Slow decline or is a big chunk about to be ripped out?

[CA renter]

[quote=sdrealtor]CAR
I was surprised also by the volume decline and yes it is the 1st five months. I dont expect higher volume and think that it will stay pretty close to where it was last year. I’d like to think prices will drop also but i think prices in the 1st 5 months of this year spiked down faster than the trend should have because of the economic panic in the air and WS crash. Prices have recovered a bit so year over year could go either way at this point.[/quote]

So, maybe my “spring prediction” was right so far? 😉 Still, though we can find certain high-end properties with 30-45% declines, I’ll concede that the overall averages are not down that much…yet.

Submitted by CA renter on November 18, 2008 – 12:00am.
Agree that this spring will probably see pretty brisk sales…but we’ll see slower activity than 2008 (which was very high activity).

Also thinking we’ll see major price drops in the more desirable neighborhoods by Q3 2009, for an average of around 30-45% off peak in 92024 and 92009 (that’s for you sdrealtor!). 😉

I think 2008 saw the dead-cat bounce in sales which resulted in stickier prices in the upper-mid to high end properties.

After an initial period of elation in the first two quarters of 2009, activity will drop like a rock around August of next year due to macroeconomic trends (massive deflation and unemployment hitting 10%+ in California). This will also be the time that all those “re-worked” mortgages run into trouble again, and we finally see the wall of foreclosures that the govt has been trying to artificially hold back.

http://piggington.com/spring_housing_prediction

[sdrealtor]

Pemeliza

So I went back and tried to replicate the old numbers and they didnt sync up because I couldnt remember exactly which ZIP’s I used in the original post. I ran new numbers for all years back to 2000. They show what a wild year 2003 was!

2000-1469
2001-1241
2002-1780
2003-1540
2004-1480
2005-1373
2006-1179
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBD

Here is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).

2000 2,380 sq ft $623,605 ($263/sq ft)
2001 2,310 sq ft $652,661 ($291/sq ft)
2002 2,427 sq ft $696,409 ($298/sq ft)
2003 2,438 sq ft $795,486 ($340/sq ft)
2004 2,524 sq ft $1,045,310 ($437/sq ft)
2005 2,477 sq ft $1,154,849 ($492/sq ft)
2006 2,540 sq ft $1,204,233 ($500/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)

A couple interesting things worth noting:

1.) The increase in the size of the average home by more than 10% over the bubble years.

2.) Getting back to 2000 pricing in the prime coastal areas means a decline in the genereal pricing levels by about 50% off peak.

[sdrealtor]

Pemeliza

So I went back and tried to replicate the old numbers and they didnt sync up because I couldnt remember exactly which ZIP’s I used in the original post. I ran new numbers for all years back to 2000. They show what a wild year 2003 was!

2000-1469
2001-1241
2002-1780
2003-1540
2004-1480
2005-1373
2006-1179
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBD

Here is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).

2000 2,380 sq ft $623,605 ($263/sq ft)
2001 2,310 sq ft $652,661 ($291/sq ft)
2002 2,427 sq ft $696,409 ($298/sq ft)
2003 2,438 sq ft $795,486 ($340/sq ft)
2004 2,524 sq ft $1,045,310 ($437/sq ft)
2005 2,477 sq ft $1,154,849 ($492/sq ft)
2006 2,540 sq ft $1,204,233 ($500/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)

A couple interesting things worth noting:

1.) The increase in the size of the average home by more than 10% over the bubble years.

2.) Getting back to 2000 pricing in the prime coastal areas means a decline in the genereal pricing levels by about 50% off peak.

[sdrealtor]

Pemeliza

So I went back and tried to replicate the old numbers and they didnt sync up because I couldnt remember exactly which ZIP’s I used in the original post. I ran new numbers for all years back to 2000. They show what a wild year 2003 was!

2000-1469
2001-1241
2002-1780
2003-1540
2004-1480
2005-1373
2006-1179
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBD

Here is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).

2000 2,380 sq ft $623,605 ($263/sq ft)
2001 2,310 sq ft $652,661 ($291/sq ft)
2002 2,427 sq ft $696,409 ($298/sq ft)
2003 2,438 sq ft $795,486 ($340/sq ft)
2004 2,524 sq ft $1,045,310 ($437/sq ft)
2005 2,477 sq ft $1,154,849 ($492/sq ft)
2006 2,540 sq ft $1,204,233 ($500/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)

A couple interesting things worth noting:

1.) The increase in the size of the average home by more than 10% over the bubble years.

2.) Getting back to 2000 pricing in the prime coastal areas means a decline in the genereal pricing levels by about 50% off peak.

[sdrealtor]

Pemeliza

So I went back and tried to replicate the old numbers and they didnt sync up because I couldnt remember exactly which ZIP’s I used in the original post. I ran new numbers for all years back to 2000. They show what a wild year 2003 was!

2000-1469
2001-1241
2002-1780
2003-1540
2004-1480
2005-1373
2006-1179
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBD

Here is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).

2000 2,380 sq ft $623,605 ($263/sq ft)
2001 2,310 sq ft $652,661 ($291/sq ft)
2002 2,427 sq ft $696,409 ($298/sq ft)
2003 2,438 sq ft $795,486 ($340/sq ft)
2004 2,524 sq ft $1,045,310 ($437/sq ft)
2005 2,477 sq ft $1,154,849 ($492/sq ft)
2006 2,540 sq ft $1,204,233 ($500/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)

A couple interesting things worth noting:

1.) The increase in the size of the average home by more than 10% over the bubble years.

2.) Getting back to 2000 pricing in the prime coastal areas means a decline in the genereal pricing levels by about 50% off peak.

[sdrealtor]

Pemeliza

So I went back and tried to replicate the old numbers and they didnt sync up because I couldnt remember exactly which ZIP’s I used in the original post. I ran new numbers for all years back to 2000. They show what a wild year 2003 was!

2000-1469
2001-1241
2002-1780
2003-1540
2004-1480
2005-1373
2006-1179
2007-1247
2008-885
2009-754
2010-TBD

Here is the averages represented by these sales (i.e. average size, selling price and price/sq ft).

2000 2,380 sq ft $623,605 ($263/sq ft)
2001 2,310 sq ft $652,661 ($291/sq ft)
2002 2,427 sq ft $696,409 ($298/sq ft)
2003 2,438 sq ft $795,486 ($340/sq ft)
2004 2,524 sq ft $1,045,310 ($437/sq ft)
2005 2,477 sq ft $1,154,849 ($492/sq ft)
2006 2,540 sq ft $1,204,233 ($500/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)

A couple interesting things worth noting:

1.) The increase in the size of the average home by more than 10% over the bubble years.

2.) Getting back to 2000 pricing in the prime coastal areas means a decline in the genereal pricing levels by about 50% off peak.

[pemeliza]

Wow. When you think about all of the new homes that are not even included in this data that were built in Carlsbad from 2000-2006 versus new homes built in 2008-2009 the sales volume situation may be even worse than what these numbers indicate. Back in those days everyone I knew was buying a new home not a resale.

In addition to the house size growing during the bubble years, people spent an excessive amount of $$$ on fancy upgrades, restaurant style kitchens, and resort style landscapes. That stuff is being heavily discounted now. People just want basic living these days and aren’t going to pay up for the fluff.

People are still paying up for the best locations, lots, and views. This leads me to an interesting question. What is really depreciating here? Is it top quality SD coastal real estate or is it granite countertops, designer paint schemes, and giant boxes on postage stamps?

[pemeliza]

Wow. When you think about all of the new homes that are not even included in this data that were built in Carlsbad from 2000-2006 versus new homes built in 2008-2009 the sales volume situation may be even worse than what these numbers indicate. Back in those days everyone I knew was buying a new home not a resale.

In addition to the house size growing during the bubble years, people spent an excessive amount of $$$ on fancy upgrades, restaurant style kitchens, and resort style landscapes. That stuff is being heavily discounted now. People just want basic living these days and aren’t going to pay up for the fluff.

People are still paying up for the best locations, lots, and views. This leads me to an interesting question. What is really depreciating here? Is it top quality SD coastal real estate or is it granite countertops, designer paint schemes, and giant boxes on postage stamps?

[pemeliza]

Wow. When you think about all of the new homes that are not even included in this data that were built in Carlsbad from 2000-2006 versus new homes built in 2008-2009 the sales volume situation may be even worse than what these numbers indicate. Back in those days everyone I knew was buying a new home not a resale.

In addition to the house size growing during the bubble years, people spent an excessive amount of $$$ on fancy upgrades, restaurant style kitchens, and resort style landscapes. That stuff is being heavily discounted now. People just want basic living these days and aren’t going to pay up for the fluff.

People are still paying up for the best locations, lots, and views. This leads me to an interesting question. What is really depreciating here? Is it top quality SD coastal real estate or is it granite countertops, designer paint schemes, and giant boxes on postage stamps?

[pemeliza]

Wow. When you think about all of the new homes that are not even included in this data that were built in Carlsbad from 2000-2006 versus new homes built in 2008-2009 the sales volume situation may be even worse than what these numbers indicate. Back in those days everyone I knew was buying a new home not a resale.

In addition to the house size growing during the bubble years, people spent an excessive amount of $$$ on fancy upgrades, restaurant style kitchens, and resort style landscapes. That stuff is being heavily discounted now. People just want basic living these days and aren’t going to pay up for the fluff.

People are still paying up for the best locations, lots, and views. This leads me to an interesting question. What is really depreciating here? Is it top quality SD coastal real estate or is it granite countertops, designer paint schemes, and giant boxes on postage stamps?

[pemeliza]

Wow. When you think about all of the new homes that are not even included in this data that were built in Carlsbad from 2000-2006 versus new homes built in 2008-2009 the sales volume situation may be even worse than what these numbers indicate. Back in those days everyone I knew was buying a new home not a resale.

In addition to the house size growing during the bubble years, people spent an excessive amount of $$$ on fancy upgrades, restaurant style kitchens, and resort style landscapes. That stuff is being heavily discounted now. People just want basic living these days and aren’t going to pay up for the fluff.

People are still paying up for the best locations, lots, and views. This leads me to an interesting question. What is really depreciating here? Is it top quality SD coastal real estate or is it granite countertops, designer paint schemes, and giant boxes on postage stamps?

[sdrealtor]

I defintely agree that sales volume is even lower when you consider how much less new construction is being sold.

[sdrealtor]

I defintely agree that sales volume is even lower when you consider how much less new construction is being sold.

[sdrealtor]

I defintely agree that sales volume is even lower when you consider how much less new construction is being sold.

[sdrealtor]

I defintely agree that sales volume is even lower when you consider how much less new construction is being sold.

[Author]

Posts