I usually wait until we’re at least a week into a new month before I post the median numbers for the prior month, but with a few readers commenting that this blog’s activity has been waning of late, I decided to post November’s numbers today. Happy Monday!
So, what do we have…
November’s median sold price of $150,000 rose 1.0 percent over October’s sold median of $148,500. Similarly, November’s median sold price per square foot (ppsf) of $85.23/sf rose 1.0 percent over October’s $84.35/sf. November is the second consecutive month of increasing sold ppsf. Will this trend continue? If the amount of REO inventory begins to decrease, as many have predicted due to the effects of AB 284, then sold price per square foot should continue to increase because REO sales generally represent the low end of the ppsf range. Eliminating that segment of sales should boost median sold price per square foot, an possibly the median sale price, as well.
Units sold continue to be robust tallying 464 houses sold during November. Not only does November 2011’s number represent a 16.6 percent increase over November 2010’s 398 units sold, but 464 units sold sets a new high for number of sales in any November on record – surpassing even the bubble years. And I thought sales typically slowed this time of year.
For the second consecutive month the average days on market (DOM) came in at 146 days. This is a slightly higher number than we’ve topically observed this year [YTD average DOM is 135 days].
The number of Active listings continue to slide. The current 1,545 Active listings represent an 8.1 percent decline from October’s number (which itself was an 18 percent decline from September’s Active inventory). This decline in inventory is to be expected this time of year, and usually is not noteworthy because house buying activity (i.e. Pending sales) typically slows in concert. However, Pendings, though down slightly (barely 1 percent) from last month have not been falling as sharply. In fact, the numbers I’m posting today marks the first time that the number of pending sales actually exceeds the number of houses currently listed.
What will this greater demand vs. lower supply mean to home prices? The last time I brought up the subject (see Looming inventory problem in Reno-Sparks?) a spirited thread of comments and opinions ensued. Perhaps, the conversation will continue with this post. And just to preemptively clarify my position: I agree that a shortage of supply of available inventory can not increase a potential homebuyer’s purchasing power, or in other words, what he or she is able to afford. However, a shortage of supply of inventory can certainly increase what a potential homebuyer is wiling to pay for a property. Furthermore this willingness/ability to pay more for a property is not a luxury limited to “cash buyers”. Seldom do I see my clients, who are financing their purchases, max out their purchase for the full amount for which they have been qualified to finance. Most choose a property priced at level below their max.
November sales by type break out as follows (below). At this time REOs still comprise over a third of the market’s monthly sales. The effects of AB 284 are not yet showing up in sales numbers, but remember the bill just went into effect October 1st, and average DOM for properties is nearly five months (see above). So, expect a lag before any effects from the bill are seen in final sales numbers.
- REO sale: 35% – up from October’s 33%
- Short sales: 36% – up from October’s 32%
- Equity sales: 29% – down from October’s 33%
November sales by price band break out as follows:
| sales price ($000’s) | units sold |
| 0 – 99 | 79 |
| 100 – 199 | 254 |
| 200 – 299 | 86 |
| 300 – 399 | 17 |
| 400 – 499 | 12 |
| 500 – 599 | 7 |
| 600 – 699 | 3 |
| 700 – 799 | 0 |
| 800 – 899 | 3 |
| 900 – 999 | 1 |
| 1M+ | 2 |
| total | 482 |
For those readers who prefer the median sold price for houses and condos combined, November’s 541 sold houses, condos and town homes exhibited a combined median sold price of $139,000 – UP 2.2 percent from October’s combined median of $136,000 for 576 sales.
Historical data follows:
| Month Year | # Sold | Sold Price | Sold Price per Sq Ft | Average DOM | # of Listings | # of Pendings |
| Nov 2011 | 464 | $150,000 | $85.23 | 146 | 1,545 | 1,635 |
| Oct 2011 | 491 | $148,500 | $84.35 | 146 | 1,682 | 1,646 |
| Sep 2011 | 567 | $150,000 | $83.62 | 134 | 2,044 | 1,967 |
| Aug 2011 | 554 | $154,000 | $91.34 | 125 | 1,947 | 1,694 |
| July 2011 | 511 | $150,000 | $87.59 | 128 | 2,028 | 1,667 |
| June 2011 | 538 | $154,000 | $90.12 | 123 | 1,990 | 1,689 |
| May 2011 | 509 | $150,000 | $88.66 | 133 | 1,968 | 1,682 |
| Apr 2011 | 436 | $156,125 | $89.78 | 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 | ||
| 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 – December 2011. Note: This information is deemed reliable, but not guaranteed.
skeptical
Bull, bear, agnostic, doesn’t member. These are generally positive numbers. Two questions, though, are begging to be answered:
1) Is this the beginning of a trend, a leveling of the descent, or a waypoint enroute to a lower equilibrium?
2) The elephant in the room: When will this foreclosure issue be resolved, and how will its resolution effect the market?
At the risk of sounding like the master of the obvious, I believe that a re-opening of the foreclosure floodgates (if that happens) will have a negative effect on median prices. On the other hand, forestalling the resolution of all those limbo (defaulted) properties cannot be good for the real estate market in the near to mid-term.
Norton
“When will thsi foreclosure issue be resolved?”
No time soon. With each passing month, the unfortunate consequences of AB 284 will become more apparent. The market needs to cleanse itself by finally processing out all the foreclosures. AB 284 has now resulted in an effective halt to the market’s cleansing. I attended a service club luncheon just a few days ago and a local member of the Nevada Legislature was present. He said the law enacted by AB 284 cannot be amended until 2013. He said it is possible that perhaps as many 5,000 foreclosures in Washoe County will be put on hold over the next 18 months due to the passage of AB 284. He noted that if the first two months of the new law’s impact is indicative of its impact, that about 180 NODS will be filed all of next YEAR. That’s ALL YEAR.
Guy Johnson
Norton, that total of 180 NODs will probably be fairly accurate if things don’t change. Only 15 NODs filed in Washoe County in November, and only 13 filed in October. Compare that to 613 filed in September and 642 filed in August.
November median sold price, units, DOM, $/sq.ft.
[…] I usually wait until we’re at least a week into a new month before I post the median numbers for the prior month, but with a few readers commenting that this blog’s activity has been waning of late, I decided … Continue reading → […]
Sully
A while back when I was renting, the neighborhood was used as a traffic short cut. Too much traffic and too much speed. So they installed speed bumps. At first everyone came to a dead stop and idled over the speed bumps, then they found they could go a little faster without hitting their head on the roof. However most just avoided the area period – which was the point.
At some point in time the banks will hire the unemployed mortgage brokers as mortgage finders, get their ducks in a row and everything will get back to normal. This is most likely an election year ploy to make it appear the politicians are doing their jobs. The last thing the Democrats want us to think is they are not doing anything to fix the problems and the last thing the Republicans want is us to think they are not doing their jobs.
It just boils down to buying more time for the magic to work and the recovery to take hold. Put another way – it’s the same game with new players. You would think by now they would just pick up a history book and see how things went down the last time. 🙂
MikeZ
The last 6-7 months sure look like a market bottom, but is it? Only time will tell.
Jacky
One of these YEARS you will be right mikez.. lol
Sully
MikeZ, I was thinking the same for a minute there – then I woke up! 🙂
I’m still not seeing a significant price change in the southwest region (area formerly known as ‘the high end’) and have noticed the recent activity in Tahoe with Silicon Valley gazillionaires snapping up property like easter eggs. I cannot foresee a change in this demand surge for the next 2 or 3 weeks. That would bring us into 2012, in which we will have a whole ‘nother year to debate the bottom.
BTW, if my number doesn’t hit in Dec; I’ll just use it again in 2012 via comment by Jacky.
geopower
brace for an influx of trolling, RGJ is switching their comments to Facebook login, and the anonymous will be looking for places to rant.
Super Bowl Sunday and real estate | RRB Home
[…] Recall that units sold in November and December were the highest on record for those months (see November medians and December […]