September median sold price, units, DOM, $/sq.ft.

The nice 2.7 percent increase in Reno-Sparks’ median sold price that we saw in August ($154,000) evaporated in September; the current median sold price is now back to $150,000.  We’ve now bounced along the $150,000 floor for the past few months – hitting that price in May, July and now September of this year.  Will there be resistance at the $150,000 level? Or will the median sold price fall through it in the coming months?

I believe the more telling metric is the sold price per square foot.  September saw the largest month-over-month percentage drop in the median sold price per square since I’ve been tracking that number.  September’s median sold price per square foot of $83.68 represents an 8.3 percent plummet from August’s $91.29/sq.ft.

Our MLS did not begin recording the sold price per square foot for sales until early 2004.  That’s too bad, as I would really like to know to where $83.68/sq.ft equates historically.  Are we now back to 2001?  1999?  Earlier?

Clearly the low-end of the market is driving this drop in price per square foot.  Looking at the sales prices of those homes that sold at or below $83.68/sq.ft. I see that three-quarters (74.7 percent) of them sold for $150,000 or less.

Units sold continue to post record numbers.  The 546 houses sold in September not only represent a 17 percent increase year-over-year, but also is the most units sold for a September since September 2003.  2011 is shaping up to be a good year – units-sold-wise, that is.  4,400 homes have sold year-to-date.  Compare that to the 4,156 units sold during the same time period last year.

The proportion of bank-owned sales jumped up to 38% in September; equity and short sales were down over August’s numbers. September’s sales breakout as follows:

  • REO sale: 38% – up from August’s 31%
  • Short sales: 29% – down from August’s 30%
  • Equity sales: 32% – down from August’s 35%

September sales by price band break out as follows:

sales price ($000’s) units sold
0 – 99 115
100 – 199 282
200 – 299 85
300 – 399 30
400 – 499 11
500 – 599 12
600 – 699 4
700 – 799 1
800 – 899 2
900 – 999 1
1M+ 3
total 546

For those readers who prefer the median sold price for houses and condos combined, Septmember’s 630 sold houses, condos and town homes exhibited a combined median sold price of $139,000 – down 1.07 percent from August’s combined median of $140,500 for 635 sales.

Historical data follows:

Month Year # Sold Sold Price Sold Price per Sq Ft Average DOM # of Listings # of Pendings
Sep 2011 546 $150,000 $83.68 134 2,044 1,967
Aug 2011 549 $154,000 $91.29 125 1,947 1,694
July 2011 508 $149,950 $87.46 128 2,028 1,667
June 2011 537 $154,000 $90.08 123 1,990 1,689
May 2011 508 $150,000 $88.63 133 1,968 1,682
Apr 2011 435 $155,250 $89.74 137 1,914 1,593
Mar 2011 511 $160,000 $91.59 132 1,906 1,497
Feb 2011 387 $161,000 $93.35 142 1,882 1,416
Jan 2011 365 $157,000 $92.35 152 1,970 1,329
Dec 2010 485 $165,000 $94.31 143 2,021 1,148
Nov 2010 398 $170,000 $96.43 139 2,060 1,376
Oct 2010 418 $174,950 $98.57 135 2,146 1,371
Sep 2010 467 $168,000 $97.52 132 2,186 1,473
Aug 2010 450 $180,000 $97.54 127 2,222 1,513
Jul 2010 415 $180,000 $101.84 128 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 $99.14 141
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 297 $159,950 unavailable 104
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 248 $148,000 unavailable 108
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 – October 2011. Note: This information is deemed reliable, but not guaranteed.

15 comments

  1. Sully

    Guy, when you put this info into a chart the Aug pr/sq ft is the aberration, not Sept. The Sept number is only slightly lower than the current trend line which could be explained by the increase in REO sales. According to the chart, this market has been trending down since Apr/2010 after having gone flat during the previous year. Jan and Mar 2010 were exceptions.

  2. bob_c

    This was a BAD monthly report.
    It is only logical that the lower priced homes would have a lower pr/sf. The local comps that I follow are weak and on the verge of rolling over. The backdrop of a 4 year recession with little prospect of improvement has the Macro picture for the entire country in jeopardy. The stock market is on the verge of a crash and FED has instituted ZIRP, POMO and QE1,2 and twist to thwart a Japan-style asset collapse/deflation. The more probable outcome is a slow decay, but if the national market crashes I am seriously considering exiting the current 2% 5/yr brokered CD market and becoming a landlord. Have already contacted a trusted friend to manage potential properties. With the demographics and globalization, these are unique times we live in.

    I sincerely hope we do not crash, but one has to be prepared.

    On a separate topic, why doesn’t Reno condem the entire downtown (sans a few historical buildings ) ? The core downtown is a LIABILITY to the area and is holding Reno back. Until that decrepit area is dealt with, Reno will never reach its potential.
    I understand one just can’t condem in one fell swoop, but there is policy to weed out the seedy properties one by one and eliminate them—but the leadership fails to act.

    My 2 cents on Sunady morning. Go niners!

  3. Tom Joad

    20% of sales are for $100K or less.
    50% are for $150K or less.
    70% are for $200K or less.
    Almost 90% are for $300K or less.

    I laugh when I hear people say that a $300K house in Reno is mid-range. $300K now is the high end. It is interesting to observe how much resistance there is to people recognizing that the housing market in Reno has returned to its working class roots. $150K is right in line with Reno’s median household income.

  4. GreeenNV

    Just curious, Guy, if it would be possible for you to dig into the median and $/sf based on REO, Short, and Equity sales status. I have a a sneaking suspicion that there will be a pretty wide divergence.

    Older houses, we are back into the ’90s. Condos back into the ’80s and beyond. Newer places are trying to find a level, but the banks keep going lower and lower.

  5. Reno Ignoramus

    I don’t think there is any question that the median and $/sq.ft. for REOs are less than for equity sales. That is why this market is never going to get healthy until the foreclosures abate and the supply of REOs dries up. And 1,300 NODs in the last 2 months is not a good sign for this market. There is no way to put a happy spin on that.

    The banks are in complete control of this market. They have direct control over 7 out of every 10 sales. They control the number of NODs that are recorded, they control the number of NODS turned into NOSs, they control the number of NOSs brought to the courthouse steps, they control what the prices are at the courthouse sales, they control what they will accept in a short sale and thus control whether a short sale can happen at all, and they are setting the market in the process of all of this. Only 3 out of 10 sales are not directly controlled by the banks, and those 3 out of 10 sellers are selling in a market where the current comps are being set by the banks.

  6. Guy Johnson

    GreeenNV,
    I have broken out September sales by type and shown the sold price per square feet for each type – See below. I have performed this exercise separately for site/stick built houses and condo/town homes. Keep in mind that the monthly data for condos is quite thin – 84 condo sales in September compared to 547 houses sold. What this means is that when I pull data on condos sold as short sales in September, for example, I get 19 units sold. So take the numbers below with a grain of salt.

    Site/stick built median sold ppsf (September Solds)
    all types: $83.73/sq.ft.
    bank-owned: $72.52/sq.ft.
    short sales: $87.16/sq.ft.
    equity sales: $101.68/sq.ft.

    Condo/townhouse median sold ppsf (September Solds)
    all types: $51.75/sq.ft.
    bank-owned: $42.45/sq.ft.
    short sales: $37.09/sq.ft.
    equity sales: $86.98/sq.ft.

  7. Newell

    Guy maybe you could also tell us what the median asking price is for REOs? I suspect that RI is right that the median sales price of REOs is lower than that of equity sales (both in general and on a $/sq.ft. basis) because I suspect the asking price of them is lower. If you start out lower you are going to end up lower. Just a glance at the MLS listings indicates that most of the REOs are at the bottom of the price range and become fewer in number as one moves to higher priced houses. Yes there are some REOs in the higher price ranges, but mostly they are in the lower price ranges.

  8. Martin

    I think sometimes we say the same thing over and over again on this blog. For at least the last 3 years , maybe more, many people here have observed that having 70% of all sales being distressed is not a healthy market. When the banks directly own 38% of all houses sold and can directly control the selling price of another 30% of all houses sold, it’s hard to say that we have a healthy market.
    Maybe somebody will point out that when 70% of all sales are distressed, such sales produce very few move-up buyers, which also does not make for a healthy market. O wait! I think we’ve had that conversation here before as well.

  9. Guy Johnson

    RI and Newell, you make excellent and valid points. I covered this topic in more detail in a post earlier this year – See Price per square foot not equal across sale types.

    Newell in response to your request I’ve pulled the September’s median sales price by sales type:
    bank owned: $123,000
    short sales: $153,000
    equity sales: $177,750

  10. Ciphers

    I remember the last time the market “bounced along” a steady median price for several months, and many said that was surely the sign of the bottom. That was just before the median sales price proceeded to drop by another 17% as I recall.
    Now if the median proceeds to drop another 17% from here, that would bring it to 77% down from the bubble high.
    And that, of course, is absolutely impossible.
    Right?
    That only happens in Las Vegas.
    Right?

  11. bob_c

    Previously posted on wrong heading, but I thought July 2011 median was 149,950 in above chart.

  12. bob_c

    Now, the buyers in the last two years are marginally underwater—so there has been no cleansing of the market, where new buyers remain even or gain equity. The new buyers are now slightly distressed ….. so how could prices ever rise?
    A. A crash
    B. Inflation

  13. Sully

    The comment by RI, got me to thinking – so I did some research. About two years ago HUD announced a program to sell any of their REO’s to local housing authorities for $1 if it went six months without an offer. Not much has come of that until recently. Reno Housing Authority has purchased three HUD houses for $1 in the past couple months.

    One – 910 SBRAGIA WAY – was bought for $1 and re-sold the next month for $58.000 to Wood Is Good LLC. Another was 3967 Spruce Trail, Sparks.

    http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/3967-Spruce-Trail-Ln-Sparks-NV-89436/83929533_zpid/#{scid=hdp-site-map-bubble-address}

    Looks like the banks are in for some real bottom line competition in the near future.

  14. Carney

    I agree completely with RI that until the foreclosures end (and is there any indication, anywhere, that is close to happening?) the Reno housing market will not get off the mat. I would also add that the housing market is not going to show any real signs of life until the unofficial unemployment rate of 20% in Reno goes down. Way down.

  15. Walter

    Carney I assume that what you mean when you say “signs of life” is some sustained upward movement in median price. In terms of sales volume, the market has been pretty darn lively. But that activity has not translated into any upward movement in sales price. A lot of activity, not much movement.

Leave a Reply

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