Posted by: Timothy Ellis (The Tim)

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market.

8 responses to “Non-Distressed Median Up 6.58 in December”

  1. Sam

    I find this graph to be EXTREMELY instructive at parsing all of the YoY stats the press is always clamoring over. By looking at this graph you can pretty much determine that the only source of median home price growth in 2012 is from the dramatic reduction in bank-owned sales as a fraction of the whole market. Thanks for the clarity, Tim!

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  2. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: Sam @ 1 – Exactly (although I’d have used the word “mainly” rather than “only”). For all practical purposes, the non-distressed median has been flat, and as Tim notes, some of the variation could be due to a change in mix between the areas.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  3. corndogs

    RE: Sam @ 1 – “By looking at this graph you can pretty much determine that the only source of median home price growth in 2012 is from the dramatic reduction in bank-owned sales as a fraction of the whole market. Thanks for the clarity, Tim!”

    It might be even more clear to you if you read the title of the piece. Non-distressed is up 6.5%. That does not include bank-owned sales. The fact is, not only did the non-distressed median price increase but the sales volume of non-distressed increased. That translates to a big increase of dollars changing hands over the year. More people spending more, not something to be discounted.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  4. Kary L. Krismer

    I wonder what the reason is for the drop in the short sale median? The only thing that I can think of is people in better neighborhoods might have been more concerned (better advised) about the tax consequences of doing a short sale with the Mortgage Debt Relief Act expiring. That could have affected sales months in advance, but that seems unlikely.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  5. Todd Miller

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 4

    The short sale median drop is misleading I’m sure. Its probably because initially, agents wouldn’t handle a short sale unless it was worth it. Not that they are easier, agents will take short sales in all price ranges, so those individual homes aren’t really worth less, the number could just show that agents are now will to help people with short sales on lower priced homes.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  6. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: Todd Miller @ 5 – That’s a good possibility.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  7. Lo Ball Jones

    Seems to me that demand in this area has to be nearly null.

    With so little inventory, one would expect a 64%…not a 6.4% rise if people were cramming to migrate to Puget Sound. Also declining or stagnant rents. These point me to estimating a stagnant or potentially declining population here.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  8. No Name Guy

    RE: corndogs @ 3

    I don’t know there ‘dogs…..that solid green line could be covered with a horizontal line from a fat tip sharpie. I’d call that range bound or with no trend (at least for the time period plotted). 6.5 YOY….yawn……when it breaks out of that horizontal band, THEN I’ll believe prices are going up for non-distressed. Oh, and look at today versus 2 years ago….’bout the same.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

Leave a Reply

Do you want a nifty avatar picture next to your name, instead of a photograph of Tim's dog? Just sign up with Gravatar, and make sure to use the same email address in the form below. It's that easy!

Please read the rules before posting a comment.

You have 5 comments remaining on this post.

Archives

Find us on Google+