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.
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
Jim,
As always, thanks for the data. Is this for all of San Diego county or the typical north county coastal?
-Biosurpher
Sorry, All SD County
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!
Sure looks like most houses went down a pricing tier, as Erica suggests.
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.
Agree with Erica’s observation as well.
Thanks for the stats, Jim.