Saturday, March 1, 2008

It's happening now. Or isn't happening. We'll know at the end of summer. The next three months are going to be all important in the housing market, and the three months after that will seal the deal. (With all the weasel words and revisions, I don't think we'll know the real numbers until a few months after the fact.)

It would be interesting to set benchmarks in advance, to gauge failure or success. There are just too many ways to weasel out of the statistics.

First of all, I would limit my guesses to Bend, so we can compare like to like. Also, try to avoid comparing stats with either the boom years or the much slower years before that, but instead concentrate on the numbers we need to achieve now. So, if we sell 200 houses in June, for instance, which would be a huge improvement over now, us bubble busters can't just go back a couple of years and say, Yeah, but we sold 350 in 2005, or whatever. Nor can the kool-aid boosters say, yeah, but 200 is a huge improvement over January.

Some of you guys are more up on the statistics more than I, but my rough guess is that we'll see a 10 to 20% increase in the inventory of houses for sale, (with a huge bulge behind that just waiting to flop out onto the market if sales perk up.) So, if the latest numbers of For Sale houses is around 1875, we'll see that increase to 2250 or so?

I'm guessing even more; 2400 housing inventory at the peak.

I think anything under 100 sales a month during the normally busy months would be a confirmed disaster; anything under 200 won't make much headway against the tide.

Anything over 300 a month on a sustained basis and I bow down before the superior prescience of the real estaters (even though that number would probably only hold our head above water -- still, I'd be amazed.) Anything between 200 and 300 would be a gray area where both sides could claim success.

I'm guessing a peak of 125 houses sold in the busiest month.

Housing prices are a whole nother animal, and I don't expect prices to drop rapidly. The saying that prices are 'sticky' seems to be really true. But, to me, the important numbers are how many houses are for sale, and how many actually sell. Prices are all psychological; but a house actually selling is a confirmed event.

Especially now, since we can assume the buyer actually put money down and had good, confirmed credit and income, and a realistic chance of paying back the loan.

If the prices don't unstick this selling season, and I don't really expect more than token drops, then we have to suffer another lousy year before people really start to get real. I don't think 5% or 10% or even 15% drops are going to do it. If we start seeing across the board drops of 15%, maybe, but not the occasional house. (But then if the situation continues to decline nationwide, the drops will need to be even more next year, and then if it gets worse, more, and .....worst case scenario.)

The other important number is how many building permits are issued. This is the biggest impending disaster for the next two or three years. I think anything under 100 building permits per month in the busy spring and summer months will cut into local employment even further. I actually wonder if we'll do even half that much. So a lot of construction people will be scrambling for work....the more nimble ones will accept work whatever and where-ever it's available.

I'm guessing a 40 building permits on the peak month.

I would be more than open to suggestions as to what the current stats are, and what an appropriate benchmark for gauging success or failure would be. Otherwise, the goalposts just seem to shift in the middle of the game -- on both sides of the field.


I found the following current stats, and so revised the above entry:

Feb sold stats as of 3/1/08.

Bend Residential homes on less than an acre:
45 Sold @ median of $322,500
Bend all types of residential
58 Sold @ median of $327,500
Current active listings are 1876.
Hopefully a few more sales will be reported next week as brokers catch up with reporting to MLS.
There seems to be more homes going pending the past 60 days though.

In 2007 the numbers were:
Bend all types res
169 Sold @ $335k
in 2006 it was 190 Sold @$336k

11 comments:

Duncan McGeary said...

Prices sticky? Drop of less than 3% in prices.

Result: 34.3% as many sales.

Those of you on the cusp of buying?

What the HELL are you thinking. Prices are about to tumble....

Duncan McGeary said...

A couple of years back, a few of us made the prediction we could even lose population, which most people thought was lunacy.

But I keep looking at the 58 houses sold and the numbers of mortgage and title companies, and real estate agents, and appraisers, and so on and so on.....and think, what are they all going to do?

I keep looking at the 11 housing permits taken out in January, and then the 400 general contractors (and the no doubt many contractors working under the radar) and the 50 furniture stores, and the thousands of people employed primarily and secondarily in constructions....and think, what are they going to do?

What may actually save Bend from a population loss, ironically, is that it's bad everywhere else.

Duncan McGeary said...

An interesting twist on this story, to me, is that because prices are so sticky, less than a 3% drop from last year, we don't even know if houses would sell better at lower prices.

In other words, we don't know if we're dealing this a 'wet noodle' situation until prices became much more realistic.

Scary thing to realize: if the prices tumbled 30%, which a lot of experts are predicting, what happens if the houses STILL don't sell -- because people can't move, because they can't qualify for loans, because they are waiting.

Duncan McGeary said...

I know it's crazy to predict, and I could be making a fool of myself.

But, no offense, it's a bit of a game for me, to see how good my pattern recognition is....a test, so to speak, that if I get correctly helps me trust my judgement on other guesses that DO matter, like business.

Anonymous said...

"What may actually save Bend from a population loss, ironically, is that it's bad everywhere else."

Spot on there Duncan. It costs money to move - money that just might be needed to 'hang in there'. So, without a firm job elsewhere that truly pencils out it's tough to pull the let's move trigger. Unless of course, one is in desperate straights and moving away from Bend / Central Oregon back to live with Mom & Dad is the only viable option. Ouch.

Only time will tell, eh?

Duncan McGeary said...

From the Bendbubble2 blog, sounds like Bilbo (?) though he usually isn't shy about posting the same message in more than one place, but since I answered it:

"Garbage IN, Garbage OUT, BENDBB, HERE, everywhere, everyone uses the MLS data from the same source like it were fucking GOLD, when in fact the MLS data can't be verified, and its always been massaged.

Duncan today asks for predictions, but his questions fall back to the same fucking framework of MLS, I have said for over a year here FUCK MLS MEDIANS THEY DON"T MEAN SHIT.

It's time to start using your brain, and use real data, and NOT be led around by the leash by MLS Pr Bunny's."

Duncan McGeary said...

I wasn't asking for predictions so much as for benchmarks. What would constitute success, or failure? So the goalposts can't be constantly moved. If sales are twice as good in June as January, I don't want to real estaters to pop up and say, See? Success! If sales are pretty good, say 250 houses, we bubble busters shouldn't be able to pop up and say, "Yeah, but we sold 350 in 2006!"

Set the goalposts before the game starts.

The MLS compared to MLS at least is comparing the same tool (assuming, I guess, that they don't change how they count.)

There just way too many ways to measure these things, and everyone can nitpick any group of stats until they don't mean anything.

House sales can be up one day, down the next, and it may be "new" vs. "old" but all the public hears are "Sales."

I'm totally with you that median's don't mean shit. That's a whole different subject, and a total wild assed guess, which I addressed a week or two ago. (My guess, it would reach bottom in Dec. 2010, if I remember.) Median prices will hit a low of 250k to 260k, or 2001 medians plus 5% up to Dec. 2010. Rough estimates and wild assed guesses and fairly meaningless in the here and now.

Like you said, it don't mean shit if they aren't selling.

Besides, until the prices come down, we can't even know if we are just pushing a wet noodle or not. It's entirely possible prices could drop 30% and there are still no qualified takers.

Anonymous said...

I guess what I'm say, is that ONLY recorded sales should be considered, heretofore, all other metrics shall be ignored, otherwise yea shall rot in hell.


Recorded sales is County Record.

Duncan McGeary said...

Bilbo, if someone posts those, I'll use those.

It's not me job.

I spend too much time on this frikken blog already.

But, I know what you're saying. I just try to use whatever I can find online. Try to figure out how valid it is.

Anonymous said...

The MLS compared to MLS at least is comparing the same tool (assuming, I guess, that they don't change how they count.)

*

That's the essential problem its all spoon-fed SHIT from MLS, we only know what they feed us, and besides OUR focus on MLS legitimizes them, they'll NOT survive this down-cycle the MLS is finished, and NAR will go down hard for lack of membership, when 80% quit paying club-fee's.

On to the predictions, ratio's notice of default to actual eviction. It's all public record.

Complete paralysis now, in terms of nothing selling just like 1932 ( read mcEleveny "Great Depression" ), sellers wouldn't go down, and buyers wouldn't buy. Eventually banks didn't loan, and the entire system imploded.

A damn good indicator will be when the government steps in to provide loans, its damn near impossible to sell MTG loans now, the auction market has ceased, and MTG outfits aren't going to keep buying loans from brokers, if they can't pass them to investors. Its almost ground to a halt.

You need to be specific in what your asking for in terms of prediction. In my humble opinion, we have already from two years ago prophesied enough on the bubble demise. Nobody can call a bottom until its passed, we know its got a long way to go because of LAG.

Better bellwethers here are watching the BULL lay off people, or perhaps in the next election city hall gets flushed, and new people actually start trying to stay within a ration budget.

Things are very different here compared to where you stand, are you talking STD's that are already ghost-towns?? Then there are inner city hoods that haven't changed much at all, nobody near my primary home has moved, nor are they moving, and almost all are paid for.

Huge job loss, but so what they were all contractors, meaning they weren't employees, so they'll simply just move-on,

Watch MLS and MLS number, will only tell you about the demise of MLS, if that's what turns you on.

This bubble is going to be VERY regional, most people up at Highland@BrokenTop are rich, they'll weather the storm, many people at BT are renters, and they'll just move-on, many people in the inner downtown are retired, and just will live. Then there are hoods like "Shevlin-Park" that will become ghost-towns, all the STD's east&west will become ghost towns.

So heres the question? What are the metrics, what are the areas? There really are NO generality's here in Bend, ... Except that what is NEW will most likely go down, those that are NEW will most likely leave, ...

How low? I think CACB is the perfect bellwether because of liquidity, you can't say anything on BEND RE because it ain't liquid, and nobody wants to move here, and the people who do live here are trapped.

This week the WSJ reported that 401k's are dropping like a rock,

REAL ESTATE PARALYSIS and we're only a year into it, most likely it will be 1-2 years before we'll really even see who can survive.

You'll be fine, people want to be entertained during a depression, play games with the family, read escapist comics, ...

Anonymous said...

What saves Bend is that its bad everywhere else.
- dunc

*

No dunc, I don't think that is a good argument, first of all Bend is #1 toxic WORST in the country, there is NO place worse than Bend.

Secondly, there are tons of really great HOT places right now all over the country, Texas is hot, OIL recovery is hot. Energy is HOT, there never has been energy in Oregon,

The population you double you saw in the last ten years here was an RE boom, and its OVER, people came here to make money, and the population is going to go down, people talk, and they know people, and they'll figure out where the current BOOM is.

Except for the GOLF people, and the retirees I think most of the people that came here didn't come to hike or ski, they came to make money, and and its NOT coming back anytime soon ( > 5-10 years ), and thus gradually when the get-rich-quick folk figure this out, they'll leave.

Also its expensive here, if your living off savings ( 401k ) why be here, when you can leave, and go spend your savings in a cheaper place, ....

No they'll NOT stay in Bend, because other places are worse I really think thats a false argument.