Manhattan 2nd Quarters prices UP YoY

No quarrel from me. I agree: market has stabilized. The crash never made it to my end of the market, and it appears that it never shall. Sigh.

evnyc, I'm sure some of the regulars will come down on you pretty strong for that last statement. I think this is an excellent complementary read:
http://www.urbandigs.com/2010/07/q2_2010_report_out_doesnt_capt.html

R those 'happy tissues?'

my long nightmare continues...

julia, an alcove studio at your favorite gramercy location just closed for about $370k. i think you must not be an insider. smaller units are getting slammed.

Hey aboutready. You finally decided to pay the roaming charges in Europe?

Julia, come on now? Itz so so so easy to see where this is headed. I'd say I was 95% sure mkt would by $500psf when I first got on se, I'd say over the last 4 months with euro, china, stiffness of republicans to not extend unemployment bennies and Stk mkt gyrations...... I am now officially 99% certain it will hit $500psf sooner rather than later.

For the hermits crew above, what is it about 2.5k open houses every weekend that gives you hope that this is stabilizing? G
Flmao. Oooopps. Those are 'sad tissues?, right? '

Jerkoff not 'hermits'!!!!!!

Bjw, when they can show me evidence of the crash reaching my market, they are welcome to crow. I'm a regular myself and friendly with many of the bears; I just think they oversold their case.

I'm still waiting for my $600k real 2-br in Brooklyn Heights. There were a few. We didn't pounce. There really aren't any now that aren't spectacularly flawed in some way.

w67th, i've got connectivity, i'm just otherwise generally occupied.

but, the family is watching some horrid movie tonight and i declined.

evnyc, these things are not linear, as we say. i'll concede that bh is resilient. but don't talk about now. now has been influenced by tax credits, a little mini frenzy, a bit of optimism, etc. the underlying problems haven't gone away, they've just been blanketed by a whole lot of QE and fiscal stimulus. all of which will end soon. if not extended.

and if extended, well then we may wait some more. but sadly our qol seems to be about to decline. corporations may expand, but not likely on the backs of the us consumers. and it is unlikely that they'll expand much in the way of business onshore, unless we become destitute. i haven't taken a look closely at the reports (vacay!!) but from what i've noted it's not the smaller units (up to and including 1200 sf two beds except for some established condos) that have had increases in prices generally.

btw printer, your auto analogy is a joke. it's already starting to look putrid, and demand was greatly increased by the fact that the cash for clunkers program actually destroyed the old cars, severely limiting used car sale options for as possibly quite some time, as it pushed sales forward.

and so the spinning begins

Just wait until the FED stops buying those MBS, and mortgage rates shoot through the roof.

Interesting perspective, bjw. Thanks.

spinning? so says one of the spinmeisters. of long duration.

how's that u6 looking these days? or the fact that congress seems so reluctant to extend transfer payments or even basic aid to states? you spin me right round, baby, right round.

AR...hi, i am an insider but I haven't really been looking..i'm thinking i will continue to rent for a while and see what happens in the next couple of years.

w67thstreet....i believe, i believe!!

Let's be honest - the spinning happens on both sides of the coin. There are and have been enough permabears/bulls on this site that it's maddening to read it all and try to decide which side of the fence you're on. Until you realize that you don't have to pick a side, can read and interpret the good data that's out there (about to get a big hand from urbandigs' efforts, thankfully), and decide what's best for your individual situation. So much bad blanket advice gets tossed around here - read at your own peril (julia, this means you!).

they already stopped buying MBS

Drop in Pending Home Sales Aligns with Plunge in Purchase Apps
http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/07012010_pending_home_sales.asp

Weak Housing Data Signal That Economy Is Losing Steam
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/02/business/economy/02econ.html?hp

What does it say when the FEDs stop buying MBS and mortgages hit a new low?

It says to me the "smart" money would rather take a 1% backpedal on their treasury holdings rather than risk capital in ANY markets, be it commodities, forex, RE, porn, porkbellies, gold or movie futures.... IT SIGNALS to w67, a crazy azzed deflationary spiral that will commence wit the failure to extend unemployment bennies for 15MM families who have not found employment for 99 weeks. I wonder when every person that is not unemployed gets a call from a long lost friend/colleague/family member asking for $500 to tide them over till the end of the month? I WONDER what that WILL DO FOR THE US ECONOMY? => NYC RE? FLMAO

but the graph says.....

Price per square foot is down year over year. J miller on his blog is careful to point out that its the larger apartment sizes that caused the increase. Its barely up by TOP measure, and barely down on a square foot basis. But on 80% more volumes, this is not a raging bull market just yet. And as urbandigs points out, these are CLOSINGS and reflect the market 6 months or a year ago, not today. We will see.

more studying of charts and graphs?

As a bear closely following the dismal global tells for the economy, I am quite surprised that the NYC real estate market has done so well this quarter -- especially for the new developments. Of course, every time the stock market has a huge spike like it has had this last year, we always see that loot make its way into the NYC RE market. It is just surprising to see that it has happened again considering we are facing the highest household debt as well as highest govt debt in history. You would think we all might want to collectively rein it in just a tad. But no, as Americans, we are nothing if not entitled to our creature comforts. So bring on the sales at 400 Fifth for $3000 psf. And let's all kick back for the fireworks and watch what happens as the hot summer months meet an S&P 980...or 880

thats the difference between living history and reading about it many years later.

3 yrs from now, people will have long forgotten this quarter---the few historians studying it will wonder at the lingering craziness exhibited by the buyers of this period.

Printer - we rarely see things eye to eye, but your original post did give this grumpy bear a smile. I have to thank you for that!

columbia, you might be right, but your permabear friends have been saying the same thing for years now. Here's some reading material while we wait:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sky_Is_Falling_(fable)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_who_cried_wolf

Endless babble. I guess it makes you feel better.

> and so the spinning begins

Who needs to spin? We had a real estate market crash. By definition, bulls were wrong and bears were right. The depth of the crash was already beyond what most bears called for, and it could easily go further down.

Well, I guess the bulls are trying to spin it now...

and, sorry, we didn't just have a real estate market crash. We had a HUGE market crash.

"The depth of the crash was already beyond what most bears called for"

Least truthful statement made on SE in a long time (which is saying something), unless you are referring to bears other than those on the SE boards. The crash was nowhere close to what most SE bears called for. Have you completely forgotten the spring 2009 we're-off-30%-from-peak-and-going-down-50%-from-here hysteria? It did get to -25% or 30% or whatever VERY quickly, so in that sense it was a huge crash, but it also stopped declining very quickly once the sharp adjustment was done. Check the comps threads, where even with signficant poster selection bias toward showing downward comps there just aren't many 30% off peak trades being posted anymore.

but anyway, as printer was saying...

I was expecting a strong quarter price-wise given all the broker hoopla about a busy market, but things appear quite the opposite. My preferred metric from these imperfect reports is ppsf, which was more or less flat YoY. The averages were up, indicating a larger mix of higher-priced apts with typically higher ppsf, so I thought this meant a downish trend. Looking at the data broken down by number of bedrooms, all categories were down save the spinning dervish that is the 4+ BR category:

Year Quarter Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4+ Bedroom All
2010 2 792 869 1,073 1,364 2,072 1,051
2009 2 863 917 1,088 1,391 1,776 1,056

Add to this that Q1 2010 was a lot more peachy than Q1 2009 when these contracts were signed (think S&P 676 vs 1200 in the Marchs, economic freeze-up, panicked behavior, tax credit, worst is behind us, etc.), and I wonder what might come given that Q3 number of sales will be lower using UD's pending sales chart. The listing discount was a huge 9% (higher than 2009) at the same time number of sales spiked!

It's almost as if the bubble riders said "Well, we've had our ride, we missed the top, but this is clearly no longer an appreciating asset. Let me get out while the flood gates are open, so a 9% listing discount is fine."

Then again, data is random and fickle...

inonada: excellent analysis, as usual. I think people are trying to reach a conclusion about the NYRE market far too quickly. The only thing clear to me is that there is a lot of uncertainty over the next several months, but that most of the macro factors have now become negative, with the danger of more negative shocks to come. It remains to be seen how the market will react to this new environment.

> Least truthful statement made on SE in a long time (which is saying something), unless you are referring
> to bears other than those on the SE boards.

Nope, you're just wrong here.

Pre-crash (and pre the clear signs the crash was coming, Lehman, Bear, etc.) there was a survey done, and most bears were in the 10-15 or 15-20% range, a handful in the 20%s... and nobody claimed 50%.

> Have you completely forgotten the spring 2009 we're-off-30%-from-peak-and-going-down-50%-from-here
> hysteria?

No, you're just rewriting history. Steve pulled out the 50%, and there were a couple others, but the majority of bears never got there.

> It did get to -25% or 30% or whatever VERY quickly, so in that sense it was a huge crash

Yes, in the sense that it was a huge crash by definition, it was a huge crash.

As I said.

> but it also stopped declining very quickly once the sharp adjustment was done.

So far, of course.

> but anyway, as printer was saying...

When printer is your source, you know you have problems.

so we've divided by 3, integrated, multiplied by 2.6, seasonally un-adjusted, taken the square root just a few more manipulations and there'll be the proof that we plunged this quarter - come on SWE, I know you can take us there

sls, i'm on vacation. i'll get back to comps in a few weeks. they're a lot of work.

bjw, i really don't think it's appropriate to lump all bears together. show me a declining unemployment rate, increased gdp not based on stimulus and inventory restocking, some sign that public and private debt has a chance of declining some time in the future without massive amounts of austerity, and i'll spin right round.

where in the last few years has there been any sign that the economy was headed in the right direction? just where? why should i, or most of us, be happy that some people are able to afford $4,000,000 apartments because of wealth transfer? why?

nada, your numbers are consistent with what i've been seeing and saying. the rich have got their groove back, but i see a fair amount of distress below that level. obviously some apartments have traded above those numbers, and some below, but i'm starting to see $400-500ish psf in Harlem, and smaller sized units are showing signs of decline, particularly in some buildings that had seen massive appreciation.

sme- a good number of the bears on this board insisted the market would be down 50-70%. It hasn't happened. You cannot claim the bears were right and the bulls were wrong, sorry.

I'm curious why daily stats don't seem to be pointing to a slow down.

UD says 84 contracts registered yesterday, 30 day moving average still over 1k, inventory back down below 9k.

"I'm curious why daily stats don't seem to be pointing to a slow down."

spin - is that really what you meant to say, or was it more, "I'm curious why so many knee-jerk permabears insist on ignoring the daily stats that don't seem to be pointing to a slow down"?

Did real estate go down last year because of external factors or just because it went down? How do external factors look now and Into the next twelve to twenty four months?

Calculated Risk had a good piece recently on the quality of NAR statistics.
The media just accepts the NAR numbers as fact which is odd considering the collection methodology.
We know that REO inventory is competing with "normal" home resales and that REO invenory typically is sold at a 20% discount. Any thoughts to whether NAR accurately captures bank REO properties which may not get sold through brokers. Urban digs?

SLS it's such a gorgeous morning out here on the terrace I find it hard to be so negative toward my SE brothers, but have it your way. Can you explain the disconnect between the the stats and the sentiment?

cc - One could argue the hottest months for real estate in the last year were during the darkest days of the recession. So following with this illogical activity I'm not so sure about overly obvious conclusions going forward.

Really? Because there were such great deals to be had?

I gather that you think the so called recession is over?

You can draw your own conclusions on why it happened but as we were losing 600k jobs/mth, RE in NY defied logic, and I gather your predictions.

Huh?

Afraid I don't follow you.

What are you saying?

"Can you explain the disconnect between the the stats and the sentiment?"

I think there is a new shot that you can get with your annual physical that provides immunity to data. It might be that. I think somewhereelse actually participated in the clinical trial

Riversider, I'm not a statistician, but I am a reporter, and a member of NAR, and to me the problem with the macro numbers is that they're too big.

The foreclosure problem is, by and large, a five-state problem: CA, NV, AZ, FL, MI. Yes, there are foreclosures in, say, Texas, but by and large the devastating real estate speculation was locally concentrated, and the huge shadow overhang that everybody's worried about is pretty locally concentrated.

So trying to reconcile the national picture with what we know are those horrible trouble spots doesn't make any sense. Miami, for example, could be in trouble for ten years. But that doesn't mean Dallas didn't follow a more normal curve of a softer runup, and a softer slump, which, honestly, it's pulling out of.

On a big national level, we know the housing stimulus worked -- it brought the number of national transactions up from a roughly 4.5 mm level to a 5.5 mm level. (Whether it was too expensive for the results we got is another separate discussion). Now the stimulus is ending, and we're clearly going to fall from a 5.5 mm level, but I don't know that if we ended up in the low 5s for the year that that would really be such a disaster for the industry.

It's as though the bears are defining recovery as "are we in better shape than last month?" (by and large, NO) and the bulls are defining recovery as "are we in better shape than last year?" (by and large, YES).

ali r.
DG Neary Realty

450-500 psf?

You bears are too much. There are thousands of units sold already this year and that 5-10 units that you see being discounted are used as a mean of measure. Laughable.

The same way you can use that ONE unit to say things are going down, i can pick that ONE unit that indicates prices are going UP.

"I was expecting a strong quarter price-wise given all the broker hoopla about a busy market, but things appear quite the opposite."

inonada, why? The broker hoopla was mostly about strong activity at the new (lower) price levels. I didn't see much about strong price increases.

"there was a survey done, and most bears were in the 10-15 or 15-20% range, a handful in the 20%s... and nobody claimed 50%"

Yes, I recall the survey thread you started (under one of your other SE aliases, of course). So you're saying that if the more hysterical bears didn't post to that thread, it doesn't count? Please, there was tons of the 50% down stuff. Even 70%. It happened, so don't dismiss it because it damages your black-and-white view of things.

"bjw, i really don't think it's appropriate to lump all bears together."

ar, sorry if it came off that way, but I specifically said permabears. I don't think I would include you in that group.

sls, I think I confused your handle with swe. please accept my profound apologies.

Ruh roh, cc's all confused again. Funny guy.

"I think there is a new shot that you can get with your annual physical that provides immunity to data. It might be that. I think somewhereelse actually participated in the clinical trial"

Flmao (sorry, couldn't help it).

ericho75
about 11 weeks ago
ignore this person
report abuse Junk bonds confirming this move above 11K.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SHIAX&t=3m&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

It's all good fellas.

12K Dow
S&P 1300

spinnaker - I wouldnt use that data..we found many issues with data source system resulting in tons of redundancies. It goes far beyone eliminating dupes, co-exclusives, etc..the issue is with flaws in broker status sharing system and that had to be accounted for. When you scrub and scrub, you realize there is a lot of junk in there that should be removed.

I have ACTIVE at 7600 level, 835 contracts signed in last 30 days.

Sorry but I don't have a window into your secret lab at UD. Is the current tool any less or more accurate than it was a year ago? It's a relative comparison and I recognize the caveats. Are the contract numbers going the opposite direction on the new machine?

didnt mean that...I guess its been so long digging into the data and finding problems to fix and adjust for, that I forget nobody else is privy to it. So for that I apologize.

Its not so much that, but I find the general problem is double counting both individual listings and multiple states. What I mean is, how many times do you see a active listing, also in contract? Or a in contract listing, also off market? etc.? There are reasons for these types of flaws that are not SE's fault.

I wonder, how many active listings should not be counted as active, but should be counted as off mkt, or a pending sale? Yes, its all relative and sticking to the same tool I guess should give you the proper general trend. I just cant say enough how many issues had to be fixed with the data though. I didnt design the SE tool, just offered my opinion that it should be 1) only manhattan, 2) exclude dupes, 3) only with listings with exact addresses, 4) all coops, condos, townhouses...

I put this chart up, a sneak peak at 1 chart of the new machine, on UD yesterday:

http://www.urbandigs.com/2010/07/q2_2010_report_out_doesnt_capt.html

This measures the changing status as brokers adjust a listing from ACTIVE to CONTRACT SIGNED internally using the REBNY sharing system. Id use that chart for measuring pace of signed deals.

Keep up the good work UD. I hope that your efforts are rewarded.

PS: for my ACTIVE inventory, we have settings. For example, when we launch our measurement for ACTIVE will be only listings that

1) have been updated (maintained) internally by the listing broker in the past 30 days
2) been on market less than 365 days

My new platform is designed to measure the manhattan market as accurately as possible, and at the same time, be able to track changes in real time as they happen. Think about listings that are set to ACTIVE, been on market for 3 years, and never been updated by broker in last 10 months? Is that really ACTIVE? The answer is NO, yet unless these types of rules are in place it gets counted as ACTIVE.

So, with my settings I have ACTIVE inventory at 7600. If I tweak those settings to:

1) broker must update it within last year
2) counts all active up to past 5 years

..ACTIVE inventory jumps to 9,183 - just to give you an idea.

Every metric has to be preset. Pending sales, off market, etc.. What constitutes a pending sale for a system that should be designed to capture changes in the market as they happen? If you go real far out and widen the settings, the larger data pool will dilute real time changes making it harder to see. And think about off market? What counts as off market inventory? A listing that was off market for 3 months, 9 months, 2 years, 5 years? Is a listing off market and not update for 5 years, really considered off market inventory that people interpret as likely to come back on?

These are the things I want you guys to know when it comes to measuring the markets, the people I have been talking to for 4 years now on these forums...The flaws alone forced us to implement a algorithm that governs our entire system, and the concept is any one listing can only be in 5 states, 4 of which are measured...ACTIVE, CONTRACT SIGNED, OFF MKT, SOLD & CLOSED, and a sort of PURGATORY (which is where a listing goes when it falls out of our settings - until the broker updates it again or status is changed to re-activate it)

Since analytics are only as good as the data that comprises it, the system was designed to take advantage of the highest quality of data, that data that is updated regularly and most often. Hope this helps a bit

thx Malthus!! given the soaring cost of this thing, I hope so too!

"Pre-crash (and pre the clear signs the crash was coming, Lehman, Bear, etc.) there was a survey done, and most bears were in the 10-15 or 15-20% range, a handful in the 20%s"

and there were a couple "bulls" that claimed 5-10%

"... and nobody claimed 50%."

anon3, steve, and w67th are STILL claiming this. w67th on this very thread.

"My preferred metric from these imperfect reports is ppsf, which was more or less flat YoY."

inonada, this is my preferred metric as well specifically, median ppsf. We have been flat for some time and the "market is up and market is down" hoopla is noise from writers that don't really care to understand the data.

"so we've divided by 3, integrated, multiplied by 2.6, seasonally un-adjusted, taken the square root just a few more manipulations and there'll be the proof that we plunged this quarter - come on SWE, I know you can take us there"

Sorry printer, thats your strawman and yours alone. Whatever you need to cover up your mistakes...

"sme- a good number of the bears on this board insisted the market would be down 50-70%"

again, nobody, as in noone claimed 70% on the "put your money on the table" thread. Steve did pull out 50% once thinks had already tanked, but, hey, thats steve. And I think there was one other.

But otherwise, thats just dishonest. Again, the vast majority Vast, vast majority were 25% and under.

But if this is all the bulls have to argue now - "yes, there was a crash, but it didn't go down 70% so it doesn't count" - then I think we can officially say the bears were right....

> You cannot claim the bears were right and the bulls were wrong, sorry.

Actually, I can, by definition. Look up the words, LIC.

Sorry.

"again, nobody, as in noone claimed 70% on the "put your money on the table" thread."

By your logic, if someone starts a thread and you don't post to it, it's like you've never said anything. Get real.

This is why I hate "in contract" figures. THey not only inflate in contracts, it shorts true inventory figures.
Here are 62 in contracts in one building and in one day.....that's right.......SIXTY TWO.

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/building/w-downtown-hotel-residences

So that's plus 62 in the in contract column...and more important, MINUS 62 in the inventory column.

" then I think we can officially say the bears were right...."

you forgot to add "nanny nanny boo boo" to the end of that sentence.

swe, the bears have been right about some things, the bulls have been right about some things, and steve has been right about nothing. Must we continue this endless argument about who called what?

> the bulls have been right about some things

Just not about the bull part.

;-)

> and steve has been right about nothing.

We can agree 100% there.

> Must we continue this endless argument about who called what?

We shouldn't... but as long as bulls keep starting up the argument, like in this thread...

If perhaps just one bull admitted they were wrong, instead of trying to cover it up.

Oh Hockey sticks!

Who the f'k said this recession is over? Flmao. I believe even tulips had mini rallies! The smart ones sold into those.

Hey ericho, Stk mkt is looking like it'll be the cheapest in a generation very soon, glad to be all cash wo a leveraged 'asset' taking up valuable cash flow. Itz times like these where a few smart choices pays dividends for years to cone.

truthskr - "This is why I hate "in contract" figures. THey not only inflate in contracts, it shorts true inventory figures.
Here are 62 in contracts in one building and in one day.....that's right.......SIXTY TWO."

Ok, good example. So our system will NOT count many of these units in PENDING SALES..I just checked. Many were signed into contract NOV 4th, 2008. So, here you have a situation where these would fall into our purgatory category, because it falls outside the preset limits that we define as necessary to be PENDING SALE.

Of course, it would have showed in the monthly broker update chart back when the status was changed, but it will not be part of ongoing measurement of pending sales because we would deem it as poisoning an otherwise very useful metric.

THanks Noah, that's good to know.
So it's not affecting current in contracts (at least not now, but did in '08 figures).
However, it is still stuck in purgatory and likely somewhat poisoning the inventory metric.....

Actually not poisoning, but shorting inventory..

It's more than shadow, I guess we scan call it ghost inventory? :)

its in purgatory because our system focuses only on data that is up to date, maintained by the broker and excludes listings that are stale and not being tended to because status likely changed..so we dont count those anywhere..so, yes, its not affecting current pending sales, but it did in '08 until either:

1) the broker didnt update it for 90 days
2) it was in contract state without a change or closing for 180 days

the reason we do this is to exclude poisonous data and to not degrade fresh data and to not make new changes in the market dilutive because you have very old data that may or may not be accurate. So you can accurately see changes as they happen..system is working wonderfully right now after we implemented the flow algo for governance. No one listing can be in two states at any given point in time. So we are never double counting anything. If anything, we have a listing in the wrong state until the real status comes in, which is usually max a few days by sharing system..90% of updates are daily. Some get lost in processing load issues at source

UD...appreciate the more detail on the parameters on pendings, points 1 and 2.

How about confirmation on the inventory effects. These 62 units have been basically missing from inventory totals since 2008 then?
{And I understand there is no real way to reconcile or fix this problem, but it can be quite an asterick to inventory figures)

Thoth, thanks for the kind words.

bjw2103: "inonada, why? The broker hoopla was mostly about strong activity at the new (lower) price levels. I didn't see much about strong price increases."

Call me gullible for believing what was coming out of the collective broker mouth. I distinctly recall the words "hot", "multiple bids", "above ask", etc. The fact that listing discount was so high surprised me given this backdrop. Of course, the collective broker pocket is more interested in volume rather than price, so the almost-double amount in those terms may have colored their opinion much more strongly than price.

JM: "inonada, this is my preferred metric as well specifically, median ppsf. We have been flat for some time and the "market is up and market is down" hoopla is noise from writers that don't really care to understand the data."

Agreed, flat is probably the most accurate description. Do you think "flat" will continue to describe the market for the rest of the year? You know I'm ascribe to the "flat for a decade" as the most likely scenario of how everything plays out, but the turn in sentiment combined with weak prices for the "last hurrah" of the Q1 2010 selling season increases for me the possibility of a measured 5-10% drop this year. On the other side is the juice of ultra-low rates...

And I understand nothing is double counted, but you do see how it affected both Pending Sales for 90 days in '08 (giving pending a higher total) while at the same time affecting Inventory in '08 (giving it a lower number) and indirectly...or directly rather double padding two metrics.
A plus one in pending Sales AND a negative one in Inventory causing a spread of 2 actually.

inonada, I hear that. Some brokers are rightfully called out for such shenanigans. On the other hand, some are too quick to blame them for everything, and you rightly state that in the end they actually care more about volume than sky-high prices. Commissions, even though reduced by ~20-25% are much better than no commission at all. It's more of a volume driven business than some realize.

"Agreed, flat is probably the most accurate description. Do you think "flat" will continue to describe the market for the rest of the year? You know I'm ascribe to the "flat for a decade" as the most likely scenario of how everything plays out, but the turn in sentiment combined with weak prices for the "last hurrah" of the Q1 2010 selling season increases for me the possibility of a measured 5-10% drop this year. On the other side is the juice of ultra-low rates..."

I'd guess right along those lines. A decade is too long for me to forecast with any degree of confidence, but near-term, not much to make one feel too bullish. But that should totally preclude one from looking for deals out there.

well these are the dynamics of the market. Listings go to contract, stay in contract, removed from active, etc..cant fault the data.

So what do you suggest? Its a NEW DEV problem as I discussed so many times. When you have listings a) not released in inventory, and b) not reported in contract accurately, you have problems. We had to remove these completely from our platform if they had no ACTIVE state prior to CS. Honestly, 62 listings going in and out of pending sales in a 6 month period likely would not affect the overall trend. So pending goes from 3100 to 3040, if all else stays the same. But this is how it is. If the last update is IN CONTRACT, and it was on the market prior, it should not be counted in ACTIVE.

"Who the f'k said this recession is over? Flmao. I believe even tulips had mini rallies! The smart ones sold into those."

true dat

"Agreed, flat is probably the most accurate description. Do you think "flat" will continue to describe the market for the rest of the year"

I think we're going to see couple point jumps up and down, as the mix shifts every quarter. Netting out relative flat a year from now.

Best quote yet about the economy - could easily be applied to NY RE.

"The question at this point now becomes whether the economy is a deer in the headlights (frozen in fear momentarily but with strong underlying fundamentals still largely in place) or roadkill."

i like that one... they do look awful similar...

Optimism definitely helped the last quarter. Question is, is it enough, or is there something else holding it up...

"You know I'm ascribe to the "flat for a decade" as the most likely scenario of how everything plays out, but the turn in sentiment combined with weak prices for the "last hurrah" of the Q1 2010 selling season increases for me the possibility of a measured 5-10% drop this year."

inonada, flat was my call about a year ago (can't find the post) and all of the bears said that was illogical. I don't see anything right now that would change my position, though I'm not ready to call the decade. I will continue to watch median ppsf however, as I think it is the best indicator for market movement.

"columbia, you might be right, but your permabear friends have been saying the same thing for years now. Here's some reading material while we wait:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sky_Is_Falling_(fable)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_who_cried_wolf"

LMAO

http://www.mortgage-x.com/trends.htm with mortgage rates at historically low levels, a "crash" in manhattan prices seems improbable at best...

> and all of the bears said that was illogical.

Untrue once again... unless you're not calling me or other bears bears anymore.

A year ago I was saying it could stay flat, it could go down, it could go up but nowhere near enough to cover the risk of the downside... and the risk of flat for a leveraged investment for a long period might have been an even bigger risk.

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_who_cried_wolf

The embarassing thing for the bulls here is that the analogies fall completely flat. Shameful that they don't get the irony.

In the story, the villagers actually pay attention to the warnings... which just happen to have been false. In reality, the bulls ignored the obvious warnings.

In this case, the bulls are the ones who got eaten...

And, same for the sky is falling. It actually did fall.
The embarrasing mistake was thinking that RE was as much as a given as the existence of the universe!

> LMAO

Oh, poor, poor juice, doesn't get the joke is on hhim.

Want the better analogy for RE....

sorry, bulls, but its...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes

Turns out, juice and the bull boys were naked all along....

UD, I don't have a real suggestion to fix or rectify, Im just shining a light on a flaw in inventory totals. Especially on SE.

>Honestly, 62 listings going in and out of pending sales in a 6 month period likely would not affect the overall trend<
Agreed, but this is just 1 building, 1 broker, one day. In past threads Ive posted or caught other brokers and/or buildings with massive "already in contract" listings.
Say 3 buildings like this a month....... no effect? 200 false in contracts when there is 700 to 1000 per month? But your catching these for the most part, as you've described....still these are 200 more missing from inventory. I think it's substancial.

I know we've had this arguement, actually more discussion on the topic before.

It must have some effect, or at least some brokers think it might.....why?.....Because Ive caught some dubious in contract listings/postings before and there is a trend. It's always done near the end of a quarter or at the beginning of a quarter.
Maybe brokerages are using it for in house reports to pump up their brokers, I don't know.

I think there will need to be some effort for a count on shadow inventory, at least a stage of shadow with a criteria.....like already built, has been in contract at least 180 days,etc.
Or maybe just call it the purgatory metric, with a number..lol.

Anyway, have a great weekend all. Stay safe.

"The embarassing thing for the bulls here is that the analogies fall completely flat. Shameful that they don't get the irony."

Just like you to miss the point. The moral very much applies to your brand of "discussion" here. The fun part is that it wasn't even a bull who offered the links.

"I think there will need to be some effort for a count on shadow inventory, at least a stage of shadow with a criteria.....like already built, has been in contract at least 180 days,etc."

agreed..discussed this on a thread recently, someone was suppose to start up an XLS file on documenting the new dev activity from start to finish..then they asked me to do it. No room for hat on my plate.

u2..thx and enjoy!

"A year ago I was saying it could stay flat, it could go down, it could go up but nowhere near enough to cover the risk of the downside.."

This pretty much sums up swe's predictions. Easy to see why he constantly takes credit for being right. Anyone else want to go out on a limb and say that the market will probably go up, down, or be flat?

"Untrue once again... unless you're not calling me or other bears bears anymore."

Difficult to believe I know swe, but there are other people on this board beside you.

JM, to be fair, I believe swe is saying that the downside risk is much greater than upside. At least that's how I interpret his/her statement. That is very different from your interpretation, which is saying swe did not give an actual opinion.

Also, quite a few bears here did not say it 'was illogical' to be flat, though not as likely. Someone did a survey here a while back, and many bears put some possibility that it could stay flat, even if not a high probability.

In any case, I still believe another 10 - 20% down is still very likely in the next couple of years.

"This pretty much sums up swe's predictions. Easy to see why he constantly takes credit for being right. Anyone else want to go out on a limb and say that the market will probably go up, down, or be flat"

Oh, Juice, poor, poor Juice... who only seems to be able to wake and and withstand the day by completely blocking out actual history. Including the time when a number of folks (including me) said the market would crash... and he said "not going to happen".

Oh, Juice, your life must be so pleasant when you can completely block out all the mistakes you've made.

Enjoy fantasyland!

> "Untrue once again... unless you're not calling me or other bears bears anymore."

> Difficult to believe I know swe, but there are other people on this board beside you.

Oh, Juice, so now you're having trouble with the meaning of words again? Is that how you cope, changing what they mean?

Here is the quote that was being responded to, and you conveniently left out...
"and all of the bears said that was illogical."

Juice, tell us what the word "all" means?

Difficult to believe, Juice, but you can't change the meaning of words because you got caught making a strawman again.

Poor swe, trying desperately to get us to say the "the bears were right" just as prices seem to be firming up, rents are increasing, and rates continue at historic lows. Isn't it clear that this renter is one nervous Nellie?

"Poor swe, trying desperately to get us to say the "the bears were right" just as prices seem to be firming up, rents are increasing, and rates continue at historic lows"

Poor, poor, juice, making more things up to cover his own mistakes.
Only because its been two years of you trying to pretend you didn't make your horrible calls.

And inferring that I'd doing it only *now* for some particularly reason is completely disingenous...

And inferring that what happens AFTER the crash makes your call that there would be no crash any more correct... wow, now THAT is wishing.

I've been laughing at the fact you got proven wrong for over a year now... this isn't anything new..

lol

swe...Juiceman is right....You are one nervous Nellie.

Juice - those factors are meaningless in the context of this heat wave. The extra $$ that people are spending on air conditioning will reduce disposable income, and should take at least an additional 5% off prices during the proximate dip.

wow, when steveF is on your side, you know you have problems...

SteveF, don't know anyone as freaked out as you, first trying to unload your condo and trying to singlehandedly prop the market up, then scrambling to get it on the stock rebound after it happened.

There isn't much to be nervous about when you call it right... I'm not underwater on a 10x leveraged asset!

Sunday? down 10-20% in the next few years? Are u kidding me? try ..up 10-20% in the next few years. I'll bet that prices double in the next 5-7 years.

SteveF, SO confident of his choices he ran off the board CRYING!

(and then came back and reversed his calls!)

rotfl!

> I'll bet that prices double in the next 5-7 years.

Ah, another SteveF prediction! I think thats means that prices have to halve in that time, going by his track record.