- This topic has 425 replies, 43 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 6 months ago by CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 3, 2009 at 12:57 PM #477744November 3, 2009 at 1:07 PM #476917sdrealtorParticipant
Its important to remember that this was all before the credit collapse in Aug 2007. I honestly did not know what the numbers would look like until I ran them but 2 years later the verdict is in.
2004-1489
2005-1432
2006-1218
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBDHere is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).
2004 2,684 sq ft $1,072,428 ($400/sq ft)
2005 2,624 sq ft $1,176,811 ($448/sq ft)
2006 2,703 sq ft $1,252,146 ($463/sq ft)
2007 2,558 sq ft $1,178,553 ($468/sq ft)
2008 2,597 sq ft $1,193,847 ($464/sq ft)
2009 2,490 sq ft $997,868 ($410/sq ft)Verdict:
sdr-prediction for next 6 months to a year intact. Little changes in price but large decline in volume most likely due to lack of jumbo financing alternatives.Russell-a year later gets some satisfaction with a 12% decline in $/sq ft amidst even lower volume most likely due to the continued lack of jumbo financing.
Have at it piggies! Any guess what the 2010 numbers will look like?
November 3, 2009 at 1:07 PM #477090sdrealtorParticipantIts important to remember that this was all before the credit collapse in Aug 2007. I honestly did not know what the numbers would look like until I ran them but 2 years later the verdict is in.
2004-1489
2005-1432
2006-1218
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBDHere is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).
2004 2,684 sq ft $1,072,428 ($400/sq ft)
2005 2,624 sq ft $1,176,811 ($448/sq ft)
2006 2,703 sq ft $1,252,146 ($463/sq ft)
2007 2,558 sq ft $1,178,553 ($468/sq ft)
2008 2,597 sq ft $1,193,847 ($464/sq ft)
2009 2,490 sq ft $997,868 ($410/sq ft)Verdict:
sdr-prediction for next 6 months to a year intact. Little changes in price but large decline in volume most likely due to lack of jumbo financing alternatives.Russell-a year later gets some satisfaction with a 12% decline in $/sq ft amidst even lower volume most likely due to the continued lack of jumbo financing.
Have at it piggies! Any guess what the 2010 numbers will look like?
November 3, 2009 at 1:07 PM #477455sdrealtorParticipantIts important to remember that this was all before the credit collapse in Aug 2007. I honestly did not know what the numbers would look like until I ran them but 2 years later the verdict is in.
2004-1489
2005-1432
2006-1218
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBDHere is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).
2004 2,684 sq ft $1,072,428 ($400/sq ft)
2005 2,624 sq ft $1,176,811 ($448/sq ft)
2006 2,703 sq ft $1,252,146 ($463/sq ft)
2007 2,558 sq ft $1,178,553 ($468/sq ft)
2008 2,597 sq ft $1,193,847 ($464/sq ft)
2009 2,490 sq ft $997,868 ($410/sq ft)Verdict:
sdr-prediction for next 6 months to a year intact. Little changes in price but large decline in volume most likely due to lack of jumbo financing alternatives.Russell-a year later gets some satisfaction with a 12% decline in $/sq ft amidst even lower volume most likely due to the continued lack of jumbo financing.
Have at it piggies! Any guess what the 2010 numbers will look like?
November 3, 2009 at 1:07 PM #477533sdrealtorParticipantIts important to remember that this was all before the credit collapse in Aug 2007. I honestly did not know what the numbers would look like until I ran them but 2 years later the verdict is in.
2004-1489
2005-1432
2006-1218
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBDHere is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).
2004 2,684 sq ft $1,072,428 ($400/sq ft)
2005 2,624 sq ft $1,176,811 ($448/sq ft)
2006 2,703 sq ft $1,252,146 ($463/sq ft)
2007 2,558 sq ft $1,178,553 ($468/sq ft)
2008 2,597 sq ft $1,193,847 ($464/sq ft)
2009 2,490 sq ft $997,868 ($410/sq ft)Verdict:
sdr-prediction for next 6 months to a year intact. Little changes in price but large decline in volume most likely due to lack of jumbo financing alternatives.Russell-a year later gets some satisfaction with a 12% decline in $/sq ft amidst even lower volume most likely due to the continued lack of jumbo financing.
Have at it piggies! Any guess what the 2010 numbers will look like?
November 3, 2009 at 1:07 PM #477754sdrealtorParticipantIts important to remember that this was all before the credit collapse in Aug 2007. I honestly did not know what the numbers would look like until I ran them but 2 years later the verdict is in.
2004-1489
2005-1432
2006-1218
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBDHere is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).
2004 2,684 sq ft $1,072,428 ($400/sq ft)
2005 2,624 sq ft $1,176,811 ($448/sq ft)
2006 2,703 sq ft $1,252,146 ($463/sq ft)
2007 2,558 sq ft $1,178,553 ($468/sq ft)
2008 2,597 sq ft $1,193,847 ($464/sq ft)
2009 2,490 sq ft $997,868 ($410/sq ft)Verdict:
sdr-prediction for next 6 months to a year intact. Little changes in price but large decline in volume most likely due to lack of jumbo financing alternatives.Russell-a year later gets some satisfaction with a 12% decline in $/sq ft amidst even lower volume most likely due to the continued lack of jumbo financing.
Have at it piggies! Any guess what the 2010 numbers will look like?
November 3, 2009 at 2:36 PM #476962IT.MOMParticipantWhich zip codes are included in the data? Those houses hold on to their values pretty well (compare to most other areas)
November 3, 2009 at 2:36 PM #477134IT.MOMParticipantWhich zip codes are included in the data? Those houses hold on to their values pretty well (compare to most other areas)
November 3, 2009 at 2:36 PM #477499IT.MOMParticipantWhich zip codes are included in the data? Those houses hold on to their values pretty well (compare to most other areas)
November 3, 2009 at 2:36 PM #477578IT.MOMParticipantWhich zip codes are included in the data? Those houses hold on to their values pretty well (compare to most other areas)
November 3, 2009 at 2:36 PM #477799IT.MOMParticipantWhich zip codes are included in the data? Those houses hold on to their values pretty well (compare to most other areas)
November 3, 2009 at 3:23 PM #476986sdrealtorParticipantThe ZIPs I used include all the prime coastal towns – Point Loma, Ocean Beach, Pacific Beach, La Jolla, Del Mar, Carmel Valley, Solana Beach, Cardiff, Encinitas and Carlsbad. I excluded RSF because the prices are so much higher that they skew the data.
November 3, 2009 at 3:23 PM #477159sdrealtorParticipantThe ZIPs I used include all the prime coastal towns – Point Loma, Ocean Beach, Pacific Beach, La Jolla, Del Mar, Carmel Valley, Solana Beach, Cardiff, Encinitas and Carlsbad. I excluded RSF because the prices are so much higher that they skew the data.
November 3, 2009 at 3:23 PM #477523sdrealtorParticipantThe ZIPs I used include all the prime coastal towns – Point Loma, Ocean Beach, Pacific Beach, La Jolla, Del Mar, Carmel Valley, Solana Beach, Cardiff, Encinitas and Carlsbad. I excluded RSF because the prices are so much higher that they skew the data.
November 3, 2009 at 3:23 PM #477603sdrealtorParticipantThe ZIPs I used include all the prime coastal towns – Point Loma, Ocean Beach, Pacific Beach, La Jolla, Del Mar, Carmel Valley, Solana Beach, Cardiff, Encinitas and Carlsbad. I excluded RSF because the prices are so much higher that they skew the data.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.