In January of 2007, 455 people were able to sell their homes in 30 days or less at 99.84% of asking price.
In January of 2008 only 261 people were able to sell their homes in 30 days or less and they sold at 98.93% of asking price.
42% fewer people sold their homes within 30 days of listing the home for sale in January 2008 vs. January 2007
In January of 2007, 13.25% of all homes sold had been on market for over 120 days and sold for 97.52% of asking price at time of sale.
In January of 2008, 21.67% of all homes sold had been on market for over 120 days and sold for 95.60% of asking price.
And yet…they sold for a little more. Volume down by 30%, days on market longer, but median sold prices up from $430,000 to $431,375. Median asking prices up from $430,014 to $439,000.
That was January…let’s jump to April (I don’t know the answers before I type this BTW. I figure I can’t introduce my agent bias if I post in real time.)
In April of 2007, 1,184 people were able to sell their homes in 30 days or less for 100.62% of the asking price.
In April of 2008, only 561 people were able to sell their homes in 30 days or less and they sold at 99.25% of asking price.
53% fewer people sold their homes within 30 days of listing the home for sale in April 2008 vs. April 2007
In April of 2007, 13% of all homes sold had been on market for over 120 days and sold for 97.8% of asking price at time of sale.
In April of 2008, 20% of all homes sold had been on market for over 120 days and sold for 95.97% of asking price.
But in April, no more volume down; prices up.
Median sold price in April of 2007 was $474,950 ($50 less than median asking price)
Median sold price in April of 2008 was $451,250 and median asking price at time of sale was $459,925
By Request: Stats for “Curious” in Redmond 98052 pretty strong relative to King County as a whole. Also for Curious – Woodinville 98072; not a pretty picture. For Aiboh here’s 98074 Sammamish – not bad. A lot better than Woodinville. I have to put the special request stats on my blog for space purposes. But keep the requests coming and if I can’t do them on Sunday night, I’ll squeeze them in during the week somewhere.
Regular weekly stats:
King County Residential
Actively For Sale: 11,231 – UP 268
In Escrow: 2,813 – UP 63 – MPPSF $210 (dropped $2.00 again – and that’s asking price
Closed YTD 5,414 – UP 305 – MPPSF $220 YTD (April MPPSF $224)
Not sure why closed sales keep running high while the properties in escrow are running low as to median price per square foot. You would expect the closings to be affected eventually as these close, but so far not.
MAYBE a lot of the ones staying in escrow are short sales, and they are not closing at all. That would be the only explanation I can come up with for “in escrow” MPPSF running lower and lower and closings not being lower.
King County Condos
Actively For Sale: 3,890 – UP 106 MPPSF $320 Down $3.00
In Escrow: 940 -UP 40 – MPPSF $303.50, Down $1.50 but close to where they were the week before last.
Closed YTD: 1,776 – UP 101 – MPPSF $288 – asking prices still running high relative to closed prices. Especially considering April closed sales are running at $270 MPPSF compared to April 2007 at $300 MPPSF.
Volume down 52% April YOY in condos and prices are starting to see more signs of weakening. But again, given the sold properties in both residential and condo were on market for a long time, we could be seeing some old inventory selling off at drastically reduced prices. Some old stale inventory is runing scared from “new on market” and dropping prices accordingly.
Stats not compiled or published by NWMLS. (Required disclosure)
So – why are they still building like it’s 2006 out here? That totally confuses me. They’re putting in some huge developments and still playing tear down on 7th in Kirkland.
Thanks for the stats!
Ben,
I saw the same exact thing in San Diego and also South Florida. I think most of these projects were already planned out and financed a few years ago. Once they start they can’t stop.
House prices also continued to rise in all other bubble areas in the face of high inventory and record low sales. Price is a lagging indicator and we’re 18-24 months behind here. Nothing new here.
I think synthetik is right about projects reaching the point of no return, and that point is fairly early on. Given the lag time, I almost wonder if builders have more blame for the downturn in parts of the country than the sub-prime lenders.
Oh, I see now it’s 18-24 months behind, rather than 18 months. Pretty soon it’s going to be 24 months, and then 24-30 months.
Anyone who thinks there’s patterns to these things should be making a killing on the stock market–right? 😉
Kary, don’t be a jerk. It’s always been 17 months.
Here is an interesting report from the Wall Street Journal with a different perspective. Seattle Number One.
I always pay attention to the fundamentals. Job Growth, Healthy Inventory and Low Interest Rates. Three things we have in WA.
http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/retro-HAGERTY.html
Here is a different perspective from the Wall Street Journal. Seattle NUMBER ONE.
I always pay attention to the fundamentals of job growth, healthy
inventory and low interest rates, all of which we have in Seattle.
http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/retro-HAGERTY.html
Ben,
Unfortunately when a market starts turning and profit margins are cut, the quality suffers. Sometimes well after the project is started. When the liklihood of turning the project over quickly diminishes, and carrying charges increase, something’s gotta give and usually that’s the quality.
Ardell, regarding Woodinville stats. I think Woodinville suffered terribly during the windstorm from Dec. 2006, and several snow storms early winter 2007.
There was so much violent storm and tree damage thru Woodinville, that I can’t help but wonder if people living in Woodinville decided to sell due to that stressful winter of 2006/07. Or, perhaps, buyers still remember the news reports of the long weeks without power for many parts of Woodinville and just don’t want to live there.
I had first-hand listing experience with that storm. I had a listing in Woodinville that had a buyer see it literally the morning of the big windstorm. The agent called me while they were at the house to ask some questions, and said he thought they’d be writing an offer, and would get back to me in the next day or two.
That night, the violent windstorm hit hard, and of course we all ended up with no power. The house was vacant, which was a good thing, since the power didn’t come back on for many days.
We did get the offer, and had a bit of a struggle getting the paperwork to everyone since most of us didn’t have phone service for faxing. We did it the old-fashioned way: we met in person for signatures! 🙂
During the inspection time period the power didn’t come back on at all. The selling agent kept driving over to the house “just in case”, but nope, no power. Finally he called me and asked if my seller would mind if he hooked up his own generator at the house so the inspector could inspect what he could. My seller was delighted!
They inspected everything, except the gas dryer and gas heater – and just asked the seller to service the furnace prior to close and provide evidence that it and dryer worked. Deal went Pending! Everyone was quite relieved.
I think we had 2 snow storms during the Pending status. For a couple of weeks, I couldn’t get up the icy hills in Woodinville to get my keybox & staging items out. The moving truck was scheduled, so the other agent was gracious enough to move my staging things out of the way till the snow melted. Their moving truck had to be rescheduled due to the road conditions, at least a couple of times.
The buyer was his son, which was nice for relieving some of the stress of all the storms. Since they already lived in Woodinville, they knew this particular year wasn’t “normal”. I was very pleased we got this particular buyer, rather than someone relocating here from some sunny state!
I have never seen a winter so full of bad storms as 2006/2007 — and I’m a Seattle native!
If I were a seller in Woodinville today, I’d go out and buy a good generator right now and plan on giving it to the buyer! Precautionary, and perhapsa good marketing strategy :-).
Leanne,
One of the things I was most proud of while at BRIO was helping Hilde Webber sell her two listings in Woodinville. I had more influence on the first than the second that was just dragging on. They were on opposite sides of Avondale, and that is apparently an issue in terms of days on market.
I always say the problem with Woodinville is they have too much of a good thing. Everything starts looking the same, so competition becomes fierce and price driven.
Ardell, I always say Woodinville is 45 minutes from everywhere! 🙂
You’re right too about too much of a good thing. Each era brought it’s own style to Woodinville. Splits in the 1970’s, all the mauve & gray colored homes of the 1980’s, big, bigger, biggest from the 1990’s to present ….
“Some old stale inventory is runing scared from “new on market
Well you really targeted an oddity deeplennon. I’ve never seen a “double listing” like that one. It’s active twice in the same area with two different days on market. Sometimes that will happen if an agent adds it to a different area, but both of these listings say Area 390 Capitol Hill and one is cumulative with a prior listing, and one is not.
I’ll shoot an email to Linda and see if she’ll pop in here and explain it. In the mls agent remarks it says “this is a double listing with mls” X” but I can’t find a rationale for the allowance of two different mls #s for the same property.
How did you happen to spot that one of the 11,000 plus listings on market?
One’s condominium and one’s residential.
BTW, how long will it take the NWMLS to come up with a townhouse category? It doesn’t seem like it would be that tough to do
Between listing these things as condo and residential, I think the seller is best served with condo–even though they’re not condos.
Kary, why should they? A lot of the ‘townhouses’ are residential according to the City …
Walks like a duck and all that, but they aren’t ducks. Personally, I think these need HOA’s with dues, but that will have to be up to the homeowners in the group.
In 3 – 8 years, when they aren’t new & pretty any more, it will be interesting to see the ‘mood’ of the resale opportunities.
Why should they what?
Why should the NWMLS come up with a category? So that people can search for what they want. Personally I’d never own a townhome, but then I wouldn’t own in a small condo complex either. It’s more the size of the complex that turns me off. But others might prefer no condo association–they should be able to search just those listings.
Why should a seller list a townhome as a condo, even though it isn’t? Because people searching residential are mainly looking for houses, and would be unlikely to want a townhome. It’s sort of like listing a 3 bedroom house as a 4 bedroom house–potential buyers are going to be disappointed. If you list one of these as a condo, the potential buyers seeing it are less likely to be disappointed.
BTW, the HOA with dues would only take care of part of the problem. It wouldn’t address the exterior walls, roof and structure, because those aren’t common areas.
It’s not an MLS issue though. If the City calls them single family, you can’t list them as condos.
Some of them actually have good CC&R’s, but many don’t.
A buyer simply has to be cautious and diligent about his research when buying these. Inspections are critical!
Well the listing that brought this up is a dual listing as a residence and a condo. You can do that.
And yes it is an NWMLS issue. If they had a category for them, you’d list them there (and possibly still do a dual listing as condo). You’re right that it’s state law that makes it a condo or not, but that doesn’t mean the NWMLS couldn’t have a category for them.
I’ll weigh in on this one.
Townhome on Eastside is usually a condo. When it is NOT a condo, and there are a few that aren’t, then I think the agent should be able to list them in both Residential and Condo as long as the PUBLIC remarks note this and why and indicate the true legal status of the property.
Townhome in Seattle is most often a SFR, particularly in the area noted above, so showing it as “condo” is not appropriate in my opinion.
When the property is other than the norm for an area, then two postings would be warranted. When the property is the norm for an area, than duplicate postings should not be permitted.
Same as when a home is on the border line of two areas, such as 380 and 390. Showing in both is appropriate. But NOT when it is nowhere near the cut-off between to the two areas.
To the best of my knowledge ALL duplicate postings must be approved by the MLS and entered by the mls. So yes, it is a NWMLS issue.
If I remember correctly, the NWMLS rule for listing in both residential and condo was allowed only if the property was a PUD — Planned Unit Development.
I don’t know that a new category would be any less confusing though – perhaps we need a search function for “Resale Certificate” or “Public Offering Statement” if new construction?
I’m not 100% against the single family townhomes, I think there are some quality builders out there doing some of those projects. As usual, there are some not doing a decent job too.
Leanne,
I agree that a category for “townhome” wouldn’t remove the confusion. Most consider a townhome attached and more than one level. But some have a unit under or over as well. Some are not attatched at all. Some are condos and some are single family.
There are very tall and skinny single family homes built on 2,500 square foot lots in Seattle. No one ever called them “townhomes”, yet…they kindof are…aren’t they?
How do you define “townhome”?
As to Kary not liking them, well, it’s a matter of amenities and afforability more than “like”. Not everyone can afford a nice single family home and nice townhome vs. crappy single family home is a good choice for many.
Ardell, my dislike goes to the future maintenance issues, and the size of the complexes, not the design per se. I’m not a fan of small condo complexes either.
But, there are others that would feel just the opposite, and prefer not to have the condo association (like some don’t like HOAs). So breaking it out would be helpful to them.