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

The number of houses sold in August rose 6.1 percent from July’s units sold.  The median sales price of August’s 436 houses sold was $179,950, and remained practically unchanged from July’s $180,000 median, as well as August 2009’s $179,900.

However, the median sold price per square foot fell more than 4.2 percent from July’s number.  Using the median sold prices for the last two months, homebuyers in August were able to get an additional 78 square feet of house over July’s homebuyers.

Active listings are up 3.0 percent this month.  Pendings are down 4.2 percent.

August sales break out as follows:

  • Bank-owned properties – 28.9% – up from July’s 26.3%
  • Short sales – 35.6% – up from July’s 34.7%
  • Equity sales – 33.5% – down from July’s 37.7%

For those readers who prefer the median sold price for houses and condos combined, August’s 511 sold houses and condos exhibited a combined median sold price of $155,000 – down 4.8 percent from July’s combined median of $162,900.

Month Year # Sold Sold Price Sold Price per Sq Ft Average DOM # of Listings # of Pendings
Aug 2010 436 $179,950 $97.54 129 2,222 1,513
Jul 2010 411 $180,000 $101.84 128 2,158 1,580
Jun 2010 597 $170,000 $100.57 146 1,966 1,625
May 2010 449 $175,615 $102.57 138 1,789 1,804
Apr 2010 509 $179,990 $103.13 129    
Mar 2010 476 $175,500 $99.29 141    
Feb 2010 338 $170,000 $101.68 138    
Jan 2010 346 $167,000 $98.32 134    
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 379 $229,000 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    
Dec2002 379 $193,500 unavailable 93    
Nov2002 423 $190,000 unavailable 82    
Oct2002 483 $189,900 unavailable 83    
Sep2002 410 $174,000 unavailable 85    
Aug2002 459 $180,000 unavailable 74    
Jul2002 469 $176,000 unavailable 83    
Jun2002 445 $185,000 unavailable 80    
May2002 470 $178,450 unavailable 77    
Apr2002 360 $169,500 unavailable 93    
Mar 2002 377 $169,000 unavailable 84    
Feb 2002 323 $170,900 unavailable 89    
Jan 2002 268 $172,475 unavailable 99    
Dec2001 287 $182,000 unavailable 86    
Nov2001 323 $161,500 unavailable 85    
Oct2001 357 $166,500 unavailable 79    
Sep2001 355 $168,000 unavailable 81    
Aug2001 448 $160,350 unavailable 84    
Jul2001 433 $169,900 unavailable 90    
Jun2001 426 $166,225 unavailable 96    
May2001 404 $162,050 unavailable 97    
Apr2001 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    
Dec2000 272 $156,500 unavailable 100    
Nov2000 355 $154,500 unavailable 93    
Oct 2000 348 $153,000 unavailable 98    
Sep2000 356 $160,000 unavailable 104    
Aug2000 412 $163,375 unavailable 94    
Jul2000 368 $155,000 unavailable 110    
Jun2000 466 $165,845 unavailable 104    
May2000 363 $158,000 unavailable 105    
Apr2000 312 $155,000 unavailable 113    
Mar 2000 339 $162,700 unavailable 102    
Feb 2000 244 $149,620 unavailable 110    
Jan 2000 217 $156,000 unavailable 112    
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    
Jun1999 372 $150,000 unavailable 103    
May 1999 307 $145,500 unavailable 106    
Apr1999 324 $151,700 unavailable 111    
Mar 1999 308 $151,000 unavailable 121    
Feb1999 249 $148,900 unavailable 120    
Jan 1999 210 $143,000 unavailable 115    
Dec 1998 265 $140,000 unavailable 118    
Nov 1998 279 $153,000 unavailable 126    
Oct1998 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 165 $149,490 unavailable 131    

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 – September 2010.  Note: This information is deemed reliable, but not guaranteed.


  1. skeptical

    Lowest ppsf recorded since data was tracked in ’04. I’ll go out on a limb and say it hasn’t been this low this century…

    Was it Sully who said you could buy more house with the same money with each passing month? Data seems to be on his side.

    And, look out below with that combined Median Price (incl. condos). This is August — supposedly one of the best months of the year for the market.

  2. sleezy

    what’s the excuse this time mikez??

  3. MikeZ

    Was it Sully who said you could buy more house with the same money with each passing month? Data seems to be on his side.

    Yes, it does.

  4. bob_c

    i expected the expired tax credit of 6,500 or 8,000 to be deducted from the median…instead
    it has added to the sf you acquire from the steady median price
    4% more sf of 180k house = $7,200
    i also agree that price bands seems to be visibly
    compressing….and still contend that a graph would reveal this (dont have the data to draw one)

  5. CommercialLender

    Doing some simple math, albeit flawed: I took the number of sales each month and multiplied by median price (of course, I don’t have average only median, so bear with this flaw). Then, I graphed it to find graphically we have in fact been bouncing along sideways since July 07. There’s been a bunch of up/down especially seasonally, but overall the graph shows a range over 3 yrs that’s not been broken out of. 1998 to 2003 shows a gradual uptrend followed by the obvious bubble for a few years, but again since 2007 there has been only flatlining en masse.

  6. burgerking3g


    hows that stabilization prediction looking now?

  7. burgerking3g

    That math couldn’t possibly be more flawed.. lol..

    flat since 2007? what a side splitter!

  8. Sully

    CL, not sure what that shows except maybe sales volume in dollars. However, tracking the median in nominal and inflation adjusted dollars shows a rough flattening (more like churning) since May 09. The inflation adjusted numbers show touching the 1998 median and dropping below it for the same period (also churning). So basically, the adjusted numbers show us no better (median wise) than 1998 and actually dropping lower about half the time.

  9. bob_c

    off the topic question–

    how come zillow and trulia show y-o-y
    -10% on the median in reno?

  10. Sam

    After moving to Sparks Fall 2009, I moved out this Summer thanks to NV’s well known job issues. When I first moved to Sparks, I was considering potential homes in the 250-400K range. I stopped looking earlier this year after the job took a turn for the worse. The other day, I glanced at the homes on the MLS and see now I can get so much better than when I was looking. There are many homes that were once significantly out of my range (up to 550K) but see they have come down into my range. I don’t really know what’s happening out of that range, but I know in the 250-550K range, prices are definitely still significantly dropping. I still read this blog on occasion because there are a lot of good opinions.

  11. skeptical

    Curiously awaiting your explanation of what (median sales price) X (number of sales) indicates.

  12. burgerking3g

    I don’t get it? where did all the cheer leaders go?

  13. smarten

    Derrick aka “burgerking3g” [Mr. TIMMMBBBEEERRR] –

    No one’s been cheerleading. All some of us have said is that the overall SFR, as measured by median sales price, has been relatively stable for over a year now. August’s numbers are further evidence.

    As you will recall, Sam’s observations appear to be pretty much what I was talking about two years ago here in Incline Village: notwithstanding a stable median sales price, “there are many homes that were once significantly out of [his] range (up to 550K) but…have come down into [his] range.” In other words, although the cost of the house Sam was interested in purchasing may be about the same as it was two years ago, the size and quality of house he can purchase now has improved markedly.

    Only two months to go until Guy’s game of guess the SFR median sales price as of December!

  14. Ralston

    Did you all see where 1 out of 4 Nevadans is either unemployed, in bankruptcy, or in foreclosure. Nevada is in the worst financial condition of all the 50 states, including California.
    And Michigan.

    The housing market ought to hit bottom any hour now. Rising prices soon to set in.


  15. JE Mort

    Sam’s comment, while totally correct, is unremarkable. Only a fool, or someone with an agenda not to see what is clearly there to be seen, would deny that a buyer with a fixed amount of money to spend on a house can buy more house today than he could have a year ago. Or 6 months ago. Which to say, housing values are still falling.

  16. Kalifornian

    I was hoping Mike will post recommendation on how to better invest $350K in Reno… Maybe I should look in other places, but anything decent in the bay area is still out of my reach.

  17. billddrummer


    Great data, thanks.

  18. GratefulD_420

    To Bob C:
    “how come zillow and trulia show y-o-y
    -10% on the median in reno?”

    Guy’s median is median of actual sales occuring in that month. Zillow’s “median”… is Zillow’s Home Value Index… or their current valuation of pricing for all existing housing in Reno.

    Zillow’s data and therefore pricing is way outdated (90days+) and also has some serious flaws such as not counting distressed (foreclosure/short-sales sales). So in both cases it is biased higher than actual!!! Interesting though if we’ve been a flat median sales price… the VALUES keep dropping. This has been my point on my last few post to Smarten that he refuses to discuss any other data source or data sets (see previous posts) which almost every single one show this thing continuing to trend down. I’m not saying that one is better or worse than the other…. however when 4 out of 5 measuring sticks says its going down… and we understand clearly how the median can be greatly unassociated with value…why would we continue to defend the median as THE measuring stick ??????

    p.s. – Guy I truly do appreciate your data set(s) as another valid piece of data to put into the pile for analysis.

  19. smarten

    GratefulD –

    What are the 5 measuring sticks?
    Unit sales? Here are the beginning/ends of the bell curve [which IMO is where we are]:
    8/00 – 412
    8/01 – 448
    8/02 – 459
    8/09 – 482
    8/10 – 436
    Average – 447

    Increased unit sales portend a rising MSP.

    MSP? Here are the beginning/ends of the bell curve:
    8/00 – $163,375
    8/01 – $160,350
    8/02 – $180,000
    8/09 – $179,900
    8/10 – $179,500
    Average – $172,625

    DOM? Skewed so unreliable.
    PPSF? Tends to lag MSP; is too subjective; and, we’re at a 6 year low in any event.

    So what am I ignoring?

  20. MikeZ

    By the way, it’s good to see that we’re all ACCEPTING the data now … and not making excuses.

    That’s a positive change, in and of itself.

  21. GratefulD_420

    – Here’s a few…. there is certainly more.

    Even though the median or psf… doesn’t include

    even forget that if you look at different set of median price data within Washoe that the median IS falling…(Q2?09=$260k, Q2?10=$212k)

    Forget that the listed sales prices keeps falling..
    forget about increasing inventory (supply & demand theories are worthless!)

    Forget that unemployment in Reno is catastophic…
    that completely has nothing to do with improving housing market…

  22. billddrummer

    I’m still waiting for my income to rise and housing prices to fall to the point where I can buy a house for cash.

    I’ll stay a renter until that happens.

  23. GratefulD_420

    also Forget the facts…..

    Foreclosures listed on MLS are rising again to highest level in a year. 229 units listed.

    Forget the fact that in April’10 there were 18 active foreclosures on MLS in $200 to 500k range. Today there is 39.

    Forget there is 3,811 total foreclosure (all types) listed in Washoe County. Where 1,016 of those are SFR’s in Washoe.

    Goodnews… shortsales listed on MLS have been relatively constant for 1 year @ 1,017 sept’09 and 1,144 sept’10. Unfortunately the active shortsales (not pending, call or other) has risen from 32% availible in April’10 to 48% availible (active) today.

    For those that like price bands on the SFR Foreclosures…here are the quantities of each
    SF Res (100k)
    2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 >6
    3/15/2010 268 75 19 19 28
    4/4/2010 224 78 22 17 39
    7/2/2010 270 113 32 18 44
    9/7/2010 292 132 37 17 44

    Since the above listed foreclosure price is very subjective we can use quality….

    G G/VG VG VG/Exc Exc Exc/HV1 HV1+
    3/15/2010 15 12 16 7 1 2 1
    4/4/2010 16 14 17 7 2 3 1
    7/2/2010 22 12 20 7 4 1 12
    9/7/2010 29 11 18 8 3 1 14

  24. Smarten's Vanishing Equity

    “MikeZ said,
    in September 8th, 2010 at 8:22 pm

    By the way, it’s good to see that we’re all ACCEPTING the data now … and not making excuses.

    That’s a positive change, in and of itself.”

    It isn’t that people were not accepting the data, it’s that they didn’t draw the same naive conclusions from the data that you did. You call it a stable market, but others realize that another shot of heroin for the trembling junkie does not equal a return to sobriety even though his hands show a remarkable steadiness.

  25. sleezy

    so basically claiming the market has stabilized from a median price perspective doesn’t mean squat really…

    PPSF is and has ALWAYS been the better indicator of future prices..

    btw prices are STILL FALLING!!! August numbers are PROOF

  26. sleezy


    you claimed the market was stabilizing by pointing to the median AND ppsf over the last year..

    now that ppsf has fallen BELOW levels of the last 2 years, do you STILL conclude prices have stabilized? LOL

  27. Sam

    While median price and PPSF are good data to look at, I think you just have to look at homes on the market to know if prices are rising or falling. Median and PPSF can both be skewed by various factors.

    Consider the peak. My Sparks neighborhood had homes ranging in size from 1600-3900 SF. The smaller homes would sell for over 200/SF. A 1700 SF home could sell for 350K. The larger the home, the less/SF it would sell. Mine was over 2200 SF, sold for 193/SF. The 3900 SF home could only sell for about 550K or about 140/SF.

    Back then, I knew prices were still rising since everything was selling like hotcakes. Recently, I was very interested in buying a home in Reno/Sparks for 300K range. Even though prices may be continuing to drop, I just wanted to settle down for stability as my child’s about to enter school. I found some reasonable homes earlier this year and probably would be under contract by now if I had been certain about my job. I’m sure I could have been happy with the home. But the job didn’t work out, so I moved, glanced at the MLS the other day and found much more nicer selections now for me than earlier in the year. Some of the homes earlier this year are reduced even further. If I had waited to buy now, I would be getting more home for the same money that I was willing to spend 6 mos ago.

    Well I had to move away and have found a job I feel good about. So now I am under contract for a new construction >3000 SF house that will be about 100/SF, with many nice upgrades in another area that got hit hard by the bubble. Prices may still be falling here too, but I will be happy with the floorplan, the materials, location, and schools. Also at over 300K, it is what I can comfortably afford and feel I will happily stay in it until my child heads off to college.

    If I bought in Reno now, my purchase would contribute to raising the median price and likely the PPSF, but I can surely tell you that in my price range of interest, prices in Reno/Sparks are still falling.

  28. CommercialLender

    Derrick/Burger/Sleezy and Skep,
    My math as I freely admitted is inaccurate in that I don’t have average prices per month or even de/inflation rates over the sample period, but that is not the point I was doing my head-scratch on. (I freely assume median values and average values have held a fairly close relationship over the sample period.) My point is when I graphed it, it clearly patterned pre and during the bubble perfectly, but since just after the peak, the total transaction costs as measured by median values has been in a fairly narrow range and frankly flat.

    I make of this a few things, maybe improperly, but hear me out. This points to some finite level of resilience in the market to buy, and points to the fact that there are still a number of buyers and large degree of cash en masse playing in this market. Now, we are seeing of course medians either flat or falling still, but we are also seeing a rise in transactions, thus the cash injected into the Reno system has remained in a demonstrable range – flat. I would otherwise had guessed it to be falling, but it is not. Suggests to me 1 thing I am beginning to see in the commercial space that at the right price point in a falling market, there was a pick up in demand but now that some inventory overhang (in commercial) is being absorbed, prices in some sectors have risen and rapidly so. Cash on the sidelines has in some sectors, apartments particularly, sprung into action causing cap rates to plummet (values to rise).

    This is not to predict that as soon as some overhang in the SFR space is absorbed the same thing will happen, but I wonder.

    My premise is based upon cash flows into and out of SFR assets in Reno. The money could dry up, tansactions fall off and therefore prices continue to decline. However, so much of the ‘value’ of a SFR has to do with emotions and sentiment that if buyers see others buying, albeit at low relative medians, they might take from this ‘confidence’ and be more poised to buy, thereby starting a cash flow from the sidelines into SFRs which will first dry up inventory and second cause prices to rise.

    All this was in answer to Smarten’s quandry: many lambast his views on values as measured by median prices. Fine, but what is a better, more telling or more accurate measure of SFR values in Reno? My thought is that cash invested en masse into the market is a telling metric that should not be overlooked.

    Fire away….

  29. skeptical

    Got it.

    It is interesting to try to calculate total $$ inflows into the Reno market. Also, I think you’ve done a good job at qualifying your back-of-the-napkin thoughts.

    All that said, the real answer to Smarten’s eternal question, as I’ve stated several times before, would be a Case-Schiller representation of the Reno market.

    In other words, the best way to know the general condition of the market is to be able to compare recent sale prices on homes with the prices those same homes fetched previously.

    Unfortunately, Dr. Schiller doesn’t do that for us, and it would be a laborious undertaking without his data.

    So, I will continue to rely on the anecdotal evidence of contributors to this blog and family and friends, who are convinced that prices for real estate in the Reno Tahoe area continue to decline, and that each passing quarter offers better pricing opportunities for prospective buyers.

    This trend will change someday. I do not think it has turned positive yet, and I believe that it’s possible that when values stop declining, they may remain flat for 5-10 years.


  30. sleezy

    IS this some realtors idea of a joke? This guy should be fired for making such remarks!

    MLS# 100013110
    840 BOWMAN DR
    Reno, NV 89503

    *note the description of the property*

  31. smarten

    Skeptical, I’m not necessarily disagreeing with your suggestion that we defer to a Case-Schiller representation that doesn’t exist. But did we defer to that a year ago? Or three years ago? Or ten years ago? The data Guy provides only refers to the metrics he lists going back 3, 5, 10 or whatever number of years. So instead of comparing those same metrics, many on this blog [including you] suggest that all of a sudden we shouldn’t. However I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that if those metrics evidenced the state of the market you’ve been suggesting [“I will continue to rely on the anecdotal evidence of contributors to this blog and family and friends, who are convinced that prices for real estate in the Reno Tahoe area continue to decline”], you’d be the first to chastize me for refusing to accept the data.

    No one is saying the economy has stabilized nor the Reno/Sparks residential real estate market as a whole has recovered. But the fact of the matter is that for many, many months you and others have discounted the numbers which were being reported by Guy as being skewed because of the first time homebuyers’ tax credit. Once the credit ended [which was supposed to have been June] you told us unit sales would tank as would the median sales price. But that has not happened and insofar as unit sales are concerned, it appears we’re pretty much in line with the long term trend for this time of year going back a decade.

    The only metric which appears to continue to be dropping [and I might add at a much, much slower pace] is the PPSF. But all this really means is that as the median sales price rises; notwithstanding the drop in unit sales; the proportion of higher priced housing is increasing; which means higher priced housing is selling for less; and since higher priced housing oftentimes means more square footage, the PPSF is continuing to drop.

    We have discussed before on this blog that if your particular housing price strata of interest is $700K strata, and vice versa. What we’re hearing now is that SFRs previously priced in the $500K strata [asking (rather than sales) price] have come down in price within the last year. Although in a vacuum this sounds as if the market as a whole is continuing to fall, we’re not hearing about that [hypothetical] $150K priced SFR that may have been selling for $130K or so a year or more ago.

    As long as unit sales continue at their present pace, I think median sales price is a somewhat [and perhaps best] indicator for the state of the market as a whole. But when unit sales drop to the level they were in January of 2008, IMO it’s not a sufficient sampling to be as accurate an indicator. That’s why three years ago or so I suggested that PPSF might be a more accurate barometer than median sales price. But with 417 unit sales in August, PPSF although certainly of interest, takes on far less importance.

    Again, just my opinion.

  32. bob_c

    My observation of the 275-500 market. The inventory that moved 12 months ago were those that
    appeared priced well below market. They jumped out at the page at you. Today, if you want to sell; your going to list your home in a crowd of homes which once appeared ‘well below market’. My conclusion it that are more higher end homes listed at what the market might bear and this is causing the threat of more price drops because the denial has subsided and the competition intensified.

  33. MikeZ

    So, I will continue to rely on the anecdotal evidence of contributors to this blog and family and friends

    You choose to rely on anecdotal evidence rather than the actual data?!

    This is, literally, the definition of denial.

  34. sleezy


    are you ever going to answer my question? Or are YOU in denial as well?

  35. MikeZ

    re: Derrick aka sleezy

    No and no. Hope this helps.

  36. Sleezy

    No and no = DENIAL!

Leave a Reply

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