Kathy here, posting my first blog of the blogathon. Helen is with me, observing. She’s already learned how to do the market research. Now she’s learning how to post her results in a blog. I did a little research on our glamorous neighbor to the west, El Dorado Hills.

So here is what we’ve learned about El Dorado Hills. The average list price for November 2005 was $704,820. This year the number has gone up 4%, making the Average list price for November 2006 $733,128. That was a surprise to us since we thought that the market was going down. But that was only the list price. Sellers, of course do not want the market to go down. The average Selling price stayed pretty close to the same as last year for the same time period. The selling price for November 2005 was $694,661. This year the number is up 1.5%, making the Average selling price for November 2006 $705,164. Interestingly enough the average list price last November is virtually the same as the average selling price this November. And the average number of days on market has risen 21.6% But the most significant figure we saw was the drop in unit sales. For November 2005 the number of houses sold was 53. This November there were only 27 sold, making a drop of 49.1%. So by raising the list price while there are fewer buyers, sellers are getting the result you would expect — fewer sales.
So there you have it folks. And tomorrow, Helen will tell you about what’s happening in Folsom

Placerville’s residential sales in November were very sluggish compared to the same time last year, and with interest rates quite low and inventory high, bargain hunters may find this is a good time to get out there and get searching. As we’ll see, however, at least part of this conclusion comes from the limits of the sample, so hang in there for a minute as we go into the details.

Sellers who were successful in getting a buyer dropped their price an average of 12.4% from last year, with the average list price falling from $521,496 to $457,070. The average sale price dropped slightly more — 13.9% — from $514,257 last year to $442,790 this year. That means that on average, last November’s buyer purchased a home at 99% of list price, while this year’s buyer negotiated a somewhat better discount, paying 97% of list (i.e., three percent less than list). The year to year median price dropped most dramatically, 16.2%.

So far so bad, and it gets worse before it gets better. So let’s have a good clean cry now and then cheer up at the end of the article. Unit volume was down 63% from November to November, with twenty-seven units selling last year and ten selling this year. With expireds rising at the same time from twelve to seventeen, the expired to sold ratio now stands at 170%. Another way to put that is that if you had your home on the market in November, the odds against it selling were something like 1.7 to 1.0 (not counting those homes that may have been voluntarily withdrawn).

Because of the oversupply, residential inventory in Placerville is now at 13.4 months, if November’s slow performance is taken as representative (which probably errs on the side of caution and bubble-o-mania). If instead we take the average sales per month over the last year, the inventory numbers look a little less grim, at 7.8 months.

In fact, the inventory numbers shows us one case of how cautious we need to be with the statistical data. Now I admit, most of what we see in Placerville for November is a bubbler’s delight, but also afoot are some other statistical oddities. First, in November we got down to ten units per month selling, meaning our sample is getting small enough to show that same high margin of error that we’ve reported for Amador County. Secondly, there’s some evidence that when adjusted for what the sample really is, the decline in price is not representative of the end of the world. To be sure, the average sale price dropped 13.9% from November to November, but this November’s homes also averaged 11.6% smaller (1943 square feet last year as opposed to 1717 square feet this year). The result is that price per square foot during the same period also dropped, but far less dramatically (2.6%) than average the drop in average price.

So, as the saying goes, “There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Or if I may try my hand at coining my own phrase: the number you get is the number you want. I’d be inclined to call Placerville in November for the bubblers. But I also feel a certain responsibility to report those areas where the entireity of the numbers tell a different story.

Like Ione (see last post), Pine Grove buyers this November bought a house that was significantly bigger than last year’s buyers, on average. In fact, at 1973 square feet, this year’s average Pine Grove home was 18.8% bigger than last year’s average of 1,660, so even though the average sale price was 6.8% higher ($442,500 this year compared to $385,000 last year), the sold price per square foot was down 26%, from $237 to $213.

Inventory in Pine Grove is quite low by current market standards, at only 6.625 months. I suspect — but this is pure guesswork at this point and not based on any research, so take a large grain of salt wit this — that the low inventory we’re finding in Pine Grove and other local markets results from the high amount of owner-occupied units relative to other markets. In other words, part of what’s driving the supply side in the Sacramento market and elsewhere is speculators dumping their “stock certificates” (as one caller put it recently). But so far that’s a hypothesis at best.

If indeed the unit volume is large enough to generalize, it was up slightly this year, with eight units selling in Pine Grove as compared to seven last year. Days on market, on the other hand, are up, from 118 last year to 149 this year.

I just had to use that title once.

I’ll try not to wear it out.

Having just gotten through singing the praises of Jackson’s strong market, we now turn to Ione and paint a much darker picture. I think many of the differences in the two communities also point out what we’ve been saying all along about our Amador County statistics in general — small sample sizes mean results may swing pretty widedly from one sample to the next.

Ten units sold in Ione last November, as opposed to only three this year, which is a fairly huge drop in volume. The low number for this year’s sales in turn feeds back into how we calculate inventory, so with 68 units in inventory we come up with an alarming 22 months worth. (Of course, if 10 units sell next month, that will be down to 6.8 months — so keep your eye on those sample sizes).

The average sold price per square foot dropped 13.8% from November to November, while all other indicators were up. What this means in practice is that this year a buyer spent about as much for a home as last year ($303,840 in November 2005 versus $304,518 in November 2006), but this year’s buyer found his money buying a home that was 16.3% bigger, at 1813 square feet compared to last year’s 1558 square feet.

And with that, I have to turn my attention to El Dorado County rather literally, and go meet a seller there. More blogathon fun when we return.

Sales of residential real estate in Jackson put in a strong showing in November, with at least modest gains in most indicators and fairly modest inventory by recent standards.

This November’s sold homes were bigger than last year, averaging 1914 square feet as opposed to last year’s 1771 square feet. Even adjusted for square footage, however, homes achieved a modest 1.4% increase in price from last year. The average sold price rose more dramatically, of course, from $387,812 last November to $424,866 this November. Unit volume was also up this year, from eight units in November of 2005 to 9 units in November 2006. With 75 active listings, inventory is 8.3 months worth, which is fair to good given the overall market and time of year.

The only bad news in Jackson’s market data were a slight decline in median sale price, from $404,250 last year to $396,500 this year, a 1.9% drop, and a more marked increase in average days on market before a home was sold, up 64.8% from last year’s 88 days to an average this November of 145.

Hi, it’s John and Kathy.  Kathy’s learning the family business of real estate market updates, and so we’re starting with our own lovely home town of Cameron Park.

Cameron Park’s market slowed substantially from last year, with falling prices.  From November to November, the average sale price dropped 10.3%, from $524,663 to $470,800.  The median sale price dropped even more dramatically, down 12.1% from $475,000 to $417,500.  At the same time, the average sold price per square foot dropped 12.3%.  As we’ve seen in other markets, however, the ratio of list price to sold price has not changed much.  Last November homes that sold fetched 99% of their list price, whereas this year homes still brought 98% of list when they sold.  However, more than half the homes on the market in November expired.  With 16 units selling and 18 expiring, the expiired to sold ratio was 112.5% this year, compared to 65.2% last year.

So thanks, Kathy, for sitting through this MLS / Excel Extravaganza.  Once Kathy and Helen start blogging more, they may also be exploring some of the more non-technical aspects of the real estate around here.

Cheers!

Based on Dataquick data, The Mountain Democrat recently reported a 2.7% rise in median prices for El Dorado County in October compared to a year ago.  Painting a somewhat rosey picture, the article begins:

El Dorado County continues to defy the regional trend of declining home prices. In their October report, DataQuick Information Systems found year-over-year median price declines in existing single-family homes for Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo and Yuba Counties. The drop in home values ranged from five percent in Sacramento to 11 percent in Placer County. El Dorado County, however, posted a slight 2.7 percent increase, finishing the month with a $445,000 median price, the second highest in the eight county region.

I myself have noted the same thing about El Dorado County in my own work.  Seemingly defying gravity, El Dorado County’s prices continue to post modest gains even as every other county in the area shows a loss.  I’ve been at something of a loss to explain this, especially in light of the huge losses in Placer County, a market that one might expect to perform somewhat similarly to El Dorado County.

As I read further in the article, one possible explanation came to mind, the dampening effect on the supply side that’s been created by El Dorado County’s traffic mitigation fees.  I have to wonder to what extent calling this slowdown in land sales “the desired effect” is meant to be tongue in cheek or how much it’s meant to be provocative:

The new Traffic Impact Mitigation Fees are having their desired effect. Vacant land sales have nearly stopped. With over 700 vacant land parcels listed for sale in the county, only 13 monthly sales were reported. It was the slowest month for land sales in recent history. Building and impact fees now easily total $80,000 for an average size house in some parts of the county, forcing many to look for lots and acreage elsewhere.

Well, I’m sure some of us already here who are thinking along solid Republican principles of “I got mine” may have desired that effect, but builders don’t, buyers don’t — certainly no one with land to sell thinks it’s a very good idea.  Thirteen monthly sales and 700 units in inventory works out to be some four and a half years of land inventory.  Ouch.

When we compare the market to the year before, Amador County’s real estate market in October showed a pattern of slowing similar to what we’ve seen in other parts of Northern California.  Average home prices and average sold price per square foot both dropped during the period — however the median sale price was higher this year than last, suggesting that most buyers this year are opting for “more home” than last — possibly because falling prices enable them to buy more.

The median sale price was up 7.5% from October to October, from $339,000 last year to $364,500 this year.  At the same time, the average sold price dropped some 7.2%, from $397,445 last year to $368,942 this year.  The average sold price per square foot dropped 6.9%, from $231 per square foot last October to $215 per square foot this October.

The average time a sold home that did sell in October spent 137 days on the market before selling, as opposed to 111 days on the market on average last October.  Fewer units sold this year than last year (38 versus 53, a 28.3% drop in unit volume), and inventory is fairly high currently at 13.3 months.

I mentioned in an earlier post that it can be difficult to generalize about a market that’s very small in size. The reason is that as the number of houses you’re talking about gets very small, it’s possible that you can misinterpret an artifact of the small sample size as some kind of trend.

Having said that, please take my Ione numbers with a large grain of salt. Only seven homes sold there last October, and four homes this October, so our sample size is a small one indeed. Based on that small sample, however, the average sale price is up 12.2% from year to year, from $340,128 last year to $381,750 this year. At the same time, the median sale price rose from $310,000 to $387,000, a 24.8% increase.

Well, today I found my invoice from the good people at the Amador County Association of Realtors®, and sure enough, I can get into the MLS fine now. The MLS is running using Paragon’s web site interface, the same software the East Bay Association of Realtors® uses, so there wasn’t much of a learning curve.

Before I dive headlong into publishing some statistics about Amador County, let me begin with a general cautionary tale.

The first thing that’s apparent is that overall volume is not that high, compared, let’s say, to Sacramento County. Well, gee, of course that would be true — there are fewer homes and less people. So what? Well, just keep in mind as you read the Amador County data that a smaller sample size generally means less statistical significance. But if four houses sold last month in Ione (for example), there’s no other way to write about the inventory of 57 homes available now than to say there are 14.25 months. It’s no use wishing there were four hundred sold versus 5,700 in inventory. The numbers are what they are, but as the sample size goes down, concepts like “median sale price” become especially difficult to interpret.

Anyway, having made everyone feel less than overconfident about the whole enterprise, let’s forge ahead boldly and undertake it anyway.