Archive for 2008

Sacramento County Real Estate Unit Sales Numbers Already Besting Last Year’s

image The number of homes that have sold in Sacramento County through August 19th have already beaten 2007′s year-end numbers.  According to our MLS data, year wide home sales in Sacramento County in 2007 totaled 10,698 units.  As of August 19th, 2008, we’ve already sold 11,132 units, and we still have more than a quarter to go.

Looking at it on a month by month basis, sales volume was up from the previous year in each month of 2008 so far except January (which was down .4%).  The increase was modest in February at 1.6% over the previous February, but grew to a high of 134.3% in May, when 1,879 units sold compared to only 802 in May of 2007.  The average increase in each month over the same month the same year is 57.3%.

So far as of August 19th we have 864 units reported sold this month, beating the month end figure we have for last August of 846 units.  By the end of the month we are likely to see at least a 50% increase over last year’s numbers, especially since it generally takes several days for all sales to be recorded.

Antelope Real Estate Market Update

If Downtown Sacramento breaks is the exception that proves the rule about falling prices and increasing demand, then Antelope is one of many areas we can point to and say, "See, THAT’s the rule I meant!"

Homes in Antelope lost 21.5% of their (sold price per square foot) value from July of 2007 to July of 2008, with the average home fetching $175.99 per square foot last year and $138.07 per square foot this year.  With more demand for the smaller homes (no doubt a reflection of having more smaller sized homes in foreclosure), average sale price fell more dramatically, 35.3%, from $343,354 in July of 2007 to $222,219 in July of 2008.

Driving the declines were above average sales of foreclosures, with short sales and foreclosures accounting for 85.4% of all sales in Antelope, versus "only" 30% in July of 2007.  Buyers grabbing these opportunities in huge numbers, inflating unit sales 122.5% over last year, with 40 units selling in July of 2007 and 89 units selling in July of 2008.  As a result, currently there are only about 4-5 months of inventory in in Antelope

Best (Definitely) Real Estate (Tenuously) Statistics All Year!

21" long.

7 lbs 9 oz.

Sierra Brown was born Thursday, August 14th, 2008 at 3:45 AM.  Congratulations and we can’t wait to see the gorgeous new bundle of joy!  Sierra and her mom (AKA Sacramento Real Estate Gal, Purva Brown), are doing fine.  Congratulations Purva and James!

Landscaping, gardening?  Those must be the lame, pre-labor, post-to-future articles.  OK, so they’re not that lame, the point is:

We want pictures.

We want pictures.

Oh well, good things come to those who wait.

The Real Estate Market in Downtown Sacramento

About three or four times per month, I get to say the following: real estate is local.

To me, this is what makes writing about “the” real estate market much more interesting than it would be otherwise.  You see, there is no “the” real estate market — there are just lots of little local markets.  A given market at a given time may behave differently than how you would expect.  The reason may be either that it’s too small to be statistically significant, or because it just flat out doesn’t follow the rules (or both).

Based on my background writing about greater Sacramento County, I generally expect that most local markets around here will have

  • Declined in price between 2007-2008.
  • Increased in demand between 2007-2008.

In the Downtown Sacramento area (95814 and 95816), in contrast, what I find for July is that the market:

  • Increased in price between 2007-2008.
  • Decreased in demand between 2007-2008.

To be sure, the average sale price did drop 5.3% from July to July, from $486,849 in 2007 to $460,809 in 2008.  However, a more accurate indicator of price, sold price per square foot increased 4.8% from 2007-2008 downtown, with the average home fetching $284.53 per square foot in July of 2007 and $298.19 per square foot in July of 2008.

While most of Sacramento County was losing value from July to July, downtown Sacramento was gaining value, but losing buyer interest.  This year only eleven units sold in July, down 42.1% from last July’s 19 units.

Citrus Heights Real Estate Market Update

Citrus Heights is one of many areas in Sacramento County where falling prices has fueled increased demand, and as a result, inventory has fallen to seller’s market levels (even if prices have not yet started to increase in response).

The average Citrus Heights home sold in July for $203,616, down 30.9% from last year’s average of $294,564.  Sold price per square foot fell somewhat more moderately, 25.5%, from $192.06 per square foot in July of 2007 to $143.00 in July of 2008.

In response to falling prices, some 82.5% more buyers purchased a home in July than a year ago, so last July’s unit sales of 63 homes climbed to 115 homes sold during July of 2008.  With increased demand over the last few months, Citrus Heights now enjoys low inventory numbers — 5.5 months if you base your average monthly sales on the last twelve months, or 4.4 months if you’re inclined to pay more attention to the last six months of sales.  Either way, having inventory as low as it is is a good thing — but we’ve yet to see the low inventory start to have an impact on prices.

Three and Four Bedroom Condos In Sacramento

I found a great buy on a four bedroom condo in Sacramento for a client recently.  Unfortunately, like many great buys, this one already had an all-cash, over-full price offer.  Probably a good future article would be one about what you should do if you’re looking for a bargain (and who isn’t?).

Here in the meantime are the condo I sent my buyer and two others for your consideration.  As always, please give us a call if you have questions at (877) 735-5657.

Four Bedroom Near Sac State

This is the unit that had the over full priced offer, a four-bedroom, 1518 square foot condo listed for $129,000, which works out to be only about $85 per square foot.  This is on La Riviera Drive near Sac State — putting it just a few doors down from another condo the same client bought a couple of years ago.

A lot of the units in this area are rentals to Sac State students.  Indeed, this is what first got my client interested in the area, because she had a daughter attending Sac State and was looking for a unit where her daughter and her roommates could stay.

In addition to the low price, this unit also has fairly reasonable HOA dues at $165 per month.

2008_08_13_80079778
Three Bedroom in Natomas

This condo is one of the few I was able to find currently active that’s bank owned in Natomas, at a very popular condo Bella Rose subdivision on East Commerce Way.  Built in 2004, this condo is listed at $129,900 and features granite counters, 3 bedrooms and 2 baths, with two parking spaces (one covered, one not).  The subdivision features a pool, spa, media room, and a gym.

The HOA dues on this unit are $204 per month.

2008_08_13_80067163
Three Bedroom in Gold River

Another good buy is this three bedroom unit in Rancho Cordova / Gold River, listing for only $106,500, or only $76.84 per square foot.  This is another good area where I’ve had investors buy in the past, and the prices have come down nicely in recent months, making it a better investment than ever.  HOA dues on this unit are $194 per month.

2008_08_13_80077634

The Thing I Don’t Like About Sacramento

Like many Sacramento area residents, my wife and I are Bay Area transplants.  We moved here from Cupertino in 1996, and for the most part, I haven’t regretted that decision.  At the time, homes cost less than the do now — believe it or not — and they cost a LOT less than in the Bay Area.  Since then, homes have gone up enough to become unaffordable here, and they’ve since come down quite a bit, though they haven’t reached 1996 standards.

Our decision to move to Sacramento because we could afford a home out here led to owning a couple of dogs.  I like that.  Man’s best friend and all.

The thing I don’t like about Sacramento, though, is the weather in July and August.  As I write this, for example, Weather Underground tells me that it’s 97.5 degrees in Sacramento (95.5 degrees where I live in Cameron Park).  Today’s forecast tells us that we’ll get up to 101 to 107.

Note for you folks out of the country:  We use Fahrenheit here.  101 to 107 is pretty darned hot, but it’s not over the boiling point of water here.  Honest.

Sacramento’s average high temperatures for July and August are a bit balmier than that — 94 degrees in July and 93 degrees in August.

Those of you who’ve lived on the humid east coast may find those numbers alarmingly high, but they’re not too bad given the dryness out here.

In contrast, 107 degrees pretty much is too darned hot either way.

The bright side:

  • I don’t live in Phoenix.
  • August is almost half over.

My New Friend in Toronto

I have a new friend in Toronto, Andrew LaFleur.

Andrew was good enough to give me a blog roll link and he sent me a nice note.  He’s the author of two blogs. In one, he focuses primarily on New Condos in Toronto.  I hope that’s going well — I know the whole preconstruction condo thing here became somewhat emblematic of the market downturn.  But the thing about the Canadians is — well, who knows?  They have their own country up their and everything.  So again, I hope things are going well, since Andrew LaFleur is my new friend in Toronto.

Andrew also blogs about Toronto real estate on BlogTo, and you have to go check out this post on a home that’s not in Brooklyn, but instead is the smallest house in Toronto.  This is pretty cool!

I wonder where the smallest house in Sacramento is.  I’ll have to go searching…

Sacramento State Fair Starts Tomorrow

I was hoping to find a Youtube video about this year’s California State Fair in Sacramento, but what I happened upon instead was the clip above from an earlier State Fair with Wierd Al living in an Amish Paradise.

I don’t know if that’s better or worse.

The State Fair will be happening from August 15th to September 1st.  For more details and prices, check out the State Fair web site.

And here’s a State Fair Video you can watch from the Sac Bee.  The Bee tells us the Fair this year faces hot weather and a cool economy.  Well, the economy part is a bit beyond our control, but as a tip to the Fair people:  you always face hot weather.  If you held the Fair in October you’d have better results!

Your friend,

 

John Lockwood

Realtor® & Weather Consultant

Getting My Groove Back?

I haven’t written much in the last few days, but today is the day I get my groove back, such as it is.

There have been a few reasons why I’ve been off my usual Elite Properties web site thing of beauty feed lately.  The first reason is that recently all my blogs got hacked (read more here).

Don’t we all just love Internet criminals?  Sure we do — we love them every bit as much as regular criminals.

At around the same time that these ne’er-do-wells were making up two days of security-related work for me to do, I was disabling the comments here.  Partly I got tired of the noise-to-signal ratio, and partly I was inspired to react to the smug hyperbole of the article, Without Comments Your Blog is a Web 1.0 Website.

No, without comments my blog is an efficient content management system.  Or better yet, it’s a better blog, because now it’s a place where someone who takes credit or blame for his work writes something that may or may not be credit-worthy or blame-worthy.  Indeed, as we learn from Joel on Software, a blog is very much a blog without comments, at least according to the guy who invented them.

The most disheartening development over the past few weeks, however, has not been the prevention of anonymous drivel, but the seasonal downturn in the number of web site inquiries from real people.  Over the last week or two it seems that the number of serious inquiries has slowed to something of a trickle, so if other companies are slowing as well, I expect to see a downturn in the September numbers.  (July’s volume figures bested June’s, which I didn’t expect — the jury’s still out on how August will shape up).

It’s time to get another part time job as a Chippendales model to tide me over until next year!

Real Estate Market Update – Sacramento Arden / Arcade Creek Area

Sacramento’s Arden / Arcade Creek area posted deep losses in value from July to July, with only a moderate increase in volume to show for it.  This July the average home sold for $234,387, down 45.8% from last year’s average of $432,437.  Since this year’s home was substantially smaller than last year, some of that drop is an artifact of smaller homes being sold.  On a sold price per square foot basis, Arden Arcade lost 35.4% of it’s value from July to July, starting at $264.50 per square foot last July and coming in at $170.97 this July.

60.4% of the homes that sold in July were foreclosures, while short sales accounted for another 8.8% of sales.  Unit volume is up 4.6% from last year in July.

Greater Sacramento Home Prices — Breakdown by Area

Here is the latest breakdown of real estate prices for all residential homes (including condos), in Sacramento County, Placer County, and El Dorado County.  Figures cover approximately the last 45 days of sales and are based on Metrolist data.

Sacramento County

Area Name Zip Code Units
Sold
List Price Sale Price Square Footage Price per
Sq ft
Avg Discount
From List
Carmichael 95608 71 $332,145 $321,784 1680 $192 3.1 %
Citrus Heights 95610 60 $249,926 $248,541 1675 $148 0.6 %
Citrus Heights 95621 111 $183,713 $185,437 1323 $140 -0.9 %
East Sacramento & Vicinity 95819 20 $501,342 $486,275 1567 $310 3.0 %
East Sacramento & Vicinity 95817 31 $172,061 $165,282 1112 $149 3.9 %
Elk Grove 95624 140 $270,002 $271,161 2051 $132 -0.4 %
Elk Grove 95758 177 $248,222 $250,266 1853 $135 -0.8 %
Elk Grove 95757 127 $315,612 $317,501 2480 $128 -0.6 %
Elverta 95626 5 $139,540 $130,400 1104 $118 6.6 %
Fair Oaks 95628 60 $311,805 $304,339 1726 $176 2.4 %
Folsom & Vicinity 95630 112 $440,958 $434,057 2131 $204 1.6 %
Galt 95632 60 $213,454 $215,418 1554 $139 -0.9 %
Herald 95638 1 $399,000 $380,000 1880 $202 4.8 %
Isleton 95641 2 $194,900 $182,000 1252 $145 6.6 %
Mather 95655 18 $287,333 $283,270 2099 $135 1.4 %
North Highlands& Vicinity 95660 94 $110,737 $108,375 1109 $98 2.1 %
North Sacramento Natomas Del Paso Heights 95833 94 $199,216 $196,817 1502 $131 1.2 %
North Sacramento Natomas Del Paso Heights 95838 99 $124,473 $122,809 1178 $104 1.3 %
North Sacramento Natomas Del Paso Heights 95835 114 $293,296 $288,731 2116 $136 1.6 %
North Sacramento Natomas Del Paso Heights 95834 65 $243,163 $239,360 1913 $125 1.6 %
Orangevale 95662 49 $331,077 $326,562 1713 $191 1.4 %
Ranch Cordova Gold River 95670 91 $222,596 $219,226 1509 $145 1.5 %
Rancho Cordova 95742 47 $322,702 $322,557 2459 $131 0.0 %
Rancho Murieta 95683 10 $493,130 $447,600 2384 $188 9.2 %
Rio Linda 95673 36 $195,728 $194,156 1251 $155 0.8 %
Sacramento Antelope 95843 116 $221,265 $226,539 1645 $138 -2.4 %
Sacramento Arden Arcade Creek Vicinity 95821 38 $220,691 $214,999 1318 $163 2.6 %
Sacramento Arden Arcade Creek Vicinity 95864 35 $367,383 $357,139 1607 $222 2.8 %
Sacramento Arden Arcade Creek Vicinity 95841 24 $177,719 $174,755 1336 $131 1.7 %
Sacramento Arden Arcade Creek Vicinity 95825 32 $190,558 $183,953 1167 $158 3.5 %
Sacramento Arden-Arcade Creek Vicinity 95815 54 $106,579 $102,474 1154 $89 3.9 %
Sacramento Downtown Midtown 95816 15 $453,633 $441,330 1437 $307 2.7 %
Sacramento Downtown Midtown 95814 5 $488,708 $481,218 1205 $399 1.5 %
Sacramento Elder Creek Fruitridge 95820 81 $122,334 $118,193 1129 $105 3.4 %
Sacramento Elder Creek Fruitridge 95824 48 $115,271 $107,687 1158 $93 6.6 %
Sacramento Florin & Vicinity 95830 3 $629,267 $572,667 2882 $199 9.0 %
Sacramento Florin & Vicinity 95829 58 $258,733 $259,557 1891 $137 -0.3 %
Sacramento Florin & Vicinity 95828 159 $164,419 $165,490 1478 $112 -0.7 %
Sacramento Foothill Farms 95842 79 $142,329 $142,729 1207 $118 -0.3 %
Sacramento Franklin Freeport Vicinity 95823 183 $143,145 $142,118 1408 $101 0.7 %
Sacramento Franklin Freeport Vicinity 95832 35 $167,683 $162,857 1658 $98 2.9 %
Sacramento International Airport & Vicinity 95837 1 $995,000 $855,000 2434 $351 14.1 %
Sacramento Land Park Curtis Park 95818 15 $394,213 $385,727 1274 $303 2.2 %
Sacramento Rosemont College Greens Mayhew 95827 34 $212,112 $211,240 1582 $134 0.4 %
Sacramento Rosemont College Greens Mayhew 95826 66 $198,916 $197,336 1341 $147 0.8 %
Sacramento So Land Park Greenhaven 95831 45 $358,798 $356,514 1886 $189 0.6 %
Sacramento South Land Park Greenhaven 95822 81 $184,379 $181,608 1318 $138 1.5 %
Walnut Grove 95690 2 $450,000 $388,750 1765 $220 13.6 %
Wilton 95693 9 $556,694 $548,611 3181 $172 1.5 %

Placer County

Area Name Zip Code Units
Sold
List Price Sale Price Square Footage Price per
Sq ft
Avg Discount
From List
Alta 95701 1 $239,000 $246,000 1408 $175 -2.9 %
Applegate 95703 3 $537,333 $544,333 2477 $220 -1.3 %
Auburn 95603 30 $424,127 $404,862 1907 $212 4.5 %
Auburn 95602 15 $486,083 $459,337 2173 $211 5.5 %
Colfax 95713 3 $393,600 $386,667 2015 $192 1.8 %
Emigrant Gap 95715 2 $69,000 $69,000 800 $86 0.0 %
Foresthill 95631 7 $339,100 $324,500 1862 $174 4.3 %
Granite Bay 95746 29 $788,253 $745,984 3211 $232 5.4 %
Lincoln 95648 123 $354,208 $346,256 2249 $154 2.2 %
Loomis 95650 15 $471,253 $444,867 1930 $231 5.6 %
Meadow Vista 95722 6 $342,617 $340,333 1878 $181 0.7 %
Newcastle 95658 7 $509,543 $519,929 2438 $213 -2.0 %
Penryn 95663 1 $225,000 $210,000 876 $240 6.7 %
Rocklin 95765 65 $427,515 $413,721 2541 $163 3.2 %
Rocklin 95677 48 $321,485 $315,233 1896 $166 1.9 %
Roseville 95678 87 $294,644 $289,587 1801 $161 1.7 %
Roseville 95747 126 $377,419 $369,580 2303 $160 2.1 %
Roseville 95661 36 $380,832 $376,014 2004 $188 1.3 %

El Dorado County

Area Name Zip Code Units
Sold
List Price Sale Price Square Footage Price per
Sq ft
Avg Discount
From List
Camino 95709 7 $493,971 $461,857 2205 $209 6.5 %
Cool 95614 5 $282,480 $282,500 1539 $184 -0.0 %
Diamond Springs 95619 8 $253,712 $245,425 1421 $173 3.3 %
El Dorado 95623 4 $353,662 $344,250 1609 $214 2.7 %
El Dorado Hills 95762 63 $636,029 $611,791 3143 $195 3.8 %
Garden Valley 95633 3 $334,633 $341,000 2084 $164 -1.9 %
Georgetown 95634 2 $371,700 $367,450 2119 $173 1.1 %
Greenwood 95635 1 $390,000 $350,000 1987 $176 10.3 %
Grizzly Flats 95636 3 $167,167 $156,667 1290 $121 6.3 %
Mount Aukum 95656 1 $269,000 $230,000 1064 $216 14.5 %
Placerville 95667 38 $363,406 $352,318 1882 $187 3.1 %
Pollock Pines 95726 17 $251,691 $242,788 1499 $162 3.5 %
Rescue 95672 7 $426,813 $408,786 2226 $184 4.2 %
Shingle Springs / Cameron Park 95682 34 $478,934 $458,471 2354 $195 4.3 %
Somerset / Fair Play 95684 6 $276,933 $247,567 1836 $135 10.6 %
Twin Bridges 95735 2 $262,500 $250,000 1111 $225 4.8 %

$7,500 First Time Buyer Tax Credit Is Available NOW

Background:  The Foreclosure Prevention Act

On July 30th, President Bush signed H.R. 3221, also known as the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008, into law.   There are a ton of provisions in this legislation.  Before we get into the tax credit, let’s briefly look at some of the less buyer friendly aspects.  The bill eliminates down payment assistance programs like Nehemiah effective October 1, 2008.  (Though as I wrote about earlier, Nehemiah was something of a mixed blessing even when it was around, since often buyers getting the down payment assistance were competing for  low-priced, bank-owned homes with other buyers who were financing less than 100% or paying all cash).  Another bill, H.R. 6694, seeks to undo these provisions and restore down payment assistance programs like Nehemiah and AmeriDream.

In addition to eliminating third party down payment assistance programs, the bill raises the down payment for FHA loans from 3% to 3.5%, but (fortunately), allows the down payment to be gifted or borrowed from a relative.  (If it’s borrowed and secured against the home, it has to be in subordinate position to the FHA loan, and the total amount secured cannot exceed 100% of the value of the home).

The Tax Credit — An Interest Free Loan From The IRS

While on the one hand taking steps that make home ownership somewhat more difficult, on the other hand H.R. 3221 had at least one provision that’s great news if you’re a first time buyer buying between April 9, 2008 and June 30th, 2009.   First time buyers who buy during this period will be eligible for a tax credit of 10% of the value of their home (up to $7,500).  Since almost all single family homes and many condos in our area cost more than $75,000, most buyers will be eligible for the full $7,500 credit.  The credit must be paid back over 15 years, but since you only have to pay back the amount of the credit, what this means in effect is that you get a 15-year, interest-free loan from the IRS.

The National Association of Realtors® has put together an excellent FAQ that goes into the first time buyer tax credit in detail.  I think this FAQ will answer most questions you may have about this credit, but if you need additional information, please call us.

Can You Use This as a Down Payment?

One of our web site visitors inquired the other day whether there’s any way to use the tax credit as a down payment.

One answer to this is no, not really.  However, those of you who are buying the way my wife and I did — with help from the First National Bank of Mom and Dad — may note that a tax credit of $7,500 next year is pretty close to the amount of a 3.5% down payment on a median priced Sacramento County home this year.  In other words, if mom and dad will give you the interest free loan for year one, the IRS will give you an interest free tax credit the following year to pay them back with, and then you can pay the IRS back over the next 15 years.

For additional reading on H.R. 3221, see the following links:

Key Provisions of H.R. 3221

H.R. 3221 Overview (With Links to Summaries and Full Text)

July 2008 Real Estate Market Report – Elk Grove

Elk Grove is one of those areas with many foreclosures, where the competition for these low priced homes has become very fierce.  In July, for example, the average home sold in Elk Grove for $272,767, slightly above the average list price of $271,974.  Foreclosures are in short supply at about 1.5 months of inventory, and it is bank foreclosures that made up the lion shares of the sales in Elk Grove in July at 74.3% of the total.

Homes are selling below the Sacramento County average in Elk Grove, coming in at an average of $130.36 per square foot, which is down 32.6% form last year’s average of $193.51.  Sales have more than doubled since 2007, rising 150% from 126 units sold in July of 2007 to 315 units sold in July of 2008.

Below we have volume and price data for Elk Grove:

Unit Volume Data

Units Sold July, 2007 July, Change
Foreclosures Sold 23 234 917.4%
(% of total units) 18.3% 74.3%  
Short Sales Sold 8 36 350.0%
(% of total units) 6.3% 11.4%  
Non-distressed Sold 95 45 -52.6%
(% of total units) 75.4% 14.3%  
Total 126 315 150.0%

 Price Data

Prices July, 2007 July, Change
Sold Price / Square Foot $193.51 $130.36 -32.6%
Average List Price $382,481 $271,974 -28.9%
Average Sale Price $374,970 $272,767 -27.3%

 Inventory (Based on 12 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 187 1182 6.3
Foreclosures 119 268 2.2
Short Sales 13 664 48.9
Nondistressed 53 251 4.7

 Inventory (Based on 6 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 247 1182 4.8
Foreclosures 178 268 1.5
Short Sales 20 664 32.1
Nondistressed 49 251 5.0

Folsom Real Estate Market

Though not immune to the overall market downturn, sellers in Folsom are in a much better position than their counterparts elsewhere in Sacramento County.  Non-distressed sales still made up some 71.1% of all sales in July — more or less a mirror image of Sacramento County as a whole, where non-distressed sales comprised only 22.3% of the total.

Partly as a result of the relatively low number of foreclosures, prices in Folsom have fallen off less dramatically than in other areas of the county.  Sold price per square foot fell 11.1% in Folsom from July to July, from $229.38 in 2007 to $203.89 in 2008.  This July the average home sold in Folsom for $440,997, down 11.6% from last July’s year’s average of $498,793.

Although the increase in demand this year has been less dramatic than in other areas, unit volume has still increased 12.2% in Folsom, from 74 units sold in July of 2007 to 83 units sold in July of 2008.  Even without a huge upswing in demand, however, buyers in Folsom have kept the inventory trimmed back nicely.  Currently there are 5 months of inventory (based on 12 months of absorption), or an even more healthy 4.3 months of inventory if you look at the absorption for the last six months.

July 2008 Sacramento County Real Estate Market Report

Sacramento County’s market continued to be characterized by strong demand for bank owned properties and falling prices as banks continue to discount homes to move them off the books.  Once again, prices are down sharply from last year, but sales are up sharply. 

The average home sold in Sacramento County in July for $228,656, down 38.3% from last year’s average price of $370,770.  On a sold price per square foot basis, homes lost 35.5% of their value county-wide, averaging $217.74 per square foot in July of 2007 versus $140.53 in July of 2008.

Compared to last July, sales have more than doubled in Sacramento County.  996 units sold in July in 2007, versus 2024 (reported so far) for July of 2008, an increase of 103.2%. 

This is the sixth month in a row that our unit volume has increased substantially over last year.  Indeed, with today only August 4th, Metrolist affiliated agents and brokers have already reported 10,338 sales for Sacramento County this year, so we’re on track in the first couple of weeks of August to have sold more homes than we sold in the whole calendar year of 2007 (10,698 homes).

Inventory in Sacramento County is currently at 7.1 months (or 5.5 months if you use the more recent sales for the last six months as representative).

Some of the data on which this report is based is in the tables below.

Unit Volume Data

 

Units Sold July, 2007 July, 2008 Change
Foreclosures Sold 160 1404 777.5%
(% of total units) 16.1% 69.4%  
Short Sales Sold 43 168 290.7%
(% of total units) 4.3% 8.3%  
Non-distressed Sold 793 452 -43.0%
(% of total units) 79.6% 22.3%  
Total 996 2024 103.2%

 

Price Data

Prices July, 2007 July, 2008 Change
Sold Price / Square Foot $217.74 $140.53 -35.5%
Average List Price $379,758 $230,919 -39.2%
Average Sale Price $370,770 $228,656 -38.3%

 

Inventory (Based on 12 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 1266 9015 7.1
Foreclosures 700 2445 3.5
Short Sales 80 3850 48.1
Nondistressed 476 2730 5.7

 

Inventory (Based on 6 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 1641 9015 5.5
Foreclosures 1065 2445 2.3
Short Sales 120 3850 32.0
Nondistressed 460 2730 5.9

Title Companies Struggling

The past few weeks have not been kind to many of my friends at  title companies.  Last week I learned that a friend of mine — the office manager for a Placer Title Branch near me who’d been there twenty years or more — had just been laid off.

This morning I met with a sales rep for another Placer Title service area who wanted to meet me after a very successful escrow one of my agents and I had done with one of her escrow officers.   This was an escrow with some real title problems that needed to be addressed — and the escrow officer did a great job on it. 

In an ironic twist, the new sales rep I met from Placer Title and the escrow officer who’d done such a good job had recently moved to Placer Title after having been laid off by Commerce Title.

To add insult to irony, while I was waiting to meet with the new Placer Title rep, I learned from another real estate broker that another company I’d worked with in the past — Citrus Heights based Financial Title — had just closed its doors in California.  You can read more about that closure here.

Some Background

As the greater Sacramento market has contracted, at least two factors have combined to make area title companies particularly vulnerable.  First, one of the mainstays of title company revenue — home refinances — have declined sharply as declining property values have eroded the equity that so many homeowners traditionally tapped.   Secondly, many of the escrows we’re doing now are REO escrows, and many of the banks with REOs to sell are sending all their escrows through a single (often out-of-state) title company.  We’ll have more on the legality of this and the impact on the buyer in a future article.

Sacramento’s Pocket Area Real Estate Market

June was a good month for Sacramento’s Pocket Area (95831), with a combination of strong sales volume and low inventory.  Of course there’s the usual background of a declining market to talk about, but the Pocket’s June numbers compare favorably with the county as a whole.

In June, the average home sold in the Pocket area for $355,027, down 8.8% from last year’s average of $389,110.  Sold price per square foot fell more sharply, down 16.3% from last year’s $221.95, to an average of $185.82 per square foot this year.  Some 54.3% of all sales in the Pocket area were non-distressed in June, compared to 25% for the county at large.

Even though the Pocket area has held its value well from June to June, it still posted a respectable 59.1% increase in sales volume from year to year.  Of course, the Pocket area is not all that huge, so statistical significance is low.

The other good news for the Pocket area is that there are only 3.9 months of non-distressed inventory, and only 3.7 months of inventory overall.

The tables below give more information on the Pocket area.

Unit Volume Data

Units Sold June, 2007 June, 2008 Change
Foreclosures Sold 1 10 900.0%
(% of total units) 4.5% 28.6%  
Short Sales Sold 0 6 N/A
(% of total units) 0.0% 17.1%  
Non-distressed Sold 21 19 -9.5%
(% of total units) 95.5% 54.3%  
Total 22 35 59.1%

Price Data

Prices June, 2007 June, 2008 Change
Sold Price / Square Foot $221.95 $185.82 -16.3%
Average List Price $396,683 $367,621 -7.3%
Average Sale Price $389,110 $355,027 -8.8%

Inventory (Based on 12 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 23 95 4.0
Foreclosures 5 14 2.8
Short Sales 1 19 16.3
Nondistressed 17 62 3.6

Inventory (Based on 6 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 25 95 3.7
Foreclosures 7 14 1.8
Short Sales 2 19 9.5
Nondistressed 16 62 3.9

Fair Oaks Real Estate Market

With slightly fewer foreclosures than Sacramento County overall, Fair Oaks has seen prices erode somewhat less swiftly.  In that respect, it’s behaving much like Folsom or many areas in Placer County or El Dorado County.

In June, volume rose just slightly (3.1%) from last year.  This June, 42.4% of sales were non-distressed sales, versus 12.1% short sales and 45.5% REOs.  The average home sold for $345,991 in June, down 19.5% from last year’s average of $429,625.  On a sold price per square foot basis, Fair Oaks homes lost 18.6% of their value during this time, selling for $230.91 per square foot on average in June of 2007 versus $187.93 on average in June of 2008.

Inventory in Fair Oaks is rising over the last few months, and currently there are 7.5 months of inventory overall.

East Sacramento Real Estate Market

The real estate market in East Sacramento rallied somewhat in June.  The average home sold in East Sac in June for $574,158, up 8.2% over last year’s average of $530,568.  Sold price per square foot was down 10.3%, however, from $373.14 in June of 2007 to $334.79 in June of 2008.   The news is not all grim, however, since June’s figure has increased since May, when sold price per square foot came in at $299.79.

Non-distressed sales continued to predominate in East Sac, accounting for 77.8% of all sales in June.  In active inventory, short sales and foreclosures make up about 11% of the 97 available homes in East Sacramento.

East Sacramento is not a huge area, so few homes sell in the best of times.  However, unit sales are definitely down this year, with eighteen homes selling in June versus 19 the year before.  Moreover, average sales over the last six months have been more sluggish than over the last year, at thirteen units on average versus sixteen, respectively.  Inventory, which was low when we reported on it last year, is now up to about 7.1 months.

Related Articles:

East Sacramento Real Estate Market (Update for May 2008)

First Quarter 2008 East Sacramento Real Estate Market

North Sacramento / Del Paso Heights Real Estate Market

North Sacramento and Del Paso Heights (95815 and 95838) are areas hit hard by foreclosures, which have experienced huge price declines over the last year.  Sold price per square foot fell fully 44.4%,  from $184.73 in June of 2007 to 102.74 in June of 2008.  This year’s average home sold for $122,860, down 48% in a from last year’s average of $236,061.

With the huge drop in prices, unit volume has increased 213.9% over last year’s figure, with 113 units selling this June versus only 36 last June.  Nevertheless, inventory is still high at 8.2 months, so with short sales and foreclosures making up some 81% of outstanding inventory, I expect to see additional price cuts going forward.

REOs (bank foreclosures) made up 85% of all sales in June, with short sales comprising an additional 3.5%.

Elk Grove Real Estate Market

Along with Natomas and Antelope, Elk Grove is one of the areas that has been hard hit by foreclosures, and where prices have dropped dramatically in response.  Paradoxically (or maybe not), it’s also one of the areas I expect to see on the leading edge of the market recovery. 

Sold price per square foot has fallen 29.4% over the last year, from $193.70 in June of 2007 to $136.68 in June of 2008.  The average home sold for $283,840 in June of 2008, down 32% from last June’s average of $418,937.

With the huge price cuts, demand is up 88.5%, with 139 units selling in June of 2007 versus 262 in June of 2008.  With the increase in demand (especially on the better priced REOs), homes are selling quite close to list price, with the average discount from list price being only about $900 (or 1/3 of 1%).

Distressed sales, which accounted for less than 20% of sales in 2007, now account for 81.7% of all sales.  There are 1.6 months of foreclosure “inventory”, and enough short sales to support sales for about another three months.

Related Articles:

Calling The Bottom

Antelope Stampede — Are Prices Bottoming Out?

Natomas Real Estate — Sales Up 130% with Heavy Competition

Antelope Stampede — Are Prices Bottoming Out?

I’m not much of an ungulate expert.  Do Antelope stampede?

Either way, stampede is an apt metaphor for the demand for homes in Antelope in recent months.

Consider:

  • Based on the last twelve months of sales, there are 5.7 months of inventory (into the seller’s market category).  Based on high absorption rate of the last six months, that number is even lower, at 4.5 months of total inventory.  Of course, this is a “seller’s market” if you’re a bank — some 85.5% of the sales in July were distressed sales.
  • Unit volume has more than doubled over the last year.  It is up 143%, from 37 units sold in June of 2007 to 90 units sold in July of 2008.
  • The average home that sold in Antelope in June listed for $221,566 and sold for $224,261, i.e., 1.2% over full price.
  • There are only seventy-one bank owned homes in inventory now, slightly more than the sixty-seven that sold in June.
  • To date, July’s sold price per square foot has increased from the number in June.  June’s sold price per square foot was $136.68, while in July the number so far is $139.80. 

We will have to wait until August to see if prices have indeed started to climb, and it will take several months longer to prove it.  However, much as I would love to call the bottom, I think we may see a more decreases in Antelope as Sacramento County’s overall prices fall.

However, with 1.4 months of foreclosure inventory and only enough distressed sales overall to feed less than four months of demand, it’s possible we may see prices fluctuate for several months before starting to rise in earnest.

Related Posts

Natomas Real Estate — Sales Up 130% With Heavy Competition

Downtown Sacramento Real Estate Market Report

Real estate in Downtown Sacramento (95814 and 95816) continued to command top dollar in May, with sold price per square foot running more than twice as high as the county-wide average, though this year’s crop of homes was much smaller overall than last year’s.  Sold price per square foot was at $319.09 in June, down only .4% from last year’s average of $320.50.  On average, however, this year’s crop of homes was much smaller, with the result that the average selling price fell some 21.5%, from $488,553 last year to $383,732 this year.

70% of the homes that sold in downtown were non-distressed sales.  No short sales sold in either year, but this June, six of the twenty sales were bank foreclosures.  In active inventory, 78% of homes are non-distressed, 5% are REOs, and 17% are being offered as short sales.

Unit Volume in Downtown Sacramento

Units Sold June, 2007 June, 2008 Change
Foreclosures Sold 0 6 N/A
(% of total units) 0.0% 30.0%  
Short Sales Sold 0 0 N/A
(% of total units) 0.0% 0.0%  
Non-distressed Sold 18 14 -22.2%
(% of total units) 100.0% 70.0%  
Total 18 20 11.1%

Home Prices in Downtown Sacramento

Prices June, 2007 June, 2008 Change
Sold Price / Square Foot $320.50 $319.09 -0.4%
Average List Price $501,272 $393,705 -21.5%
Average Sale Price $488,553 $383,732 -21.5%

Inventory (Based on 12 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 13 100 7.2
Foreclosures 1 5 3.0
Short Sales 0 17 68.0
Nondistressed 11 78 6.7

Inventory (Based on 6 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 13 100 7.2
Foreclosures 2 5 2.1
Short Sales 0 17 51.0
Nondistressed 1

My Inner Poor Person and Other Reflections on the Real Estate Market

Many of the folks who are on the long-haired hippie side of the political spectrum like me will tell you that they’re pretty angry like this guy at Phil Graham for calling us a “Nation of Whiners”.

In my case, at the same time that I notice that we’re becoming a nation of poorer people than we were, I find myself trying to find some ways to “tighten my belt” and live a bit more frugally.  I’ve ordered Vonage, and I’m working on paring down my electric bill, for example.  If you’re interested in doing likewise, you might find reading Mr. Electricity to be very informative and an entertaining read, as I did.

So you might say I’m getting in touch with my inner poor person.

I remember him from back in the days when my wife and I were newly married and I’d just left grad school.

There he is again.  Hello!

Actually truth to tell I’m doing better now than I did then (market downturn notwithstanding), but now I’m more fussy.

Fiscal Responsibility

Beneath my lovable liberal exterior, I sometimes think I have the makings of a true conservative.  While I recognize that on one level, artificially low interest and an unregulated banking system are behind the housing crisis (i.e., blame it on the Chimp in the White House), on another level I see how often we as individuals cause our own suffering, and recognize a lot of the rhetoric on either side of any real estate related issue as rather bizarre.

Take, for example, Jim Wasserman’s recent article on the likely impending ban on Nehemiah.  Wasserman quotes people who believe that ending the program will “harm prospects for recovery in the housing market”.

Yet why does the housing market need a recovery?  Remember 2004?  The atmosphere then was reminiscent of an episode of Oprah with a car giveaway, only instead of cars, everyone in the national “audience” got a loan.  “You get a loan!  Yes and you get a loan!  And you’re getting a loan!”  Now with Nehemiah going away, there goes our most recent incarnation of NO MONEY DOWN.

Is that a bad thing?  Are we saying it will harm the market to not be able to provide 100% LTV?  (That’s Realtor® talk for “Loan To Value” — 100% LTV means NO MONEY DOWN).

Mom And Dad Financing

How did people buy homes in the 1990s?  That’s when my wife and I bought our house.

Wherever did we get that chunk of money to afford the down payment or closing costs we needed?

Oh yes, Kathy’s mom and dad.

We were fortunate to buy in a time of expanding prices, but we also had the good sense to buy below the upper limit of our comfort zone and to get a fixed rate loan.  (See Buying a Home? Be Conservative!)  Even if we’d had an adjustable rate mortgage in a time of declining prices, however, what would having some of mom and dad’s money in the mix have done to our willingness to default?  I’m guessing it would have made it harder to walk away from the home than if our ownership of the home was 100% based on the kindness of strangers.

Here’s an underwriting quiz:  Why are interest rates generally lower when the down payment is higher?  Did you say because there’s less risk of default?  Go to the head of the class!

Oh, Market, Won’t You Please Recover By An Amount That’s Just Right?

Everyone — especially Realtors® — would like the market to “recover”.  But what we really want is to have our cake and eat it, too!  Wasserman quotes one supporter of Nehemiah as saying “Without programs such as this, it will put the American dream of homeownership in jeopardy for a lot of first-time lower-income home buyers.”

So we want to keep Nehemiah because we want lower-income home buyers to be able to buy, and so the market will recover.  But wait a minute.  If the market recovers, doesn’t that mean that prices will go up again?  Won’t fewer lower-income home buyers be able to buy if that happens?  Nobody bought a single family home from me in 2004 for $121,000, but someone bought a single family home from me this year for $121,000.  Doesn’t the market recovery “put the American dream of home ownership in jeopardy for a lot of first-time lower-income home buyers”?

If we want poor people to buy houses, isn’t it better if prices go down even more?  That way more poor people can buy them!  As a side benefit, more people will be poor, so my inner poor person will have more playmates!

No, clearly that’s not exactly what we had in mind.

What We Really Want The Market To Do

  • We want high loan-to-value loans so everyone can buy a house with NO MONEY DOWN, but we don’t want people to default on their mortgages.
  • We don’t want to increase government spending, but we want NO MONEY DOWN available in combination with federally guaranteed mortgages.
  • We want NO MONEY DOWN so poor people can afford houses, so that prices will go up for the rest of us, because having poor people buy houses with NO MONEY DOWN won’t impact the default rate later.  Honest.  The check’s in the mail.
  • The poor people who don’t buy today while we want the poor people to buy houses will just have to wait another twenty years for the market to go up and then come down again, because we really want the market to go up, up, up.
  • Why do we want the market to go up, up, up?  Well, Realtors® like me want it because the commissions are bigger!  But everyone else who’s a Good American and Not a Terrorist wants it because the chances are pretty good that we’re living beyond our means, and rising home equity is the theatrical mist on which the illusion of our standard of living is projected.
  • Oh, yes, and let’s not forget.  While the market is going up, up, up, we want homes to stay affordable for first-time lower-income home buyers.

Looking at the "Supply" Side of The Real Estate Market and the Foreclosure Crisis

I’ve been writing a lot here about how demand for homes is up substantially from last year in Sacramento County, especially in the areas where there the large numbers of foreclosures have caused the biggest price declines.  Watching the demand start to pick up is fairly exciting, but as I’ve written, prices have not yet caught up.  Moreover, just looking at demand is not enough to understand where things are heading in the future.  To get a better understanding of when we might expect to see a recovery, we’d need to understand several other important factors:

  • Is the supply continuing to grow?  Are more homes being foreclosed on?  Do we see any sign that this part of the equation is turning the corner?
  • Granted that the demand for homes — especially foreclosed homes — has increased dramatically.  But has it increased enough to significantly outpace supply?  In other words, it’s no help to say 100 people bought foreclosures if at the same time 200 new foreclosures were listed. 

Because of the way the Metrolist database works, it’s easier to look at homes that have sold than it is to follow all the homes that have listed to see what became of them.  However, it’s possible to get a rough idea.

The table below shows in an approximate way the number of short sales and bank foreclosures that were listed since the beginning of 2007, for Sacramento County only.  I say “in an approximate way” because this data includes only those properties that sold or are still active — those that were withdrawn from the MLS or expired are not represented.

Since we’re in July, the numbers for July are projected.  As you can see, during May and June it looked like we’d turned the corner and had started to see a decline in foreclosures, but the number of foreclosures and short sales picked up again in July.  So the answer to our first question above is that it looks like supply is continuing to increase.  (Having said that, I’m encouraged somewhat by the dip in short sales in July compared to June — short sales are the “leading indicator” here, while foreclosures are the trailing indicator).
 

Period Short Sales REOs Total
January 2007 44 133 177
February 2007 30 147 177
March 2007 46 236 282
April 2007 39 213 252
May 2007 50 279 329
June 2007 50 260 310
July 2007 69 373 442
August 2007 92 444 536
September 2007 103 403 506
October 2007 131 616 747
November 2007 165 558 723
December 2007 180 631 811
January 2008 340 885 1225
February 2008 424 913 1337
March 2008 548 1116 1664
April 2008 609 1087 1696
May 2008 633 913 1546
June 2008 783 710 1493
July 2008 (projected) 716 1012 1728

The answer to our second question appears to be that we’ve already reached a point where demand for foreclosures is outstripping supply.  Looking at a recent snapshot of the period July 9 – July 16th, for example, 314 foreclosures sold through the MLS while 288 more were listed. 

This optimistic figure breaks down somewhat if we include Short Sales, where 223 properties were listed to 33 sold.

Still, there are good reasons to focus on the absorption rate of foreclosures.  First, there are many difficulties with getting short sales approved.  Moreover, sometimes today’s short sale listings are actually tomorrow’s foreclosure listings, and at other times the seller goes on to cure the default, and we have no statistics about that. 

What we need above all for the market to turn around is to see demand for the end result of the process — the REO — to continue to stay strong, while we see the number for short sales go down.  I for one will be keeping my eye on that 716 short sales projected for July, to see what the actual number turns out to be and what it looks like for August and into the future. 

Sacramento Natomas Area Real Estate – Sales Up 130% With Heavy Competition

Sacramento’s Natomas area — which consists of the areas 95833, 95844, 95835, 95836, and 95837 — is one area that’s experienced a large number of foreclosures, and where as a result, prices have fallen hard and buyer interest is now very high.  “On paper”, from June of 2007 to June of 2008, prices in the Natomas area fell only slightly more than in Sacramento County as a whole, losing 34.% on a sold price per square foot basis, versus a county-wide 33.4%.  However, as we’ve written about before, county-wide price drops tend to be somewhat inflated because lower priced areas are over-represented.  So when you discuss a smaller area like Natomas, these large double digit price drops are more meaningful than they are over the whole county.

Therefore it’s not surprising that even though the paper difference in price drop is small, the unit volume boost in Natomas has been great even by Sacramento County standards.  Eighty-eight homes sold in Natomas in June of 2007, whereas 203 homes sold in June of 2008, an increase of 130.7%!

The average home sold in Natomas in June for $251,122, down 35.4% from last year’s average of $386,666.   With the bargains to be had, there is some degree of competition taking place.  Buyers paid an average of 99.26% of the list price for their Natomas home in June, and almost half the homes that sold (42.9%), sold for a selling price that was higher than the list price.

Some more statistics for Natomas are below.

Natomas Real Estate Unit Volume Data

Units Sold June, 2007 June, 2008 Change
Foreclosures Sold 11 146 1227.3%
(% of total units) 12.5% 71.9%  
Short Sales Sold 1 16 1500.0%
(% of total units) 1.1% 7.9%  
Non-distressed Sold 76 41 -46.1%
(% of total units) 86.4% 20.2%  
Total 88 203 130.7%

Natomas Price Data

Prices June, 2007 June, 2008 Change
Sold Price / Square Foot $206.10 $134.97 -34.5%
Average List Price $397,163 $252,985 -36.3%
Average Sale Price $388,666 $251,122 -35.4%

Residential Inventory (Based on 12 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 111 820 7.4
Foreclosures 57 212 3.7
Short Sales 5 427 77.6
Nondistressed 46 182 3.9

Residential Inventory (Based on 6 months of prior sales)

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 139 820 5.9
Foreclosures 92 212 2.3
Short Sales 8 427 51.2
Nondistressed 39 182 4.6

Coming Up on Five Years

I thought I’d start reflecting a bit on the forthcoming birthday of this blog.  On July 27th, this blog will turn five years old, making it the oldest real estate blog in Sacramento, and one of the older (but not the oldest) real estate blogs, period.  This site and blog officially launched on July 27th, 2003.

You’re welcome.

Such longevity is a partially a testament to my ability to endure my own tedium, since for much of that time — since about 2005 or so — a lot of what this blog has been about has been real estate market data.  I’ve posted some 287 market updates.  It’s my second most popular category next to “The Open Sac” (another word for miscellaneous — the default category).  In fact, I’m sure if I looked through the Open Sac I’d find several market update posts where I simply neglected to check the Market Updates box.

Oops.

Here are some of the things that have happened since I’ve been blogging:

  • The Market Cycle
    Homes got more expensive, then quickly got a lot more expensive, then slowly got cheaper, then quickly got a lot cheaper.  We’re still in the getting cheaper phase.  We have gotten to the point where demand is rising because of it (in Sacramento County — we’re not there yet in Placer or El Dorado County).
  • The Rise of the Bubble Blogs
    Once homes started getting less expensive, people started putting up blogs to make fun of those who were hurt by the downturn, bag on Realtors® and/or blame them for the market cycle, and otherwise encourage anonymous commenters to paint a coat of semi-gloss I-told-you-so (though as it happens, they didn’t) over the rotted structure of schadenfreude.
  • Two Failures By Democrats
    OK, so George Bush stole the 2000 election, but how could you let him beat you again in 2004?  The American people, no doubt feeling the need to reward the underachievement of losing to an underachiever, elected a Democratic congress in 2006 to end the war in Iraq, which they didn’t do.  This fulfilled the 1974 prophecy of Stevie Wonder:  You Haven’t Done Nothin’.
  • Irreplaceable
    Beyonce Knowles released this hit single on December 5, 2006.
  • The Bigdealification of Real Estate Blogging
    Somewhere around time that Beyonce Knowles was releasing Irreplaceable, give or take a Thanksgiving turkey, an increasingly large group of real estate bloggers and their vendors started making a huge fuss about real estate blogging and how something called social networking was going to create — well, something — where people would all be doing — well, something. 

    Twitter evolved as the written equivalent of the Bush Presidency.

  • I Become The Anti-Blogging Blogger
    In response to the hype, and no doubt because of thoughts like those in the last bullet point, no less a luminary than Mr. Bad MLS Photo of the Day himself once declared me the anti-blogging blogger.  Or words to that effect.  I think he nailed it.

    It’s only a web site.  It’s only a web site.  It’s only a web site.

  • Getting a Contributor
    Purva Brown was nice enough to start pitching in, hooray!  Actually, really early on I had a contributor, too, since my wife, Kathy, used to help out quite a bit on the Sacramento Things To Do blog that launched at the same time as the real estate blog.  

    That other effort has since petered out, but this Sacramento Real Estate Blog lives on in the Sprit of Christmas and the Hearts of Children Everywhere!

Calling The Bottom

The other day I got an email from a colleague, Rebekah Schroeder, who has a nice blog about real estate in Truckee that she launched this year.  I went over and checked it out.  Her blog features a lot of market data for Truckee and a lot of the surrounding ski resort communities, but one of the articles that caught my eye was one that was more general in nature, about Jim Weichert calling the bottom in real estate.

Weichert’s article got a lot of airplay, including one astute reader who observed that his prediction of a market turnaround in 2008 was nothing less than boldly going where he’d already gone last year. 

I’m always a bit uncomfortable with market predictions, unlike my alter-ego, Johnstradamus, for whom predicting the exact hour of the market’s turnaround is child’s play.  There are several problems with such predictions.

  • Nobody knows when “the market” is going to hit the bottom.
  • There is no “the market”.  Weichert’s press release waffles on this somewhat.  “Weichert acknowledges that the recovery will happen at slightly different times and at different rates throughout the country because real estate remains a local business.”  If you’re going to make a substantive claim that the market’s on the rise, you should say which one is on the rise.  Empire Ranch?  Folsom?  Sacramento County?  Otherwise you’re just talking through your hat.  (Which is fine in one respect, I suppose, since it lets you talk through your hat again and again!).
  • In Sacramento County at least, there are plenty of buyers out now, though we’re not at the bottom.  I’ve been writing about this for several months.  Sacramento County’s year on year demand has gone up for the past five months in a row.  With about 95% of last July’s volume already sold by now (July 21st), it’s a pretty safe bet that July will make six months in a row — though I think July’s unit volume will be down from June.  There’s already huge competition going on for foreclosures.  It certainly doesn’t strike me that I need to be boldly predicting the bottom to get buyers, since the buyers who are creating the bottom are already there to work with.
  • Prices have not yet responded to increased buyer demand, and nobody but Johnstradamus knows just when they will, but I can almost guarantee it will be a surprise.  Currently 68.4% of the homes that have sold in July so far have been bank foreclosures.  69% of current inventory is either a short sale or foreclosure.  In order to continue to move their inventory quickly, I believe that banks will continue to cut their prices.  If the last year was any guide, they’ll be especially aggressive about this in the winter months.  However last year the demand was awful to begin with, so how much this year will be a repeat of last year’s cuts is anyone’s guess.
  • Two $64,000 questions are as follows:
  • How much will the money supply tighten?  So far this happened later and less than I expected.
  • At what point will cash investors start to rush into the foreclosure market?  So far it seems to me that much of the early recovery has been fueled by people who will owner-occupy.

I believe you should no more try to time the bottom (though I’m sure a lot of people will) than you should have bought based on appreciation back in 2004 (though a lot of people did).  More important in either case is your own situation relative to what you’re buying, but then it boils down to sound individual decision-making, and what fun is talking about that?

Sacramento Arden / Arcade Creek Real Estate Market

Sacramento’s Arden / Arcade Creek area consists of the zip codes 95821, 95825, 95841, and 958864.  Although this area has certainly been hit hard by the downturn, Arden / Arcade Creek has fewer foreclosures than the countywide average, and thus has experienced a less dramatic price decline.  As we’ve seen in most areas we’ve studied, the flip side of that fact is that Arden / Arcade has seen a more moderate recovery in unit volume. 

Getting into the specifics, the average home sold in Arden / Arcade Creek for $287,475 in June, down 28.1% from last year’s average of $399,847.  On a sold price per square foot basis, prices fell less sharply (21.3%), and averaging $195.77 in June of 2008.  Bank foreclosures currently make up 22.8% of active inventory, but accounted for 48.6% of all sales in June.  Short sales, which make up 27.3% of inventory, accounted for only 3.8% of June sales.  Non-distressed sales made up 47.6% of sales in June, and comprise 49.9% of inventory.

The twelve month running average for sales in Arden / Arcade Creek is 64 homes per month.  June is usually a heavy sales month.  105 homes sold this month, up 16.7% from last June’s sales.  There are 6.8 months of inventory in Arden / Arcade Creek.

Unit Volume Data

 

Units Sold June, 2007 June, 2008 Change
Foreclosures Sold 7 51 628.6%
(% of total units) 7.8% 48.6%  
Short Sales Sold 1 4 300.0%
(% of total units) 1.1% 3.8%  
Non-distressed Sold 82 50 -39.0%
(% of total units) 91.1% 47.6%  
Total 90 105 16.7%

Price Data

 

Prices June, 2007 June, 2008 Change
Sold Price / Square Foot $248.71 $195.77 -21.3%
Average List Price $413,125 $298,029 -27.9%
Average Sale Price $399,847 $287,475 -28.1%

Inventory (Based on 12 months of prior sales)

 

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 64 465 7.3
Foreclosures 20 106 5.3
Short Sales 2 127 46.2
Nondistressed 39 232 5.9

Inventory (Based on 6 months of prior sales)

 

Sale Type Average Sales Per Month Active Months of Inventory
All Sales 68 465 6.8
Foreclosures 30 106 3.5
Short Sales 3 127 36.3
Nondistressed 34 232 6.7