New York Times Sales Volume Chart
It might be yesterday’s (or even last month’s) news that the upper-end of the market has remained relatively strong (and not only in San Francisco). And we won’t disagree (other than with that “it’s a relative bargain” shtick).
At the same time, keep in mind that any reports of market “appreciation” (or even “depreciation”) that are based on a change in median sales price are now that much more suspect (if that’s at all possible). And yes, that includes NAR’s national numbers.
Can’t Sell Your Home? Maybe It’s Priced Too Low [New York Times]
JustQuotes: They Say Bifurcated, We Said Bipolar (A While Back) [SocketSite]
NAR’s New New National Forecast (Yes, Another Little Cut) [SocketSite]

2 thoughts on “A Little Mix Here, A Little Mix There, Here A Mix, There A Mix…”
  1. I appreciate the number of homes sold metric…but I am not sure that it always relates to the strength of the market. Look at prime real estate in South Beach for example. 88 King has no units available, Watermark has one, and The Brannan has six units. The good two bedroom units (floors 10 and above) are priced from $1.2 million to over $2 million. Call me crazy, but a limited number of available units, combined with high prices means it is a reasonably strong market (at least in this neighborhood and price segment). $1578/foot (for a 12th floor unit in the Brannan) is no joke!

  2. I somewhat agree with your point about little inventory but I do count three active listings at the Watermark including “ANOTHER $10,000 REDUCTION!!!” for #12G and one unit that’s available at 88 King. Any chance the lack of inventory could be related to sellers not listing due to a perceived weakness in the market rather than the other way around?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *