Comments on: Existing Home Sales (SA) Surge on Cheap Condos

By: More Money Monday roundup: Cheap turkey and delinquent credit cards | Manageabuck.com

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 03:00:43 +0000

[...] Set to run out at the end of this month, Congress renewed it earlier and expanded the policy. Not everyone, however, is impressed with the numbers coming out of the NAR. [NPR via AP, The Big [...]

By: Adult Franklin411

Adult Franklin411 — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:53:44 +0000

The NAR data is available at http://www.realtor.org/research/research/ehsdata

Here’s how I read the spreadsheet data:

2006: 6.4 million units sold at avg price of $268,200
2007: 5.6 million units sold at avg price of $266,000
2008: 4.9 million units sold at avg price of $242,700
2009 (in progress): Assume annual sales of ~4.9 million units at avg price of $217,290

Multiplying units sold by average price you get:

2006: $1.7 trillion
2007: $1.5 trillion
2008: $1.19 trillion
2009: $ 1.07 trillion

Viewed in this light we’re still in an “improving second derivative” stage looking at a $120 billion loss YoY from 2008-09 instead of the $300 billion YoY hit from 2007-08.

Assuming another -10% loss in average home price in 2010 to $195,560, we will need to see 5.5 million existing home sales next year to improve upon 2009 and officially say things are looking up.

By: DeDude

DeDude — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:32:27 +0000

You got it ahab, democrats weigh a lot less on the fuck up scale. To put people who don’t believe in government in charge of government, is like a church taking an atheist as their pastor.

By: call me ahab

call me ahab — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:20:08 +0000

yeah- what Dedude said-

Democrats are cool- they got it together- if we just stick w/ them- no problems- ever- and Obama- pulease- what more could you ask for- he wants health care for everyone- wow!!!

Democrats- Fuck Yeah

By: DeDude

DeDude — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:55:17 +0000

“Which idiot would that be? Clinton? Reagan? Bush I or II?. Seems we’ve been on this path quite a while now”

GOP idiots in general for their naïve (lets be kind and just think of it simple stupidity) beliefs that if you just leave it all to the free marked things will be fine and dandy. There may be a few “blue dog” concervative democrats that can be blamed for ignoring reality and previous experience, and jumping on that same stupid train (or refusing to step out in front of it), but the ideological drive over the cliff is GOP.

By: Adult Franklin411

Adult Franklin411 — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:36:47 +0000

@Floyd Norris:
There was no corresponding loss in price due to a housing bubble during the early ’80s recession so the data you put forward tell, at best, an incomplete story.

So 4 million units sold in Period 1 and 4.002 units sold in Period 2?

Wow. BFD. Here’s why: Let’s talk used cars instead of houses. During Period 1 U is 5%. The median used car is a 2004 Saturn, say, for $8,500.

During Period 2, U is 10% and fucking Saturn is out of business. The median car sold is a fucking 1973 Ford Pinto sold at a police auction for $50. Oh, and there’s a half smoked 35 year old blunt in the ashtray. Bonus. Add $4 to value.

By: KentWillard

KentWillard — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:56:48 +0000

NAR data has been dubious at times. But I wouldn’t call seasonal adjustment an “accounting sleight of hand”. It isn’t accounting, and SA is a standard way to represent information, particularly when the NSA graph shows that there is clearly seasonality in home sales (in an expected way). Home sales increased significantly (though not to the boom days) due to the tax incentive, low interest rates, and because demand increases when prices fall (and they’ve fallen a lot). As demand increases, prices are falling less (or even increasing), though admittedly some of this is because of relatively fewer foreclosures due to moratoriums and modifications. Is this sustainable – I don’t know. Is this even good – I’m not sure. But it isn’t an accounting sleight of hand.

~~~

BR: Normally, it isn’t sleight of hand. However, the way the NAR employs it is done to mislead;

See this:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/understanding-seasonal-adjustments/

and this:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/existing-home-sales-fall-in-september-09/

and this:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/03/existing-home-sales-non-seasonally-adjusted-explained/

By: bsneath

bsneath — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:40:33 +0000

I suspect most everyone has already seen the “China’s Empty City” video, but just in case not, it is on PK’s site. (I’ve had trouble in the past getting the video to play) Very nice looking city btw. Also, I understand the crime rate is practically nil :>}

http://paul.kedrosky.com/

By: bsneath

bsneath — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:27:14 +0000

Just for drill, look at the CR graph on existing home sales and assume 50,000 of October sales were brought forward from November. Then imagine what next month’s seasonally adjusted annualized sales rate could potentially look like. Not saying it is going to happen, but it could.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_pMscxxELHEg/SwqvG-tbU0I/AAAAAAAAG3E/YJJn27bt1Jk/s1600/EHSNSAOct2009.jpg

By: Thor

Thor — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:12:47 +0000

“not the idiot whose deregulation caused the whole mess in the first place”

Which idiot would that be? Clinton? Reagan? Bush I or II?. Seems we’ve been on this path quite a while now. . .