It’s time again for the monthly median sales report. Last month I posed the question, “Should I separate condos from stick built?”. Most of the responses were “For” the separation, and I am in agreement. So this month will be the first month where the data has been split. Consequently, two tables, rather than one, will be presented going forward.
[Note: I will be adding historical months’ data as time permits. But to get things started I’ve posted the most recent twelve months of data.]
An interesting result observed after separating the data is that February’s median sold price of $206,500 for “site/stick built” properties actually increased 3% over January’s median sold price of $200,000. A blip, or a trend? 
Units sold are up almost 15% over January’s numbers. A good sign. Active inventory fell about 4%. Another good sign. Let’s hope these trends continue.
The median sold price for properties classified as “Condo/Townhome” took a huge drop in February. The median price for a condo in Reno and Sparks, Nevada now sits at $79,900, and represents an 18.5% one-month decrease from January’s median condo price. However, it should be noted that because of the relatively few numbers of condo sales, a much higher variability exists in the data. Just take a look at the fluctuations in the median sold price over the last twelve months.
Another idea that came out of the comments last month was to show price bands below $200,000. Here is the break out for February sales of site/stick built homes:
| % | sold for less than… |
| 9% | $100,000 |
| 23% | $150,000 |
| 49% | $200,000 |
| 70% | $250,000 |
| 82% | $300,000 |
| 87% | $350,000 |
| 91% | $400,000 |
- 56% of the sales were bank-owned properties
- 15% of the sales were short sales
- and 24% of the sales were “normal” equity sales
And now for the new monthly medians….
Site/Stick Built Properties
| Month and Year | # Houses For Sale | Median Asking $ | # Houses Sold | Median Sold $ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2009 | 3,491 | $245,900 | 256 | $206,500 |
| Jan 2009 | 3,627 | $249,900 | 223 | $200,000 |
| Dec 2008 | 3,671 | $250,000 | 293 | $218,900 |
| Nov 2008 | 3,840 | $259,145 | 257 | $223,990 |
| Oct 2008 | 3,978 | $269,448 | 343 | $232,318 |
| Sept 2008 | 4,096 | $279,000 | 338 | $242,000 |
| Aug 2008 | 4,047 | $289,900 | 308 | $252,750 |
| Jul 2008 | 4,122 | $299,000 | 381 | $251,000 |
| Jun 2008 | 4,033 | $300,000 | 360 | $265,250 |
| May 2008 | 3,985 | $299,900 | 310 | $260,715 |
| Apr 2008 | 3,805 | $300,000 | 305 | $275,000 |
| Mar 2008 | 3,518 | $310,000 | 228 | $274,000 |
| Feb 2008 | 3,382 | $314,484 | 190 | $290,000 |
Condominium/Townhouse Properties
| Month and Year | # Houses For Sale | Median Asking $ | # Houses Sold | Median Sold $ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2009 | 686 | $129,950 | 23 | $79,900 |
| Jan 2009 | 739 | $133,000 | 29 | $98,000 |
| Dec 2008 | 705 | $139,000 | 32 | $98,450 |
| Nov 2008 | 740 | $147,700 | 28 | $91,000 |
| Oct 2008 | 748 | $149,000 | 48 | $113,000 |
| Sept 2008 | 744 | $149,000 | 27 | $137,000 |
| Aug 2008 | 756 | $154,450 | 44 | $132,500 |
| Jul 2008 | 776 | $159,694 | 37 | $160,500 |
| Jun 2008 | 758 | $163,245 | 35 | $170,500 |
| May 2008 | 773 | $163,900 | 34 | $145,000 |
| Apr 2008 | 726 | $165,000 | 32 | $149,500 |
| Mar 2008 | 694 | $165,000 | 18 | $117,450 |
| Feb 2008 | 683 | $169,900 | 31 | $179,000 |
Note: The median tables above are updated on a monthly basis. The median home price data reported covers the cities of Reno, Nevada and Sparks, Nevada. Residential data includes Site/Stick Built and Condo/Townhouse properties. Data excludes Manufactured/Modular and Shared Ownership properties. Data courtesy of the Northern Nevada Regional MLS - March 2009.
20 comments
I’m curious as to what the median for February would be if calculated the old way? I wish we you would still have the chart going back to 2005 where we could see where we are today vs. the peak.
It seems that separating condos and townhomes from stick built homes is a way to inflate the median price, since those properties are always cheaper and would drag the median down. They are SFR’s and should be included as such, IMO. Where are manufactured homes? I appreciate the added information, but I’m not fond of this new calculation if we don’t get to see the comprehensive median. What’s next, weeding out bad neighborhoods and distressed sales?
Why is it a good sign? So houses can be overpriced and this whole thing happens again or lasts longer?
BB, my intent is not to inflate the median price. I’m actually striving for more clarity.
Look at the volatility of the sold prices for condos: $179K in Feb 2008; $117K the following month; $150K the next. My thought is that by separating the data, we can get achieve a more accurate picture of the site/stick built homes. As I mentioned last month, presenting the data this way is also consistent with the way most news outlets around the country report medians. My hope is to have more of an apples-to-apples comparison to other markets.
Regarding historical data, I do intend to present that data as well. I simply did not have enough time to compile that much data this time around. It’s coming though. Look for it next month. Along these lines, it’s interesting to note that the “peak” of the site/stick built market did not exactly coincide with the peak of the condo market. I believe the respective peaks were about three months apart; with the condo market peaking after, and remaining relatively strong for a few months after stick built peaked.
Regarding manufactured homes, I’ve never included manufactured homes. There are even fewer of those sold each month than condos…so I suppose they wouldn’t really have much of an impact on the median. Also, just an FYI, our MLS has another category for residential properties, called “Shared Housing”. Never have included that one either.
And lastly, since you asked, February’s combined median is $194,000…compared to January’s combined median of $195,000.
BB, in all liklihood if the 23 condos that sold for a median price of $79.9K were put back into the mix with stick built houses, the median would be below $200K.
I find the break out for condos to be helpful, but your point is well taken. I suppose it would be nice to have the median figure just for stickbuilt, just for condos, and then for both condos and stickbuilts combined. But I am always hesitant to ask Guy to do more work.
bo, increases in units sold is a good thing because it helps to bring down the tremendous over supply of housing inventory on the market right now. Reducing inventory to more reasonable levels will lead to a more stable market, and hence stable pricing. I think most readers would agree that there is greater risk in a volatile market and less risk in a stable market.
As has been discussed many times on this blog the volatility in housing prices will not subside until the market flushes out the bulk of REO (bank-owned) properties, short sales, and other listed property.
Guy posted:
“BB, my intent is not to inflate the median price. I’m actually striving for more clarity…As I mentioned last month, presenting the data this way is also consistent with the way most news outlets around the country report medians. My hope is to have more of an apples-to-apples comparison to other markets…February’s combined median is $194,000…compared to January’s combined median of $195,000.”
While I don’t believe it’s your intent to inflate the median, that’s exactly what leaving out condos and townhomes does. By your old calculations, the ones we have been referencing for more than 3 years on this blog, the median fell again. I have been under the impression that most of the medians reported for large metro areas INCLUDE condos and townhomes. How, may I ask, do you conclude most news outlets do not?
bo makes a great point. A very great point. Why is it good that house prices should start to go back up? A lot of people would say they are still too high. There are indeed two sides to this pancake.
Ralph, looks like we cross-posted. I never said it is good that house prices should start to go back up. I said the increase in units sold and the decrease in inventory are good thing, and (see my last comment) will lead to a more stable market.
BB, I suppose my conclusion is based on anecdotal observations. I have found many times when comparing the Reno market to other regions in the US, I need to remove condos from my numbers in order perform an apples-to-apples match to the data from the other source.
BB - The median sales number isn’t very useful in the first place, so no reason to fuss much about it. Since it simply measures the median of the houses sold, it really tells more about the price range of the houses that sold rather than price trends. And you get the sales numbers directly, so the median sales price is redundant.
If you want a measure of actual home prices, the better series would be something like what is issued by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. These numbers track actual prices of the same houses through time, thereby giving a good idea of price trends. It maintains a web site and you can look up the housing numbers for any number of cities, including Reno.
Ralph - House prices will go up when the economy recovers and jobs are created. So yes, it will be a good thing when house prices go up.
:|, So it was a good thing for house prices to skyrocket between 2002-2007 or whatever the bubble years were? It should be clarified that they should stay within the means of people, so if salaries go up, show should housing prices, or else we will be doing this all over again.
So it was a good thing for house prices to skyrocket between 2002-2007 or whatever the bubble years were?
What about the price of automobiles?
How about lift tickets at our local ski resorts?
How about movie tickets?
How about lettuce, cucumbers, radishes, wine and other foodstuffs?
So the prices of homes should stay within the means of people, yet when it comes to $80K vehicles, $35 bottles of wine, entertainment costs, etc., etc., all the identical reasoning goes out the window?
I submit it’s NOT just the cost of housing and the fact we aren’t addressing much of anything else [combined with what I see as the ground work for hyper-inflation] means we in fact WILL be doing this all over again. Maybe we’ll be assigning a different name for what we’re going through, but IMO the exercise is going to be repeated given future costs [including housing] don’t seem they will remain within the means of people.
Guy states “an interesting result observed after separating the data is that February’s median sold price…actually increased 3% over January’s.” Could this mean the bottom was actually realized on January 11, 2009?
After recomputing the numbers as BB suggested, Guy stated “February’s combined median [wa]s $194,000…compared to January’s…$195,000.” Could this mean the bottom was realized on February 11, 2009?
I’m not making further median sales price bottom predictions but if Guy has indeed pick up on a trend [”a blip, or a trend?”], especially given unit sales are increasing, we may in fact be very, very close [if we’re not already there] to the bottom.
what about price per square foot stats? I think that would give us a better idea of how much you can buy now for $250k vs. how much you could buy 2 years ago for $250k.
Median $/SF SFR (new / resale)
1/09 ($132 / $114)
1/08 ($148 / $171)
1/07 ($167 / $206)
1/06 ($191 / $217)
The wheels have fallen off the resale market. A lot of it is probably market mix - big, expensive houses aren’t selling and repo’s are.
Guy, separating SFR and condos is actually better for SFR buyers. I can better see where the market is for SFR. I’m sure someone looking for condos, doesn’t need the SFR mixed in. Had I known the median was higher last month, I might have offered a tad more to break the tie I was stuck in.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090305/ap_on_bi_ge/states_foreclosures ouch. Maybe the median has a ways to go before it hits bottom.
Interesting stats, thanks!
One thing that changed in February is 4 homes over $1 million sold during the month–2 in ArrowCreek and 2 in Incline Village.
All four buyers were from CA, 3 from the Bay Area.
Now the days’ supply is down to just 49.5 months–much better than January’s 198 months.
Billddrummer said “one thing that changed in February is 4 homes over $1 million sold during the month–2 in ArrowCreek and 2 in Incline Village.”
I was under the impression Guy, that your sales stats from Reno/Sparks DIDN’T include Incline Village [”IV”]/Crystal Bay [”CB”] sales. Was my impression wrong? If so IMO you need to filter IV/CB sales OUT of your stats.
IV/CB have their own problems and I’d hate to see their stats skewed by what’s going on [or not going on] in Reno/Sparks.
Smarten, Yes, the median home price data reported covers the cities of Reno, Nevada and Sparks, Nevada.
To smarten,
His sales stats and mine are different. I got mine from the Washoe County Assessor. I don’t have access to Guy’s figures because I’m not a realtor.
I’d be interested, though, in seeing how many listings are out there over $1 million against February sales.
Thanks, smarten, for pointing out the differences in sources.