Comments on: September Case-Shiller: Seattle Slide Continues

By: bitterowner

bitterowner — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 04:17:02 +0000

TheDexter,
Do you have a basis for your assertion, or is it simply something you can feel in your bones?

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: TheDexter

TheDexter — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 19:06:16 +0000

Seattle market will be stable, projected values will hold and even see an increase, to 3%.

California is not Seattle. All real estate is local.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Transplanted Sys Eng.

Transplanted Sys Eng. — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:01:40 +0000

If you look at the press release from Nov 8th on Case shiller website you will see the tiers are based on 1/3 of the number of homes sold that month (low, middle, high). They call them sales pares. What that means is there will be fluxuation from month to month about what is considered Low – mid-high. I looked at the aug data and the numbers are slightly different – but not significantly. However, it might be interesting to keep an eye on the break over points from one month to the next to see if there is a sudden major change (i.e. if more houses in the upper market are selling than the lower market).

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: biodieselchris

biodieselchris — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:47:12 +0000

98103 – home of the 400k buy-out-re-up-to-McMansion to sell for $1.3 million.

Don’t buy into the ‘median price’ garbage

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: goin' for it

goin' for it — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:03:00 +0000

whats my name,

I agree. As a bubblehead I shouldn’t have bought two years ago. However, I was able to get such a good deal back then (I’m a bit of a wheeler-dealer ;) ) that I figured it was OK.

As for the heresy part of it….I’m just trying to beat the rest of you to the punch. :)

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: whats my name

whats my name — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:52:00 +0000

“Ok, so heres the deal. I managed to get someone to buy my condo on the eastside for 100k more than I bought it for 2 years ago.”

What kind of talk is this? Claims to be a bubblehead. Doesn’t he know that two years ago all the smart money was on the sidelines?

He’s not even waiting for the crash to lowball some builder. This must be heresy.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: patient

patient — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:45:44 +0000

I agree sniglet but the scientist in me is a hungry beast for explanations.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Sniglet

Sniglet — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:22:35 +0000

I think it is too early in the downturn to be making predictions based on observed actions in the various market segments (e.g. low end, high-end, mid-market, etc). Over the last year we have been getting a myriad of conflicting stories from around the country where the local downturns began at completely different market segments. In the end, however, the bubble disease creeps into all markets rendering these short-term anomalies irrelevant.

It may have to do with what what price range saw the biggest volume of new construction in recent years, but I really don’t know. These contradictory reports of how the bursting bubble has variations certainly seems confusing, and at times I just sit back and scratch my head. However, given a larger perspective I think we’ll find these variations didn’t really matter in the end-game.

To put things another way, I am just recovering from a nasty case of the flu (I sit typing all bundled up on the couch). Several of my friends have recently had the flu, and my wife is just getting it now. However, what’s very curious is that each of us had different symptoms. I was light-headed and dizzy with a thumping head-ache while a friend was vomitting every 15 minutes. I have developed a lung infection but my daughter hasn’t.

The point is this: the fact that my friends and family have differing symptoms, we ALL have the same disease, and the prognosis of being put out of commission for several days to a week are consistent regardless of patient.

It beats me why each of us react differently to the same nefarious disease, althought I am sure there MUST be some explanation. But I don’t know how useful it would be for me to know those precise scientific reasons that lead to different symptomology.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: patient

patient — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 22:36:03 +0000

TJ, that’s exactly what is so puzzling, the affluent often have funding, are well informed and posess negotiation skills and patience while the “stretchers” are the impatient ones that mostly contributes to raising prices in a flaky market. You would think that this together with top heave inventory would make the high tier tank faster and steeper.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: TJ_98370

TJ_98370 — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 22:26:07 +0000

patient,

I understand that the high tier is made up of homes above $484,820. What is not clear (maybe just to me) is whether or not the high tier is 1/3 of the total population of homes. I assume that it is.

As far as the very affluent being insulated, all I am saying is that tightened loan standards would probably affect these type people the least. If you can pay $716,000 cash for a home, as an elderly couple in my neighborhodd did recently, you don’t worry much about trivial details such as loan standards or down payments.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: patient

patient — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 21:27:19 +0000

TJ, the high tier are homes above $484,820.

I’m not sure about the affluent insulation theory since these people normally did not become affluent by throwing away money in bad negotiations or by being uninformed of market conditions. The only theory I can come up with is that the sales volume is so low that only the most attractive homes are being sold in the upper tier and that there still is/was competition for them.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Angie

Angie — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:51:06 +0000

Oh, and before I forget, thanks to Mama for that link to the Rain City post. That post is looking at data from Kirkland/Redmond/Bothell, I think. It made me have a look at what’s going on with listings in my neighborhood (here in the yuppier sections of 98118).

Since I’m just going by what’s on the Windermere web site via MLS, and don’t have sales data or anything, this is not at all intended to be representative. But I will say that it looks like properties are actually starting to move again–there are several I’ve been watching that have been for sale for a while, and just in the last week or two they’ve gone to “contingent” or “Subject to Inspection” status. Some of these properties did have big price drops (at least in terms of what was listed, who knows about the final sales price). By my totally nonscientific guesstimation (there goes my reputation) it seems like it was in line with what she was saying, still a moderate increase from what they probably would have fetched last year, but nothing stratospheric.

(Also, as an aside, I think you still shouldn’t write off the South End. You asked me about schools before. Check out the new K-8 I alluded to, and also the excellent Montessori program [!] in place at another local elementary. As with the K-8, the strong performance of the Montessori program gets lost in some other stuff that goes into the test scores–this almost cost them their school during the whole closure debacle, but it’s a testament to their parent involvement that it didn’t get closed after all. I think a lot of Seattlites just don’t know much about SE Seattle, and it really is a terrific place to live. Lots cheaper than the north end and the Eastside, too.)

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Angie

Angie — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:33:26 +0000

Ooh! Now there’s an interesting data set. Thanks for the pointer, TJ.

If you look at the Seattle dataset, houses in the “lower third” have been appreciating faster than those in the top third for the entire length of time that is represented. At the top of the file,1991, houses in the lower third are worth ~27% less (in terms of the index values) than the upper third. The most recent index values have those in the lower third at 7-10% higher than the upper third.

I don’t know why the index was set based on Jan 2000 prices. But from the looks of it, lower-priced houses have been appreciating faster than higher-priced ones for a long time in this area.

Probably there’s just more competition for “starter homes” than “movin’ on up” homes.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: TJ_98370

TJ_98370 — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:39:01 +0000

patient -

I can’t find any description of tier specifications. Is it accurate to assume that each teir is an equal third with respect to data points?

Although I agree that August data do not reflect the recent tightened loan standards, I also believe that a factor that influences top tier statistics is that the most affluent buyers / investors would be the most insulated from economic variations. In other words, the very affluent are always going to be able to come up with the 20% down payment (or more), irregardless of what loan standards or other economic conditions might be at the time.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Transplanted Sys Eng.

Transplanted Sys Eng. — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:30:27 +0000

Patient,

I think part of the reason is the high tier stopped have double diget Y to T gains 4 months before the low tier (nor were it’s double diget gains as high). Don’t get me wrong I believe it to will fall but will lag the lower and mid tiers. For San Francisco the massize hits to the lower end are a combination of the foreclosures in outlying areas (such as Stockton) and the increased cost of jumbo loans. In San Fran anything under $614K is considered “Low tier”. Personally I was thrilled that they now show the tiers as I am mostly interested in the middle market anyway.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: patient

patient — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:47:09 +0000

Does anyone have a theory to the different direction of the upper tier? Since it’s c/s the median scewing arguments should be mute. It’s kind of strange since what I understand the inventory is pretty top heavy and combined with jumbo issues shouldn’t the high tier be depreciating faster? It is August numbers though where the tighter lending and jumbo issues just began, so most loans for August was probably secured prior to the main tightening. That could be the explanation i guess.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: The Tim

The Tim — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:20:03 +0000

Thanks for the feedback, everybody. I will try to make time to make the second chart more readable before next month’s numbers come out. Also, I was thinking of adding the tiered pricing data, but I noticed that it was still reflecting August stats. When it gets updated to September, I will probably put it up in a post.

Also, with respect to the blog being a “religion,” that suggestion is quite amusing to me, but rather misses the point. The point of Seattle Bubble is to provide information, analysis, and commentary about the Seattle housing market. Obviously at the moment, that means a lot of “negative” reporting, since the market is turning around after years of being hot hot hot.

However, when things shake out and start to head back up again, the content of this site will still be relevant. It will perhaps be less entertaining, since upbeat news and analysis tends to attract less attention, but in a down or up market, educated people will still seek out information about the market that comes from a source other than those that have a vested interest in selling. That is what I hope to provide with Seattle Bubble, long-term.

Reply – or<\/em> up market, educated people will still seek out information about the market that comes from a source other than those that have a vested interest in selling. That is what I hope to provide with Seattle Bubble, long-term.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: TJ_98370

TJ_98370 — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:03:53 +0000

TSE is right. There is tiered price data, and it is worth a look. As he mentions, as of August the high tier for Seattle (greater than $484,820) index data points are still increasing while middle tier and lower tier indices data points are decreasing. This is an excellent example of how median price statistics can be skewed by one end of the market and be misrepresentative of the overall market.

Scroll to Seattle at the bottom of the page –

Tiered Data

Reply – Tiered Data<\/a>',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Marc

Marc — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:19:59 +0000

goin’ for it,

This website might help http://www.building-cost.net/.
It estimates the cost to the consumer of having a house constructed in various geographic areas. It’s not exactly what you’re looking for but it will give you some idea. I used it and was surprised to find that, assuming it’s reasonably accurate, I’ll be able to build a second house on my property in Magnolia for a lot less than I would have guessed.

As for making stupid low ball offers, I highly recommend it. Several of my clients have had success and I think this winter will be a great opportunity as sales slow and interest rates fall. If you’ll need a jumbo loan you might want to wait until after the new year in order for Bernanke & Co. to sufficiently grease the interest rate slide and for lending liquidity to increase.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: goin' for it

goin' for it — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:54:31 +0000

Hi everyone, big bubblehead here. Ok, so heres the deal. I managed to get someone to buy my condo on the eastside for 100k more than I bought it for 2 years ago. (just dodged capital gains ;) ) First off, I can’t BELIEVE they paid me that much for it. I honestly feel bad for them but hey ::shrug:: what you gonna do? Also, I sold it myself without help from a realtor. I want to thank everyone here, including The Tim for their help in that regard. I used Iggyshouse.com to get on the MLS and posted everywhere else as well. So now I’m going to buy a NEW house. I’ve been looking from Bothell to Renton and I’ve seen how much trouble the builders are in firsthand. And I intend to take advantage of it. Either today or tomorrow I’m going to start make half priced offers to the builders. I was wondering if anyone here has done the research to find out what the builders average sq ft building cost is? I’ll keep you all up to date on how my endeavor proceeds. ;)

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Transplanted Sys Eng.

Transplanted Sys Eng. — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:57:12 +0000

Tim,
Did you notice that Case Shiller now also provides a breakout of the index by low, medium and High tier within each metro market. It includes what price level for each tier. You might want to look at the data. Its pretty interesting, it shows Seattle lower and middle priced homes declining at a faster rate than the higher priced homes. Also look at San Francisco as it shows a MAJOR decline in the lower market but a small increase in the high end of the market.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Sniglet

Sniglet — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:50:01 +0000

Most home-buyers will be much better off if they wait 2 or 3 years before buying in the Seattle area. Yes, there are still a handful of zip-codes that are doing well, but those bubblish locales are shrinking month by month. Give it another year and even the hottest neighbourhood in the Puget Sound will be seeing negative depreciation.

Further, I think we are in for a deep recession on top of a collapsed housing bubble, all of which will unfold over the next couple years. Those with the patience to wait will get MUCH more house for the money than if they buy now. I am predicting 20% price declines at the minimum (most likely much more).

Lastly, while someone waits to buy they should seriously look at where they are parking their savings. The stock market is likely to tank right along with housing, so keeping with equities may not be the best thing.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Peckhammer

Peckhammer — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:42:14 +0000

“but I still don’t want to overpay — even if we have $200K for the downpayment (or slightly less thanks to the market this week)”

The only money that you should have in the market is money that you won’t need for the next five years. There are safer places for your down payment.

Reply – \r\n\r\nThe only money that you should have in the market is money that you won\'t need for the next five years. There are safer places for your down payment.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: david losh

david losh — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:23:30 +0000

The chart can’t be right without a negative appreciation for this year in Seattle. However, I was surprised to learn we have not returned to 2004 pricing. If in fact we have had any positive appreciation then that’s not a bubble.
If you look at the spike in pricing from 2004 to 2007 it’s steep. Even if in the next year we return to a level of pricing that would be expected from a moderate single digit appreciation that’s a correction.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: bitterowner

bitterowner — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 11:39:46 +0000

Nostradamus, I can smell your fear.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: NostraDamnUs

NostraDamnUs — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:29:03 +0000

jess – you’ve come to the right place for your belief to get even more traction.

So now here it is, in his own words:

“I hate to sound like a broken record here, but I’ll say again what I say every month: this graph is not meant to be viewed as predictive.”

Tim is going to be the predominant religion probably for the next year up to two, maybe even 3 if he’s lucky. All the while he will be ‘right’, and everyone else will be ‘wrong’ (or whatever…).

Then there will be a point after which this blog won’t look as interesting, prices will probably drop off somewhat by then, by whatever percentage those that _had to sell_ drop ( unlike those who don’t have to sell, and there’s just as many of those, lying in wait for a good deal that may not come to fruition anytime soon while they are still paying their mortgages), and then prices will start inching up again.

Then, another cycle like this will follow, by then, there will be another Timster (hey that sounded almost like Teamster, except this one’s w/out balls ;-) who’s going to cry us a river about the next ‘bubble’, etc.

Meanwhile, you will have two types of people reading this blog – those who are actually looking to do and will do something with this information (for whatever it’s worth), and then there’s the rest. The rest will commiserate because they didn’t have anything better to do anyway in the first place, or had a wet dream about owning a home, but couldn’t because of X Y or Z reason….

So move on… nothing new to see here.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: jess

jess — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 06:05:18 +0000

Sorry, I was feeling despair at those numbers and should have sat on my hands instead of throwing my panic to the bubble board. I do have an agent (nice guy, works for the big W), and in fact we even went out looking in Sept when it looked like prices were coming down (but the houses were terrible!). I’m thinking about firing him and hiring Ira, though. We need 98103 or 98105 for quality of life purposes: I work on campus, hubby commutes to downtown by bus, and kid goes to school in 98103. We are looking to own for at least 8-10 years, but I still don’t want to overpay — even if we have $200K for the downpayment (or slightly less thanks to the market this week) and can make the remaining payments. That’s a big issue with the spouse (former RE agent and son of agents) — his attitude is that RE will always go up and so we should just shut up and buy; I believe in the bubble, even if I experience doubt once in a while. Like someone said on the forum, it’s like a religion. Thanks, everyone. Now enough about me, how about that chart? ;-)

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: A

Wed, 28 Nov 2007 05:25:55 +0000

Jess,

I personally think it’s better to wait another year to see the trend. Your children are cute, but you probably know that already. Can you rent a better insulated place? Moving is cheaper than buying a house.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Mama

Mama — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 05:06:36 +0000

What do you guys think of this post: http://www.raincityguide.com/2007/11/25/why-are-sales-down-and-prices-up/ ? I can’t decide how realistic her argument is — the homes that I looked at were expensive (too expensive for me) but sadly mostly in line with the rest of the homes around them (a few exceptions where someone bought a year or two ago and is trying to do a big markup, but those were very few)

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: AndyMiami

AndyMiami — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 04:42:49 +0000

Jess said,

on November 27th, 2007 at 7:17 pm

I’m having a problem here, a questioning of my own bubble-faith. I was pretty excited to first see 98103 on that site (one of our main target areas), but then quickly deflated when I saw 98105, 98109, and 98115! I’m starting to question my decision to “wait out” the bubble before buying, and 3 of the 4 zip codes for our area continues to go up rather than down. Was it smart for us to sit on our downpayment for a year now, waiting, or were the “cheerleaders” right? And please no snarky comments — this is a very real problem for those of us poised on buying, hoping our landlords won’t raise the rent or sell out from under us while we freeze our tushes and hear our children make comments like “when we own our house, can we get insulation in the walls?”

Jess, think about a roller coaster which has a few wagons/carts as your zip codes..some are coming down, some are at their peak, and some may still climb for a couple of more months, but eventually all the wagons will fall the same distance as they went up..back to historical fundamentals…

Cheers…

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Ira Sacharoff

Ira Sacharoff — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 04:07:40 +0000

Jess,
None of us has a crystal ball, but as The Tim has said, median prices are lies. In many parts of Seattle, perfectly nice older homes are being torn down and replaced with houses that sell for a lot of money, and that’s factored in to the median price.
I did a lot of appraisal coursework, and I think if you compared properties in the same area of similar size of similar vintage, you wouldn’t see price increases. Plus, even within those zip codes, there’s a lot of variability.
Wallingford is still hot, but other parts of the 98103 zip are less so.
Your rent is still less expensive than mortgage payments ( isn’t it?), so it probably makes sense to add to that down payment if you can and hold out for at least a few more months…At the same time, in any given zip code and at any given time, there are relative deals out there.
Get a real estate agent to send you listings, making it clear that it’s for entertainment only, and state specifically what you’re looking for. Some agents may harass you unmercifully, others, like myself, just enjoy finding listings…or if you have the time go to a website of a brokerage to find houses, like johnlscott, windermere,skyline, or redfin.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Jonny

Jonny — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 03:37:17 +0000

I’d be interested (if anyone has access to the data) to see the specific pattern of real estate declines in US cities during the 1930′s. Unfortunately, it looks like Case-Shiller only goes back to 1987.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Jonny

Jonny — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 03:29:26 +0000

CKT: I’d like to see the graph redone too.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Markus

Markus — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 02:57:55 +0000

Jess,

My suggestion: If you are going to live in the house 5+ years, then start making some bids at 4%-8% less of asking price. Use Redfin to get some money back and be clear with the agents that your intentions are to buy reasonably. If possible, ask people at work if they know somebody moving; I purchased a SFH in Bothell from a person at work who moved. He sold it to me for almost 15% below market at that time (2 yrs ago) and we avoided agent percentages.

The market will most likely dip, but long term you have a home for the kids and the home price will even out. Also, don’t think of this as an investment, your home is an expense; to what degree is the question.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Angie

Angie — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 02:48:50 +0000

Jess, I wish I had an answer for you (other than seal your windows with that shrink-wrap stuff, if you can be sure your kids won’t poke holes in it.) Those are some high-demand, in-city locations and I’m not terribly surprised that they’re still attracting interest.

Offtopically, I think the bubblistas may have crashed that server! I just tried to go to those pages and got an error message.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: b

Wed, 28 Nov 2007 02:47:28 +0000

jess,

patience. the process is only in the very early stages. 2008 should be interesting.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: jess

jess — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 02:17:29 +0000

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: The Tim

The Tim — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 02:10:52 +0000

Sorry yes, that’s Phoenix. Cleveland is way down at the bottom over the entire span of the graph.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: TJ_98370

TJ_98370 — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:49:01 +0000

Tim,

The blue trace that spikes up to 50% is Phoenix, not Cleveland, right? It’s difficult to differentiate.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: The Tim

The Tim — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:58:18 +0000

on topic, those get posted with the NWMLS figures, not the Case-Shiller data.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Alan

Alan — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:28:08 +0000

Q: If sales are way down, and inventory is up, how can prices do anything but decline?

A: Poor negotiation skills.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Brian

Brian — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:57:31 +0000

I would take the place in San Diego as long as the condo wasn’t in the bad part of Ocean Beach.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: on topic

on topic — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:44:05 +0000

what happened to the supply/demand chart and the appreciation chart?

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Dave0

Dave0 — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:43:01 +0000

I with you Patient, which of the following two would you rather buy:

http://www.windermere.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Listing.ListingDetail&ListingID=18531673

http://www.californiamoves.com/property/propertydetails.aspx?propertyguid=2ac97e05-c78e-4969-891c-d00acdb9a4f9&WT.mc_ID=201810000000000

Personally, if I was going to spend half a million dollars, I’d want the townhome 1/2 a block from the ocean in San Diego, not the “Contemporary, yet serene, green townhome” in the central district.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: rose-colored-coolaid

rose-colored-coolaid — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:28:01 +0000

Tim, how long have you had the broken record routine? Didn’t you first post this chart last spring?

I know Tim says this chart has no predictive power, but I’ll point out for him that because LA/SD are leading by 18 months, today’s Seattle updates are matching a chart that Tim hasn’t changed since he first posted it.

Will it predict the future? But it’s done awful well predicting the present for nearly a year and counting.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: CKT

CKT — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:17:42 +0000

your = you’re

duh

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: CKT

CKT — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:17:15 +0000

Not to pick nits, but can I recommend a few things about the fig for the 20 cities?

1) Change the y-axis to -20 so that it includes all the data points. Some of the data points are getting clipped. (It is interesting that this is even necessary…)

2) Change the color of Detroit to something that can be seen!

3) move the labels for the x-axis below the graph. The clutter of lines crossing text makes it hard to read.

4) I know your a fan of this, but the angled gradient of blue across all your figs drives me nuts! I guess it’s the scientist in me; if it can be done in B&W, then do it!

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Ira Sacharof

Ira Sacharof — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:03:24 +0000

I’m guessing that there’s some lag time. Supply is up, sales are down, but it takes a while for sellers to get a clue that if they want to sell they’ll need to lower prices. Right now there are still plenty of sellers adamant that they’ll hold out for heir price. That can only happen for so long. They’re making payments and paying taxes and at some point reality will set in and it already is as the last few months we’ve seen price declines.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: softwarengineer

softwarengineer — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:53:08 +0000

HI IRA:

Yes, the confusing supply and demand law gone backwards: prices can go up when demand plummets and supply sky rockets.

There are many bubble brain theories I’ve heard on this one as follows:

1. It takes 10% in remodeling costs to fetch a 5% price increase.
2. The few buffoons buying have low IQs and rely too much on MSM and RE ads for their predictions, for now.
3. A little of both rationales.

One things for certain, try selling your house for a price you’d like to get….then take up trying to win on solitaire with a deck of 51.

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Buceri

Buceri — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:48:42 +0000

$600K for a townhome?? Isn’t $300K unreasonable enough??
Unreal…

Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0