The median sales price of October’s 406 houses sold was $172,775. This number represents a 2.2 percent increase over September’s median sold price of $169,000.
The number of houses sold in October (406) fell 12.3 percent from September’s 463 houses sold. Some of this decline may be attributed to the seasonal drop in buyer activity. Year-over-year, October’s sales show a very large decrease from October 2009’s 561 units sold; however, keep in mind, last year at this time the first-time homebuyers tax credit was in full swing.
For the third month in a row the median sold price per square foot was below the $100-level, coming in at $98.06/square-foot.
Active listings fell 1.8 percent this month, while Pendings dropped a hefty 6.9 percent from September.
October sales by type break out as follows:
- Bank-owned properties: 32% – down from September’s 34%
- Short sales: 31% – down from September’s 32%
- Equity sales: 36% – up from September’s 33%
October sales by price band break out as follows:
| sales price ($000’s) | units sold |
| 0 – 99 | 49 |
| 100 – 199 | 198 |
| 200 – 299 | 99 |
| 300 – 399 | 28 |
| 400 – 499 | 11 |
| 500 – 599 | 11 |
| 600 – 699 | 6 |
| 700 – 799 | 3 |
| 800 – 899 | 0 |
| 900 – 999 | 0 |
| 1M+ | 1 |
| total | 406 |
For those readers who prefer the median sold price for houses and condos combined, October’s 475 sold houses, condos and town homes exhibited a combined median sold price of $160,000 – unchanged from September’s combined median of $160,000.
See all the data below.
| Month Year | # Sold | Sold Price | Sold Price per Sq Ft | Average DOM | # of Listings | # of Pendings |
| Oct 2010 | 406 | $172,775 | $98.06 | 132 | 2,146 | 1,371 |
| Sep 2010 | 463 | $169,000 | $97.52 | 132 | 2,186 | 1,473 |
| Aug 2010 | 447 | $180,000 | $97.53 | 127 | 2,222 | 1,513 |
| Jul 2010 | 412 | $180,000 | $101.74 | 129 | 2,158 | 1,580 |
| Jun 2010 | 599 | $170,000 | $100.52 | 145 | 1,966 | 1,625 |
| May 2010 | 449 | $175,615 | $102.37 | 138 | 1,789 | 1,804 |
| Apr 2010 | 509 | $179,990 | $103.13 | 129 | ||
| 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 | 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 | ||
| 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 | 268 | $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 | 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 | ||
| 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 | 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 – November 2010. Note: This information is deemed reliable, but not guaranteed.
Randy
Here’s to hoping that the New Year pulls everyone out of their funk!
Gail
Well this thread has been up for more than 24 hours and there is not the usual pissing contest about what the 2.2% change from month to month means for the market. No testosterone contest about whether the market has “bottomed”.
How refreshing.
MikeZ
No testosterone contest about whether the market has “bottomed”.
No one has called a bottom, only stability.
MikeZ's Vanishing Credibility
I am torn on which way to go with this one. I could point out that MikeZ has indeed called the current stability “a bottom” before clarifying that it may not be “the bottom.” Pointing this out would fulfill my gadfly function of highlighting MikeZ’s annoying habit of changing terms and premises to suit the instant argument. On the other hand, I agree with him that none of the usual suspects has called an absolute bottom (Smarten has been accused of doing so, but any careful (and objective) reading of his posts should show that he recognizes the market could drop further).
The data support the assertion that the market has been “stable” since May 2009, and that is the position that Smarten, MikeZ, et al. have taken. The problem arises from some people assuming that Smarten, MikeZ, et al. are claiming the market is healthy, something they do not claim. This problem has been exacerbated by the inability of a prolific, but ineffective, poster (I will not reveal the identity of such, but everyone will know who I mean) to properly articulate and support this simple proposition – a stable (or perhaps stagnant) market does not necessarily equate to a healthy market. In the current context, I do not believe anyone here (other than shills) would call this a healthy market, but I cannot see how anyone can continue to deny that it has been relatively stable (especialy with respect to the prior crash) for well over a year (not withstanding how poorly that position may have been present in the past by a certain poster).
Reno Ignoramus
Thanks Guy for your continuing to supply this info every month. Two other metrics of the market, besides median price, that have been consistent for the last year and a half are the price-band stats and the percentage of distressed sales. For the last 18 months 85% of all SFR sales have been for $300K or less. And two thirds of all sales have been either REOs or short sales.