December median sold price, units, DOM, and $/sq.ft.

As many readers are aware this post contains December’s median sold price, which will determine the winner of the contest that began one year ago.  Because you’ve all been so patient, I will reveal the median and announce the winner right off the bat.

December’s median sold price came in at $165,000.  And the winner is…Zen.  Congratulations Zen!  With your prediction of $166,250, you predicted the closest to December’s median sold price. [see Readers predictions for December 2010’s median for all the guesses.]

And how did Zen come up with his winning prediction?  Here is Zen’s entry from December 22, 2009: “$166,250 is my number. Why, you ask. Why not? My big fat guess is as good as anyone’s attempt to predict the future by putting together a bunch of hypothetical outcomes or staring into a cup of tea leaves all afternoon, only I didn’t have to spend nearly as much time doing it. Ok, I actually just took 5% off of Novembers $175,000, but it still didn’t take that long to do and it is as good as anyone else’s number right now. Good luck to all, except BB because your number looks like a disastrous year.

And what does Zen win?  Well, besides bragging rights on the blog, I will make a $50 donation in Zen’s name to the charity of Zen’s choice.  [Zen, please contact me off blog at gjohnson@chaseinternational.com so that we can set this up.]

Now back to December’s numbers.

December’s median sold price of $165,000 is not only the lowest monthly median for the year, but also a median that we haven’t seen since 2001.  $165,000 represents a 2.9 percent drop from November’s median of $170,000, and a 7.3 percent drop from December 2009’s median sold price of $178,000.

December’s median sold price per square foot also set a new low – coming in at $94.31, nearly a 2 percent drop from November’s number.  Having now seen five consecutive months below the $100/sq.ft. price point, I wonder when we’ll ever see it again.

470 houses were sold in December – a robust number for the month of December.  470 units is a whopping 17.8 percent increase over November’s 399 units sold, and a 15.6 percent increase over December 2009’s 424 units sold.

December sales by type break out as follows:

  • Bank-owned properties: 39% – up from November’s 32%
  • Short sales: 30% – down from November’s 31%
  • Equity sales: 30% – down from November’s 36%

Bank-owned sales were up, while equity sales slid.

December sales by price band break out as follows:

sales price ($000’s) units sold
0 – 99 63
100 – 199 235
200 – 299 100
300 – 399 37
400 – 499 13
500 – 599 6
600 – 699 5
700 – 799 3
800 – 899 3
900 – 999 2
1M+ 3
total 470

For those readers who prefer the median sold price for houses and condos combined, December’s 546 sold houses, condos and town homes exhibited a combined median sold price of $153,900 – down from November’s combined median of $155,000.

 

See all the historical data below.

Month Year # Sold Sold Price Sold Price per Sq Ft Average DOM # of Listings # of Pendings
Dec 2010 470 $165,000 $94.31 143 2,021 1,148
Nov 2010 399 $170,000 $96.14 139 2,060 1,376
Oct 2010 418 $174,950 $98.57 135 2,146 1,371
Sep 2010 466 $168,000 $97.52 133 2,186 1,473
Aug 2010 449 $180,000 $97.53 127 2,222 1,513
Jul 2010 414 $180,000 $101.74 129 2,158 1,580
Jun 2010 602 $170,000 $100.52 145 1,966 1,625
May 2010 450 $175,807 $102.37 138 1,789 1,804
Apr 2010 510 $179,995 $103.13 128    
Mar 2010 477 $175,000 $99.14 142    
Feb 2010 338 $170,000 $101.68 138    
Jan 2010 346 $167,000 $97.06 134    
Dec 2009 424 $178,000 $101.28 126    
Nov 2009 461 $175,000 $103.61 112    
Oct 2009 561 $180,000 $103.52 123    
Sep 2009 520 $185,948 $103.31 128    
Aug 2009 482 $179,900 $102.64 116    
Jul 2009 515 $180,000 $103.45 126    
Jun 2009 536 $180,317 $104.09 136    
May 2009 426 $175,000 $102.29 139    
Apr 2009 429 $190,000 $105.71 133    
Mar 2009 369 $200,000 $105.85 133    
Feb 2009 293 $205,000 $111.52 132    
Jan 2009 233 $200,000 $113.04 117    
Dec 2008 294 $218,950 $121.74 145    
Nov 2008 269 $220,000 $122.24 152    
Oct 2008 354 $230,000 $131.43 144    
Sep 2008 358 $239,250 $136.72 145    
Aug 2008 321 $250,000 $142.14 140    
Jul 2008 397 $251,000 $145.48 139    
Jun 2008 369 $262,500 $148.05 142    
May 2008 314 $260,215 $152.30 134    
Apr 2008 314 $275,000 $154.05 172    
Mar 2008 238 $274,000 $150.93 166    
Feb 2008 195 $289,000 $156.48 149    
Jan 2008 165 $285,000 $170.23 146    
Dec2007 228 $283,950 $167.22 143    
Nov2007 204 $299,750 $172.24 126    
Oct2007 241 $296,000 $173.55 116    
Sep2007 230 $299,945 $179.46 114    
Aug2007 311 $305,000 $182.49 118    
Jul2007 300 $315,000 $189.78 113    
Jun2007 329 $320,000 $196.78 104    
May2007 364 $313,200 $190.81 107    
Apr2007 320 $309,500 $193.93 121    
Mar2007 324 $315,000 $189.61 121    
Feb 2007 269 $315,000 $191.18 126    
Jan 2007 245 $312,900 $199.79 133    
Dec2006 291 $309,000 $193.51 114    
Nov2006 281 $318,000 $197.32 111    
Oct 2006 363 $312,400 $201.44 105    
Sep2006 344 $314,950 $198.08 98    
Aug2006 349 $325,000 $210.92 94    
Jul2006 373 $335,000 $210.62 93    
Jun2006 424 $339,000 $214.54 91    
May2006 374 $339,950 $219.05 99    
Apr2006 368 $334,600 $212.08 88    
Mar2006 387 $340,000 $215.54 99    
Feb 2006 283 $335,000 $217.29 101    
Jan 2006 274 $365,000 $216.38 98    
Dec2005 333 $355,000 $217.31 89    
Nov2005 385 $349,000 $220.00 81    
Oct2005 484 $359,450 $223.06 77    
Sep2005 531 $354,500 $219.26 77    
Aug2005 582 $360,500 $220.52 73    
Jul2005 608 $353,000 $218.99 71    
Jun2005 679 $350,000 $215.69 69    
May2005 644 $333,250 $209.95 68    
Apr2005 558 $326,750 $207.57 77    
Mar2005 584 $325,000 $200.17 81    
Feb 2005 342 $318,500 $197.54 88    
Jan 2005 341 $310,000 $195.19 85    
Dec2004 450 $312,500 $190.72 77    
Nov2004 448 $309,950 $191.62 63    
Oct2004 512 $299,250 $188.72 53    
Sep2004 496 $292,750 $185.78 61    
Aug2004 505 $285,000 $182.95 56    
Jul2004 544 $304,300 $179.28 61    
Jun2004 533 $285,000 $172.16 65    
May2004 476 $278,750 $169.64 65    
Apr2004 526 $259,950 $158.08 67    
Mar2004 508 $245,000 $142.56 71    
Feb 2004 365 $237,000 unavailable 81    
Jan 2004 380 $228,500 unavailable 78    
Dec2003 441 $240,000 unavailable 82    
Nov2003 444 $220,750 unavailable 78    
Oct2003 430 $219,880 unavailable 76    
Sep2003 587 $223,000 unavailable 71    
Aug2003 512 $220,000 unavailable 75    
Jul2003 533 $210,000 unavailable 77    
Jun2003 475 $207,000 unavailable 77    
May2003 450 $198,950 unavailable 85    
Apr2003 478 $197,750 unavailable 82    
Mar 2003 428 $192,000 unavailable 77    
Feb 2003 321 $186,895 unavailable 79    
Jan 2003 316 $186,000 unavailable 96    
Dec 2002 379 $193,500 unavailable 93    
Nov 2002 423 $190,000 unavailable 82    
Oct 2002 483 $189,900 unavailable 83    
Sep 2002 410 $174,000 unavailable 85    
Aug 2002 459 $180,000 unavailable 74    
Jul 2002 469 $176,000 unavailable 83    
Jun 2002 445 $185,000 unavailable 80    
May 2002 470 $178,450 unavailable 77    
Apr 2002 360 $169,500 unavailable 93    
Mar 2002 377 $169,000 unavailable 84    
Feb 2002 323 $170,900 unavailable 89    
Jan 2002 269 $172,475 unavailable 99    
Dec 2001 287 $182,000 unavailable 86    
Nov 2001 323 $161,500 unavailable 85    
Oct 2001 357 $166,500 unavailable 79    
Sep 2001 355 $168,000 unavailable 81    
Aug 2001 448 $160,350 unavailable 84    
Jul 2001 433 $169,900 unavailable 90    
Jun 2001 426 $166,225 unavailable 96    
May 2001 404 $162,050 unavailable 97    
Apr 2001 370 $158,750 unavailable 94    
Mar 2001 385 $159,900 unavailable 97    
Feb 2001 294 $159,950 unavailable 103    
Jan 2001 264 $165,000 unavailable 102    
Dec 2000 272 $156,500 unavailable 100    
Nov 2000 355 $154,500 unavailable 93    
Oct 2000 348 $153,000 unavailable 98    
Sep 2000 356 $160,000 unavailable 104    
Aug 2000 412 $163,375 unavailable 94    
Jul 2000 368 $155,000 unavailable 110    
Jun 2000 466 $165,845 unavailable 104    
May 2000 363 $158,000 unavailable 105    
Apr 2000 312 $155,000 unavailable 113    
Mar 2000 339 $162,700 unavailable 102    
Feb 2000 244 $149,620 unavailable 110    
Jan 2000 223 $156,000 unavailable 113    
Dec 1999 264 $155,000 unavailable 118    
Nov 1999 293 $149,900 unavailable 98    
Oct 1999 289 $147,895 unavailable 108    
Sep 1999 311 $157,000 unavailable 106    
Aug 1999 360 $148,500 unavailable 112    
Jul 1999 375 $147,800 unavailable 105    
Jun 1999 372 $150,000 unavailable 103    
May 1999 307 $145,500 unavailable 106    
Apr 1999 324 $151,700 unavailable 111    
Mar 1999 308 $151,000 unavailable 121    
Feb 1999 249 $148,900 unavailable 120    
Jan 1999 210 $143,000 unavailable 115    
Dec 1998 265 $140,000 unavailable 118    
Nov 1998 280 $152,800 unavailable 126    
Oct 1998 286 $142,825 unavailable 115    
Sep 1998 279 $144,500 unavailable 102    
Aug 1998 331 $145,000 unavailable 113    
Jul 1998 335 $150,000 unavailable 108    
Jun 1998 351 $148,500 unavailable 103    
May 1998 302 $145,500 unavailable 99    
Apr 1998 235 $149,000 unavailable 111    
Mar 1998 267 $142,500 unavailable 114    
Feb 1998 201 $139,900 unavailable 126    
Jan 1998 167 $149,490 unavailable 129    

Note: The medians table above is updated on a monthly basis. The median home price data reported covers the cities of Reno, Nevada and Sparks, Nevada [NNRMLS Area #100]. Residential data includes Site/Stick Built properties only. Data excludes Condo/Townhouse, Manufactured/Modular and Shared Ownership properties. Data courtesy of the Northern Nevada Regional MLS – January 2011.  Note: This information is deemed reliable, but not guaranteed.

22 comments

  1. Sully

    First off – congrats to Zen. I figured he or FutureRenoHomebuyer had it. Secondly, Guy which post do you want the guess for Dec/2011 posted under? There is one dated Dec. 21 that I only just now noticed or are you going to set up another one?

  2. Guy Johnson

    Yes, I intend to post a separate request for entries. Coming soon.

  3. smarten

    Congratulations Zen; good job! I like your methodology.

  4. bob_c

    There is a coorelation between the average monthly median and the yearly median—
    defining the extent of that coorelation would be the mathematical challenge.

    The splatter pattern of each months sales prices would be the deviation, but I’m
    maintaining that the probability of the splatter patterns being similar is high…thus
    the high coorelation and the reason for my concern that December was going to be a BAD month for Reno RE.

    I’m relieved it wasn’t worse. But then again……if it crashes I’m considering investment property. But it still sucks that the crisis may not be over. The crappy
    December data does society no good. People desire stability.

    Congrats to the winner…..but I wish the 172,500 (or higher) would have won.

  5. bob_c

    Based on watching the new listings each day….the stream of lower priced homes
    seems to have intesifed. I am seeing NO positive signals and do understand this is
    the ‘off season’ for RE. The only positive spin I can put is that most of the Somersett
    and Arrowcreek homes (which raise the median) have already changed hands, because
    the losses were so large the owners bailed faster.

  6. Martin

    This month sets a new record. We are now down 55% in median price since the bubble top in 1/06.
    So we had a nice “stable” 7.3% drop in prices YoY.
    We have now wiped out 10 years of any appeciation. And that’s in nominal dollars. Factor in inflation and the result is absolutely sobering.

  7. skeptical

    The silence from the two loudest permabears on this site (smarten and MikeZ) is absolutely deafening. They ridiculed those who voiced cautious attitudes about Reno RE. They lampooned the one contributor who has been most correct regarding the direction of prices.

    They hollered “STABILITY” from the highest perches and shouted out any newcomers to the site who voiced doubt about the direction of prices.

    Now, they are silent, except for a murmur of congrats to the winner by Smarten.

    Time for some folks to fess up and eat some crow.

    Personally, I welcome these prices, as it brings a return of rationality to the market and opens the possibility for the stability that MikeZ and Smarten wrongly proclaimed for the last 18 months.

  8. skeptical

    Oops….meant to call them permabulls, not permabears….

  9. MikeZ

    Disappointing data.

  10. MikeZ

    And congratulations, Zen, if you’re still here.

  11. smarten

    Skeptical, was not the SFR market, as measured by the median sales price, stable for more than 18 months? And didn’t you eventually accede to this fact after denying it for how many months? Did anyone say this stability would last forever? Didn’t I say it could go up or down from here? So exactly what is it you want me to “fess up” to Skeptical? What crow am I supposed to eat? That the year end median sales price was $165K instead of my guess of $172K? If so I think you need to eat the same meal inasmuch as your guess was even farther away than mine.

    Although one month’s numbers do not make a trend, this is enough of a price drop to take the median sales price out of the $170K-$180K range in which it has been essentially trading for how long now? If it happens again in January [I have opined in the past that generally the lowest median sales price of the year occurs in January], I would say December’s numbers were not an anomaly.

    However I will observe that I am very surprised by the number of unit sales. December’s numbers are the highest for any December since Guy’s charting began in 1998. Historically a spike in unit sales is generally a precursor to an increasing median sales price. But who knows?

  12. Sully

    Guy, I just downloaded the county sales to date data for 2010 and get 381 SFR sales for December. I realize the county is a bit behind but it has never been off almost 100 over Reno/Sparks data.

    Any reason for this?

  13. bob_c

    mike z was 95% sure smarten would win….based on the year end numbers.
    i voiced my statistical concern of the high probability december was a BAD month
    based on year end and recieved no support….in faxct was mocked a little. The statistical evidence I had WAS sound for me predicting a horrible month. i’m NOT as dumb as some make think i am. in fact i am extremely deft w/ numbers.

  14. Donna

    I’m not here to pick a fight, but I would just like to add a voice that says nothing in this data is at all disappointing. For some of us, falling prices are not the problem. They are the solution.
    Why is it that when the median price rose from $165K in January of 2001 to $365K in January of 2006, (more than double in 5 years) that was a good thing, but when it fell from $365K in January of 2006 to $165K in December of 2010, that is disappointing?
    Would it have been just grand if the median price had doubled again from January of 2006 to January of 2011? So today the median would be $730K, and nobody could afford to buy a house?
    Why is up good and down bad?

  15. Sully

    Without intervention, modest home price declines could be allowed to resume until inventories clear. An analysis found that home prices increased by about 5 percentage points as a result of the combined efforts to arrest price deterioration.[7] Absent incentive programs and as modifications reach a saturation point, these price increases will likely be reversed in the coming years. Prices, in fact, have begun to slide again in recent weeks. In short, pulling demand forward has not produced a sustainable stabilization in home prices, which cannot escape the pressure exerted by oversupply (Chart 3).

    Complete article here:

    http://dallasfed.org/research/eclett/2010/el1014.html

  16. Zen

    Thank you all for your nice comments. As always, the discussion on this blog does not disappoint. I love the differing perspectives. If I had one wish for this blog, it would be that the dialog would be a little more civil at times. We have lost some good contributors due to less than polite remarks. For the most part though it is kept pretty clean and definitely intelligent. Thanks to all of you for your input and especially to Guy for keeping it all going. I’m looking forward to the new contest.

  17. Guy Johnson

    Sully,
    I’m not sure what would cause such a great disparity between the two data sources.

  18. smarten

    Guy –

    What about Sue Lowe’s $172.5K pronouncement concerning December’s median sales price? Why the disparity [given he’s out of your office]? Thanks.

  19. Sully

    smarten, if I’m not mistaken the median you refer to was for the whole year, not December.

    ‘LAKE TAHOE, Nev. (Jan. 4, 2011) – The Reno-Sparks real estate market benefited immensely from the first-time homebuyers federal tax credit, but despite a strong first two quarters, the year ended with a three percent decline in sales volume and a one percent increase in units sold, according to a year-end report from Chase International.’

  20. Reno Ignoramus

    Hello Guy,
    I’m sure you recall a 2-3 years ago, maybe even more, when you kindly reported what percentage of houses on the market were vacant. If I recall correctly, the percentage was quite large, well over half. At the time, the thinking on the blog was that there were so many vacant houses for sale for one of two reasons. Either the owners of the vacant listing had already bought another house and moved, leaving the vacant house behind. Or the vacant house was a flip gone bad. The consensus on the blog was that so many vacant houses for sale was not a good thing, and likely foreshadowed a decline in sales prices going forward.
    I am wondering if you might be able to report on how many houses for sale today are vacant. We have not had any info about this in quite a while.
    Thanks.

  21. MikeZ

    There was an interesting and potentially far-reaching ruling on Friday from the MA Supreme Court: the court’s unanimous (!) decision retroactively voided two prior approved foreclosure seizures for incomplete paperwork and left prior victims of wrongful foreclosures within the state with a legal remedy to take action against the banks.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE7063M620110107

  22. Guy Johnson

    smarten,
    Sully is correct. Sue Lowe’s $172.5K median was for all of 2010.

    RI,
    Good idea. I will report those numbers (vacancies) soon.

Leave a Reply

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