regards to residential real estate is the fact that 100% of its advertising is B2B related.

From my own personal experience, the B2B world (especially in the business networking community) have little use for the B2C crowd (i.e. real estate clerks and mortgage brokers). Since B2C types are usually dealing exclusively with consumers, it can be difficult for them to provide B2B referrals, and, worse yet, they often attempt to solicit business from their fellow networking partners.

Newspapers such as the Seattle PI and Times are co-conspirators to the REIC as they rely heavily on residential real estate advertising for their revenues, often leading them to distort the truth.

(Justin Matlick, Puget Sound Business Journal, 02-02-2007)

"This is a great time to buy a home."

Check out this absolutely delightful paid advertisement masquerading as a "guest editorial" in today's Seattle Times. It's penned by Mr. Samuel L. Anderson, the executive officer of the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties.

The media have been all abuzz over the past year about the softening in the housing market.
...
At the same time, local analysts point out that even though home sales in the greater Puget Sound region have slowed, now is still a good time to buy a home, particularly in our area.

What does this slowdown really mean for consumers? Is it wise to sit back and wait for a home in the hopes that prices may drop? Most real-estate experts in our region say don't bet on it.

Oh really? Okay, well why is that exactly, Mr. Executive Builder Man?

One reason we have not experienced the steep decline seen in other markets is that while other parts of the country face an oversupply of housing, we do not.

So you're saying that supply is not growing faster than demand, so we're not headed for an oversupply? Interesting... very interesting.

Here in Washington state, the Growth Management Act (GMA) actually limits the supply of new housing entering the market by directing where new development can occur. As long as GMA is in place, we are very unlikely to find ourselves in a housing glut.

Growth management act, huh? You don't say.

Another key factor is that the area in and around Seattle has a healthy supply of jobs and a strong regional economy — factors most experts agree help keep prices from falling.

What a compelling argument.

Sitting on the fence waiting for the absolute best deal is a gamble that prevents consumers from taking advantage of buying a home, while prices are moderating.
...
In today's housing market, the real risk is in waiting to buy a home.
...
Unlike some cities where the real-estate market is in a slump, the Seattle area is healthy and analysts feel certain it will stay that way. As a result, the deep discounted prices some consumers have been hoping for simply won't be happening here.

For consumers sitting on the sidelines, the bottom line is simple. Homeownership is always attractive. Besides being a stepping-stone to a future of financial security, homeownership provides a sense of community and personal satisfaction. In fact, studies show that homeowners are more content with their lives, enjoying a stronger sense of belonging and increased activity in community groups.

The equation is simple: Since housing is always a smart investment and interest rates are still near 40-year lows, savvy consumers know this is a great time to buy a home.

Well dang, I'm convinced. Now is a great time to buy, and I'd better be quick about it or else I'll be priced out forever, doomed to be a miserable, broke, dissatisfied loner, renting from the man for the rest of my life.

(Samuel L. Anderson, Seattle Times, 01.24.2007)

Does Job Growth = Home Buying Demand?

An article in the Times yesterday about the Puget Sound's job recovery following the dot-com bust got me thinking again about the oft-claimed jobs to home prices correlation. The usual assertion goes something like this: "Prices are justified because our economy is strong (i.e. - lots of jobs), and as long as we keep adding more jobs, home prices will not stop increasing, because more jobs equals more demand." It's certainly a comforting belief for inflated housing enthusiasts to hold when the local job situation is on an upswing:

Even though it ended on a somewhat muted note, 2006 was still the best year for job creation in Washington in nearly a decade, according to figures released Tuesday by the state Employment Security Department.

The state averaged nearly 2.87 million nonfarm payroll jobs last year, a gain of 3.2 percent, or 91,500 jobs, over 2005's average. That was the most nonfarm jobs added in a year since 1997, when 98,600 were created.

The year-end figures also show that 2006 conclusively marked the Puget Sound region's full recovery, in terms of total jobs, from the dot-com collapse and subsequent recession of the early 2000s.

The article included a nice graph showing the number of jobs in the four-county region since 2000. It has been well demonstrated in other markets that job growth or loss does not directly relate to home prices, but I thought it would be interesting to compare the Seattle Times graph with some data from the Seattle Bubble spreadsheet to see how well the more jobs = more demand = rising prices claim has held up in King County over the last five or six years. To obtain data about the number of jobs in King County I went to Workforce Explorer, the source cited in the Times article.

First I present you with the graph that comes closest to supporting the view that jobs are the primary source of demand.

Click to enlarge

When you compare the percent change year-over-year in both the number of jobs and the median (residential only) home price, the curves actually almost line up, with both job and home price changes being increasingly positive from about early 2003 to the end of 2005. However, the total change in home price increases during that time went from +7.3% to +20.0%, while the total change in jobs went from -1.9% to +2.3%. Despite the similar curves, I think it would be difficult to argue that such a slight change in the job situation drove the major price increases seen over the same period.

Here is same data presented in a slightly different way:

Click to enlarge

At the end of 2006 there were roughly 4% more jobs in King County than January 2000, yet home prices had increased a whopping 85%. I'd like to hear the logic that tries to argue that such a paltry increase in jobs will cause that large of a price increase in homes.

Now let's take a look at home sales. Supposedly the improving job situation is driving demand, and demand is measured by sales, so let's see how the two compare.

Click to enlarge

Hmm. It would appear that sales were experiencing the strongest growth during a time when the number of jobs was actually declining. In the summer of 2003 sales were up by as much as 45% over 2002, and yet the job market was still declining by roughly 1.5%.

Looking at the raw numbers of jobs versus sales the disparity becomes even more clear:

Click to enlarge

If jobs are supposed to drive demand, why is it that once the number of jobs began to increase in early 2004, sales actually leveled off? And why have sales been dropping off so steeply in the last year despite what the Times reports as "the best year for job creation in Washington in nearly a decade"? Could it be, perhaps, that the number of home sales and prices of sold homes in fact have very little to do with the number of jobs in a region?

I challenge anyone out there that still believes more jobs = more demand = rising prices to show me the data that supports any sort of correlation between those data sets. Lacking that, I hope we can finally put this dead argument to rest.

All of the above graphs—and the data behind them—can be downloaded in Excel format.

(Drew DeSilver, Seattle Times, 01.17.2007)
(Workforce Explorer, Industry Employment: Historical Series, 01.2007)

Slowing Condo Market? Not Here! Not Here!

The New York Times yesterday ran a story about the struggling condo market in many parts of the country, and with as much attention as it received, you just knew the local news couldn't let it go unanswered. Enter Aubrey Cohen of the Seattle P-I with Seattle bucks trend on slumping condos.

Seattle's market was not to blame for a recent decision to change a planned 34-story downtown building from condominiums to apartments.

Rather, the slumping condo markets in cities such as Washington, D.C., Las Vegas, Miami and Boston affected the national firms that fund such buildings, said John Schwartz, northwest regional director of Keller CMS, which is managing the Terry Avenue Apartments project.

"There was quite a bit of skittishness," he said. "I think the Seattle market clearly has a little different story to tell, but a lot of the big equity players, they take a wider view."

The frenzied condo market in many cities has collapsed since the middle of 2006, dragging down prices and scuttling projects -- or at least forcing them to change, according to a New York Times report Tuesday.
...
Seattle's housing market has fared better than those in other parts of the country in recent months, with continued year-over-year price increases, despite increasing inventory and falling sales, according to the Northwest Multiple Listing Service. The area's condo market, meanwhile, has been stronger than the market for other types of homes.

Seattle real estate professionals and economists agree that the city's job creation, relative lack of speculators and the fact that its boom never rose as high as other places kept its housing market healthy.
...
A Boston real estate consultant cited about 600 condo projects in the city's metropolitan area, with about 49,000 units in various stages of development, according to the Times story. Seattle has fewer than 9,000 condos in the works, according to Williams Marketing Vice President Warren Ballard.

"We don't have anywhere near the volume of construction that some other markets have," Ballard said. "You cannot go anywhere in Seattle and find a finished, brand-new condo to buy."

Really? I guess Mr. Ballard hasn't bothered reading Urbnlivn lately, where Matt has been tracking dozens of condos coming (and sometimes sitting around) on the MLS.

Let's see how this article holds up to the standard "our market is magically stronger than all others" type of article. Prominent mention of continued appreciation: check. Citing job growth as keeping housing strong: check. Un-supported claim of fewer speculator purchases than elsewhere: check. Looks like we've got all the makings of the classic Seattle real estate fluff piece.

Plus, as a bonus, Mr. Cohen threw in the odd comparison of the Boston "metropolitan area" (population 4.4 million) with just "Seattle" (population <600,000). So the Boston metro area has seven times the population and five times as many condo projects as the city of Seattle. Go figure. Also, it is made apparent later in the article that the 9,000 condos figure doesn't include apartment conversions, which numbered 7,000 (this time in the entire Seattle metro area) just last year.

In any case, direct numerical comparisons with other markets seems rather pointless to me. What really matters is whether there are more condos coming online in the next few years than there is demand. Maybe demand for condos in Seattle is just a lot lower than other cities, and 9,000 will push us over the edge. Who knows? It's not like we can count on Aubrey Cohen to actually do some serious investigative reporting on condo demand.

(Aubrey Cohen, Seattle P-I, 01.17.2007)

Update: Over at Seattlest, Michael van Baker compares Cohen's reporting to the Titanic's claim of being "unsinkable."
Meanwhile, condo enthusiast Matt Goyer of Urbnlivn says that "this article is just a little too go-go-go, even for me."

2007 Optimism, Part III: Some Cracks Appear

This is the last post in this impromptu series. There were just so many articles out there full of "expert" quotes and predictions about the Puget Sound's economic outlook for 2007. Here are three more articles that discuss the interaction of the local housing market with the greater local economic picture. Surprisingly, the housing affordability elephant in the room is actually not completely ignored:

The Good Ride Continues in 2007
Because of relatively high rates of in-migration and household formation, the regional housing market will continue to do better than its national counterpart in 2007 and 2008.

Dick Conway, (Washington CEO)

2007: A Sound economic picture
The one sector no one sees much of a lift from is housing, either in new-home construction or resale activity and prices. Pedersen says in-migration and employment growth are counterbalanced by the deterioration of affordability.

Bill Virgin, (Seattle P-I)

Area's solid economy vulnerable to cracks showing up elsewhere
So even if the local real-estate market holds up better than its national counterpart, "if the U.S. housing market pulls the country into a recession, then we have a problem," Conway said.

Drew DeSilver, (Seattle Times)

I'm keeping this post short because I've said about all I feel like saying on the topic for now. We'll see how things pan out.

Optimism on the Menu for 2007

In addition to the standard E. Rhodes fluff piece that Synthetik posted about on Sunday, there were a couple other articles posted over the weekend that conveyed a general sense of optimism about Seattle's housing market in the coming year. Here are a few choice quotes from Mike Benbow's article in the Everett Herald titled Smiling at the slump:

David Toyer was having Christmas dinner with relatives when one asked him how he felt about the housing market.

Toyer, a vice president for Barclays Northwest, a major developer in Snohomish County, gets that a lot.

Most people expect him to be down in the dumps, or at least very concerned. That, he said, is because they've been listening to national newscasts about areas of the country where home prices have dropped like a rock or sales have plummeted due to overbuilding.

Indeed, The Associated Press named the rocky housing market the top business-related story of 2006 because of worries that it could push the nation into a recession.

Trouble is, the housing market in the Northwest in general and Snohomish County in specific did well this year and is expected to continue to be strong in 2007.
...
Toyer is very positive about the housing market for 2007, partly because he's seen the numbers in a study recently conducted for his firm by New Home Trends, a consulting firm in Mill Creek.

"There's no reason to think we will not have a very healthy housing market," he said. "We've got some things here that are different than everywhere else."

One of the unique elements, he said, is a state Growth Management Act that forces developers to build close to cities or within them, a law that is gradually reducing the amount of available land.

Toyer also noted that with hiring at Microsoft, Boeing and many other businesses large and small, most analysts are predicting a good economy in the Seattle area in 2007.

That's attracting people looking for work, and many would like to buy a house, he said.

Mr. Benbow goes to town, throwing all the classic arguments out there. We've got "Seattle is special," "we're running out of land," and of course the ever-popular "Boeing and Microsoft will save us," all in just the first few paragraphs! Never mind the uncomfortable fact that affordability continues to drop like a rock, and there is no evidence that all of these new jobs are paying any better than existing ones. Methinks Mr. Benbow's article is heavy on claims, but light on supporting evidence or critical examination, as usual.

Justin Matlick takes a more balanced look at Washington's situation in the Puget Sound Business Journal's general state economic outlook for 2007, but the high point of the article is the clever illustration that so delightfully epitomizes the unwavering hope of local housing optimists.

Illustration: James McFarlane
Click to enlarge

With the national economy expected to continue decelerating in 2007, how will Washington state fare?

First, the big worry: housing. Economists generally agree that the state's housing market will continue to slow throughout 2007, especially in the Puget Sound region, and a precipitous decline could drag down consumer spending, slow the construction industry and dampen economic growth.

On the bright side, the state's economy is poised to continue growing even as housing slows. Around Puget Sound, a strong international economy will continue fueling demand for key Washington exports such as Boeing airplanes and Microsoft software. Outside the region, economists expect the economy to continue expanding, albeit at a more moderate pace.
...
While the national housing slowdown has finally hit Washington — in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties, the Northwest Multiple Listing Service has reported falling home sales, rising inventories, and slowing home-price appreciation throughout the second half of 2006 — homes in core Puget Sound areas are still logging double-digit price appreciation.

[Union Bank of California senior economist Keitaro] Matsuda said this indicates that the housing market in the Puget Sound region and throughout the state is a long way from hitting bottom.

I don't know anyone who has claimed that the housing market around here is "hitting bottom," so I don't really know what point Mr. Matlick was trying to make with that statement. Moving on...

"It will still take a while before things start to really slow down," Matsuda said.

While Matsuda could not guess exactly how far housing will fall, he did say that it's now clear the national housing expansion has been founded on solid economics, and has not been the bubble many feared.

"If it was a bubble, the markets that experienced the strongest appreciation should also experience the largest price drops, and that hasn't happened," Matsuda said.

Whoa, hold on a minute there. How is anything "clear" at this point? If anything is clear, it's that the national housing expansion was not "founded on solid economics," because nationwide housing statistics are moving in reverse. Furthermore, Matsuda seems to believe that "hasn't happened," means the same thing as "won't happen," which is something I happen to disagree with.

For Washington, this means any declines will likely be more moderate than severe, especially since the rest of the state's economy will likely continue growing at a healthy pace, according to Matsuda and [local economist Dick] Conway.

So really, the primary argument for optimism comes back to... Microsoft and Boeing. I realize that both of these companies are doing well right now, and I certainly hope it continues to be the case. However, I truly do not believe that the recent positive performance of two companies is enough to hold up our entire region's economy.

I'm not calling for a huge pile of doom and gloom for the Seattle area, but unless the vast majority of the area's new jobs are paying $80k or more, I think that 2007 will see the start of price contractions in Seattle. I think the unaffordability ceiling has been reached.

What about you? Are you generally optimistic about 2007 for the Seattle area housing market? Do you buy the arguments that we're special and will continue to see price gains while more and more cities across the nation experience price declines?

Stay tuned in the next week or so for a more detailed post dedicated to my personal 2007 guesses. Let's keep the comments in this thread focused on these two articles and more general local economic impressions.

(Mike Benbow, Everett Herald, 12.31.2006)
(Justin Matlick, Puget Sound Business Journal, 12.29.2006)

Always Trust The 'Experts'

What's the point about worrying about global warming when we're getting all this hot air from Elizabeth Rhodes?

Please enjoy this year end feel good article about our robust housing market here in Rain City.

One of this year's biggest residential real-estate topics was the anticipated slowdown in sales and appreciation.

Would the Puget Sound market tank?

Would prices deflate?

Neither of those things occurred locally, although other parts of the country have seen moderate-to-severe downturns this year.

What happened here was a gentler transition in housing activity, from its record 2005 levels to a slower pace by this year's end.

What will 2007 bring? Here's what Seattle real-estate experts are saying.

First, let me introduce the "experts".

Elizabeth Rhodes (The Seattle Times and her job depend on a steady stream of advertising dollars from local Real Estate)

Matthew Gardner (Gardner Johnson, a Seattle land-use economics firm; "regularly retained by the region's most prominent developers")

Bill Riss (CEO of Coldwell Banker)

Frank Nothaft (Chief Economist, Freddie Mac)

Mike Scott (Dupre+Scott Apartment Advisors)

Suzanne Britsch (Senior Analyst, New Home Trends)

"This bubble lunacy is still prevalent, but not in Seattle, and I'll keep saying that," said Gardner, of the land-use economics firm Gardner Johnson.

The closer homes are to the major job hubs of Seattle and Bellevue, "the higher appreciation you'll get," Gardner said. "That's because there's intrinsically a value to our time."

What did we have in 2006?

"A more balanced market," said Bill Riss, CEO of Coldwell Banker Bain. That's giving buyers "a little more time to think, plan and write good offers."

Riss wouldn't be surprised if spring sales roar to life, causing another feeding frenzy, albeit not at record levels of past years.

A rise in inflation could drive rates up, but that's not a concern now, Frank Nothaft, chief economist for mortgage-money provider Freddie Mac, recently told the Washington Association of Mortgage Brokers.

"Inflation will be tame, and interest rates will not change much in the next six months," Nothaft said. "They may drop after that. We don't see mortgage rates even getting up to 7 percent [by the end of 2007]."

He also anticipates the number of nontraditional loans, such as negative amortization and interest-only, will drop as borrowers choose other mortgage products instead.

Sure, no problem affording that $699,000 charmer with your conventional loan: $140K down payment and $4,800 monthly payment!

The same strong regional economics sustaining the local home-sales market are also fueling apartment demand, said analyst Mike Scott, of Seattle's Dupre + Scott Apartment Advisors.

Logically, strong demand should ramp up apartment construction, but it hasn't worked out that way, Scott said.

A year ago, he forecast 3,600 new units would be built in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties this year. Instead, just under 3,100 opened.

In 2007 Scott anticipates even fewer: just 2,600 new apartments.

...apartment rents to jump about 8 percent next year, Scott predicted. Vacancies will fall from their current 4.7 percent to roughly 3.5 percent, he said.

Buy now or be priced out forever! I don't know about you, but even if he's correct I would gladly pay an additional 8% in rent rather than 50% more in mortgage costs while facing the inevitable repossession, bankruptcy and anxiety disorder.

My prediction: Rents will remain flat through 2007 and drop in 2008 as additional housing becomes available. Desperate FB's will have no choice but to rent out properties that do not sell. Condos and condo conversions will face a serious slowdown in sales and many will convert into apartments.

The national news has been full of stories about homebuilders cutting production and prices as the real-estate market cools. In November, for example, building permits nationwide fell to a nine-year low, according to a government report.

"But that's the national news, not the local news," said Suzanne Britsch, senior analyst for New Home Trends, a construction-analysis and consulting firm in Mill Creek. "We still have job growth and a shortage of lots here, so we have just not had a problem with standing inventory."

We're different. Special. A breed apart.

In King County, the average price of a new house will be $750,000, she predicted. A big chunk of that expense is the land. The rock-bottom price for a lot in a new King County subdivision is now $250,000.

In Snohomish County, new single-family homes will start at $400,000. And they'll likely be on 3,500-square-foot lots, rather than 6,000 square feet, the norm there until recently.

OMG that is so affordable! Isn't it nice to have all these objective opinions?

Happy New Year ;)

(Elizabeth Rhodes, Seattle Times, 12.30.2006)

"Local Prices Are Not Headed Backward"

Here's a familiar song, courtesy of Tom Kelly at the Everett Herald.

It used to be a popular notion among local real estate agents that the Northwest housing market lagged behind the California market by about six months.
...
I thought about that idea recently when I read that home sales decreased 30.1 percent in August in California from the same month in 2005, the largest sales decline since August 1982.
...
Things are a bit different here, and will continue to be. According to the Northwest Multiple Listing Service, home sales were down about 15.7 percent in September from the same month last year yet prices were up 9.4 percent, marking the first time in two years that year-over-year price growth has not been in double-digit territory in Western Washington.

The premise of this article appears to be that the Northwest only lags California on the way up, but we won't have to worry about following California down. Let's see how well the author backs up that claim.

While the past 24 months have been crazy, the long-term outlook for the Puget Sound housing market continues to be bright. Here's why.

Availability of jobs props up the housing market, and the job outlook for Western Washington continues to be extremely healthy, according to data compiled by Stewart Title Company. In fact, the Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area is expected to add jobs at a rate of double the national average for at least the next three years. While homes might take longer to sell and sellers again are considering offers contingent on the sale of the buyer's home, local prices are not headed backward or even close to a "soft landing."

Okay, so our housing market will remain strong because there are plenty of jobs available. But wait, what happened to the California comparison? What does the job situation look like in California? Are jobs not plentiful there? Tom doesn't say.

Instead, he totally drops the original point he seemed to be making, and closes the article with a series of bold assertions.

"No housing market has ever collapsed unless the underlying economy went sour," [real estate economist John] Tuccillo said. "Short of recession, this means that virtually every housing market in the U.S. will hold up even though sales may slump and prices decline." He did note, however, that home prices may slump in upper-Midwest rust belt areas.

What about a worst-case scenario — mass foreclosures and rising inventories?

"If the United States undergoes a recession in 2007, the housing market will do much worse than we anticipate, but so will autos and retail," Tuccillo said. "Exotic mortgage instruments will have an impact in increasing the foreclosure rate, but in any loan made before 2005, the consumer is in a positive equity position and will weather financial distress."

So, when your friends in California swear the sky is falling and real estate will no longer be the same, remind them that property is cyclical and that their neighborhood will rebound when the "down" period ends late next year.

And, the down period in the Puget Sound will mean slower, not negative, appreciation.

Sweet. Home prices definitely won't drop significantly unless there's a recession, but even if there is one, every pre-2005 loan will be totally safe, and worst case, all the pain will be over by the end of next year. Those are good things to know. I'm glad Mr. Kelly let us in on this reassuring absolute knowledge that he and his real estate economist friends are in possession of.

(Tom Kelly, Everett Herald, 10.15.2006)