Stats by Price Range

by | May 6, 2010 | Sales and Price Check, Thinking of Buying? | 7 comments

Comparing this year’s SD YTD detached sales to 2005 (1/1/05-5/4/05), by price range:

2005/2010 # of sales $$/sf SP:LP DOM
0-$199 30/574 $149/$158 92%/103% 55/67
$200-$399 555/3,025 $369/$208 96/100 45/57
$400-$599 4,224/1,685 $342/$246 98/98 47/56
$600-$799 1,991/749 $339/$289 97/97 48/63
$800-$999 710/294 $372/$337 97/97 51/65
$1.0-$1.19 241/124 $387/$376 93/95 59/83
$1.20-$1.39 210/121 $479/$435 95/93 60/81
$1.50+ 347/173 $630/$558 94/91 87/145
Totals 8,308/6,745 $362/$244 97/99 50/62
Diff -19% -33% +2% +24%

The higher-end market should note that 53% of the 2010 detached sales year-to-date are under $400,000, and 89% are under $800,000. There are 4,400 active listings and we’re averaging around 900 closings every month under $800,000, and 2,200 actives and roughly 287 closings every month over $800,000 (5 months’ and 9 months’ worth of inventory).

Looking at the changes, sales have rebounded to only be 19% less than the peak era, with the 33% drop in average cost-per-sf deserving much of the credit. Buyers are paying closer to list price on average but sellers are slower to get the price right, with average days on market being 12% longer.

7 Comments

  1. Erica Douglass
    Erica Douglass on May 6, 2010 at 8:07 pm

    Wow. Looking at that, I can say one thing: It paid to wait!

    Will it pay off that much in % terms to wait another 5 years? My guess is no, but only time will tell…

    You can almost see the slide from one category to the next. 555 sales in $200-$399K in 2005 became 574 $0-$199K sales in 2010, for instance. It correlates in nearly every category. Pretty interesting data.

    -Erica

  2. Biosupher
    Biosupher on May 7, 2010 at 8:55 am

    Jim,

    As always, thanks for the data. Is this for all of San Diego county or the typical north county coastal?

    -Biosurpher

  4. alles_klar
    alles_klar on May 7, 2010 at 9:04 am

    I’m not sure how to digest all these numbers. Does the analysis hold water, because a many homes were probably in a higher pricing tier in 2005 (e.g., $1.20 -$1.39) than that home would be in today (e.g., $800-$999) due to prices going down? Thus, is this an apples to apples comparison?

    I have to admit, I haven’t been able to digest this chart yet to determine if the above factor skews the numbers. Anyone else have a thought on this?

    Either way, it is very interesting. And thanks, Jim, for putting this together!

  5. Geotpf
    Geotpf on May 7, 2010 at 11:09 am

    Sure looks like most houses went down a pricing tier, as Erica suggests.

  6. The Blur
    The Blur on May 7, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    I like Erica’s observation, and I think it does skew the numbers as AK suggests.

    But I really like seeing the data with these pricing segments. No surprise the best $/sf differences drive the highest sales. The $1 – $1.2 group has almost no difference at all. Carmel Valley. I have a hard time believing the LP/SP numbers.

  7. CA renter
    CA renter on May 8, 2010 at 12:25 am

    Agree with Erica’s observation as well.

    Thanks for the stats, Jim.

Pin It on Pinterest