I'm Outta Here!

I'm packing up my blog and moving to Wordpress. I like some of the Wordpress features, and a change is as good as a rest. Come and check it out!

Tuesday's Numbers

There were 272 new listings today and 156 sales, for a sell/list of 57.35%. Of the sales 22, or 14.10%, went over list. 9 of those were on the Westside. 3 were in East Van, 2 were in Richmond, 2 in Pitt Meadows, 3 in North Van, 1 in Maple Ridge, 1 in Burnaby, and 1 in the Fraser Valley.

Average list price of the sales was $490,264; average sales price was $482,015, a difference of $8,249, meaning the average sale went for 1.70% under list price. 14 properties went for list price. One property went for 42%($337,000) under list while the highest over list was 22% ($212,000) over.

There were 8 million dollar plus properties sold, with 1 over $2 million. Average days on market to sale was 34.

There were 99 price changes, of which 12, or 12.12%, were increases. The average original list price of price changes was $555,620; the average new price was $540,348, a difference of $15,272, meaning the average price change was -1.96%.

Inventory in my target area rose today to 10,322 today, while over 90s rose again, reaching 1,751, and in percentage to 16.96%.

There were 43 expiries today.

0.84% of all active listings in my target area had their prices reduced today.

Monday's Numbers

There were 216 new listings today and 205 sales, for a sell/list of 94.91%. Of the sales 35, or 17.07%, went over list. 11 of those were on the Westside. 5 were in East Van, 4 were in Richmond, 2 in Port Coquitlam, 1 in Pitt Meadows, 1 in New West, 3 in North Van, 1 in Coquitlam, 4 in Burnaby, and 3 in the Fraser Valley.

Average list price of the sales was $514,797; average sales price was $506,975, a difference of $7,882, meaning the average sale went for 1.51% under list price. 12 properties went for list price. One property went for 8%($43,000) under list while the highest over list was 8% ($46,100) over.

There were 10 million dollar plus properties sold, with three over $2 million. Average days on market to sale was 33.

There were 151 price changes, of which 24, or 15.89%, were increases. The average original list price of price changes was $579,549; the average new price was $568,620, a difference of $10,929, meaning the average price change was -2.37%.

Inventory in my target area fell agin today to 10,249 today, while over 90s finally rose somewhat, reaching 1,722, an in percentage to 16.8%.

There were 44 expiries today.

1.24% of all active listings in my target area had their prices reduced today.

Some Interesting Tidbits From the Weekend's Post

There were two interesting articles in the National Post Saturday,one by Brian Hutchinson and another by Peter Kuitenbrower, about house size through the years and across the country. Houses, of course, have grown bigger. In the 1900s we wer happy with 700 square feet, but this grew to 1,000 by the 20s, 1,200 by the 50s, 1,300 by the 70s, 3,000 by the 80s, and a staggering 5,000 square feet today. A quick survey of new construction in North Van confirms this.

Comparing new home sizes across the country, Saskatchewan and Manitoba average 1,850 sq. ft., Alberta comes in at 1,900, Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada get a little bigger at 2,000, and of course we lead the pack at 2,500 (Heating bill? What heating bill?).

There's talk that house size has maxed out, and we'll see smaller places in the future, as large homes simply aren't that livable. I'm not so sure I agree. From my point of view house size is dictated by what buyers can afford to pay for. If they can buy more, builders will build larger, as each extra sq. foot is more profit (margin should increase with size, right?). I may be wrong about that, but I think builder profitability plays a large, although hidden role.

A second interesting article appeard in the Financial Post section. It wasn't directed toward housing so much as towards bond holders and how the sub-prime meltdown would effect them. David Berman writes that bond guru Bill Gross says housing prices could fall by 20%, which would be catastrophic for the US economy. "Marginal" home owners will ahve to sell because they can't re-finance, but other marginal buyers won't be able to scoop up opportunities becasue they won't qualify for financing either. The cure for low prices won't be low prices. The obvious conclusion that Gross comes to is that the Fed will keep rates low enough that mortgage rates will also stay low.

Bonds go up in value when interest rates decline, so current bond holders rejoice. (To add the requisite confusion, when bond prices rise, yields fall:-).

Does Gross make sense? Will he be right? The answer to number one seems to be a clear yes, but whether the Fed will jump the way he says is another story.