›

January 2008 Case Shiller Seattle

rudekickrudekick
edited March 2008 in Seattle Real Estate
January 2007: 183.92
December 2007: 184.88
January 2008: 181.62

-1.3% year over year
-1.8% month to month

Comments

  • aldrethaldreth
    3 month shiller for seattle... -16.26%
  • deeplennondeeplennon
    rudekick wrote:
    -1.3% year over year
    The day hath arrived.

    Now down 5.55% from July 07 peak.. Portland now negative YOY as well. Charlotte still hanging on to it's meager bubble gains.

    Phoenix, San Diego, Vegas and Detroit all went over 20% off peak. Miami is right behind at -19.75%.

    Interestingly, Seattle's C-S index is now higher than the 20 city composite index for the first time since March 2000, 181.62 vs. 180.65, but still 15 points lower than the 10 city index.
  • deeplennondeeplennon
    More off peak #'s...

    Charlotte -3.08%
    Portland -4.13%
    Seattle -5.55%
    Dallas -6.25%
    Atlanta -6.88%
    New York City -7.11%
    Chicago -7.19%
    Denver -8.05%
    Boston -10.89%
    Minneapolis -11.59%
    Cleveland -12.15%
    Composite 20 -12.53%
    Composite 10 -13.36%
    Washington DC -15.23%
    San Francisco -15.83%
    Los Angeles -18.08%
    Tampa -18.25%
    Miami -19.75%
    Las Vegas -20.76%
    Phoenix -20.82%
    San Diego -21.13%
    Detroit -21.16%
  • david_mcmanusdavid_mcmanus
    The delusional ones will stop looking at Y.O.Y. and focus on M.O.M. Then when it gets really bad they'll start focusing on week over week and day over day.

    Look, median home price is up 0.03% since 7 A.M. yesterday!!

    Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
  • rose-colored-coolaidrose-colored-coolaid
    david_mcmanus wrote:
    The delusional ones will stop looking at Y.O.Y. and focus on M.O.M. Then when it gets really bad they'll start focusing on week over week and day over day.

    Look, median home price is up 0.03% since 7 A.M. yesterday!!

    Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

    How prescient of you. This article from CNN highlights for me the direction we're heading. The article regards the NARs calculation that housing prices are down 8.2% YOY. But let's look at some of the quotes from the article.
    The National Association of Realtors reported that sales by homeowners rose 2.9% in February to a seasonally adjusted annual pace of 5.03 million, up from January's reading of 4.89 million. It was the first month-over-month rise of the annualized pace since July.

    It's never mentioned that sales always rise MOM heading into spring. January is among the slowest months of the year, so any expert would not think a 3% increase in sales is a big thing. But let's see what the experts are quoted as thinking.
    "These are signs that housing's problems are being addressed, but I wouldn't break out the champagne yet," said Northern Trust chief economist Paul Kasriel. "We still have a ways to go."

    Forget that YOY, sales are down 23.8% (same article), it's clear from the MOM data that things are getting better. But just to end on a realistic note...
    Sale prices have now fallen 15% from their peak in July 2006, and are down 14% from June 2007, when the most recent steady downturn began. That brings the median price of existing homes sold down to May 2004 levels.

    Even the trumped up optimist said "We still have a ways to go" and yet prices have regressed to 4 years ago. 15% is the type of decline people generally don't believe can happen in any metropolis, let alone nationwide. I think we'll see prices below 2002 levels before all is said and done, which adjusted for inflation is around 1998 levels of affordability.
  • deejayohdeejayoh
    I think Twist over at housing doom had the best quote about the NAR spin:
    Sales activity typically increases this time of year as home sales tend to be seasonal. Month-to-month increases this time of year are no more indicative of improving sales than rising spring temperatures are indicative of global warming
  • uwpuwp
    Regarding the NAR spin of Feb over January numbers, from The Big Picture http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/03/existing-home-s.html:
    3) The average increase from January to February over the past 4 years has been 7.2%. Yesterday's monthly "improvement" is less than half what we have been typically seeing.

    Also, this February had an extra day. I wonder how that factored in.
  • rose-colored-coolaidrose-colored-coolaid
    It's obvious. Let's normalize January to 100 sales. 100 sales / 31 days is 3.23 sales/day. In February, there were 102.8 (normalized the same way) sales in only 29 days, for 3.54 sales/day.

    Using NAR math, we see that Feb sales/day over Jan sales/day is actually 1.096, or a 9.6% increase in average sales per day. Such an increase is clearly something, something. Ergo, the slump is over.
  • UbersaladUbersalad
    bunch of real estate rookies. obviously you guys haven't heard that real estate is all "localized". my block has been selling well, in fact sales have gone up 100% YOY and remain healthy MOM.
  • perfectfireperfectfire
    Ubersalad wrote:
    bunch of real estate rookies. obviously you guys haven't heard that real estate is all "localized". my block has been selling well, in fact sales have gone up 100% YOY and remain healthy MOM.
    I think you mean "hyper-local". Talk about rookies... :roll:
Sign In or Register to comment.