There’s a company called Local Market Monitor, who claims on their website that they have “over twenty years of proven expertise and trend analysis in evaluating residential property values”.
Lately they have been ranking which towns across America have the best chance of having their real estate appreciate in 2011. Except they are apparently conflicted:
In December, their top 5 towns were quoted in msn.com as:
1. San Diego (1%)
2. Oklahoma City
In January they were quoted at forbes.com:
1. San Jose
2. Santa Ana
5. San Diego (2%)
If you are going to say that you feel pretty good about San Diego or any town, that’s one thing. But if you’re ranking them a month apart, do you mind being consistent? The credibility is suspect when people see stuff like this, plus how you can predict the future anyway?
This is what the president said in the Forbes article:
LMM tracks 315 American real estate markets, assessing values and applying Investment Suitability ratings based on multiple factors. For the Forbes lists, LMM President Ingo Winzer and his researchers started with a U.S. Census-defined list of Metropolitan Statistical Areas with populations of 500,000 residents or more. They then analyzed key economic factors that directly affect housing markets: unemployment and job growth rates, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. LMM tracks real estate markets’ valuations based on the theory that markets go through cycles.
Whatever….a consistent message goes a lot further!