UD inventory below 8,000 - discuss.

hope?

Hope results in a approval rating under 50%.

Guess again.

Inventory now over 8K and should steadily rise.

Noah has a new article regarding inventory.I tried posting a comment there but it hung in refresh land and now I can't even get an urbandigs page. Too lazy to reboot my computer so I guess I'll post my questions to Noah here?

"What is the percentage rate of "in contracts" that go into closing? Surely there must be a rough percentage #. And if so, has the rate of failed closings increased over the last year?
How is that factored into figures if at all?
One single day in January saw over 20 new listings and with status "already in contract" at the Caledonia on Streeteasy. Streeteasy confirmed it was a caledonia glitch that since has not been corrected.This is not the only building with bulk in contract reportings. How are these "in contracts" treated in your tallies?"

I will speculate that panic sellers are chilling out thanks to the return of the dow and are staying put after not being able to sell their apartments. Ironically, this is a better time to list. Classic buy high-sell low mentality.

In most cases, if you are going to sell, you then have to either purchase or rent. Taking into consideration the transaction costs, in this environment, stagnation wins. As far as developers go, they will hold out as long as the banks allow. The banks are too busy short selling, foreclosing and divying up bonus money. All told, not much inventory....but just wait.

Noah adjusted the widget, and it looks like its a better measure (though runs a little lower than older measure). Great.

Of course, important to note.... inventory is still WAY high by historical standards.

"Of course, important to note.... inventory is still WAY high by historical standards."

It definitely was when we were over 10,000. Still historically on the high side at 8,000, but much more in line with what we've seen in the past. If it gets back up to 10,000, then we're talking.

It'll be around 9K within 4 weeks.

truthsekker - hmm, not sure..but Ill try to get a tool up on the new site that can track that.

Kewl, will look for it.
Unfortunately, without a success or failure percentage rate of "in contracts." This number will always be suspect and at the mercy of those who may seek to manipulate a current trend.
Not a good thing in such a key component for market gauging.

but signed continues to significantly lag new listings: for the last 30 days--391 more new listings then signings yet inventory has not gone up by that much. clear sign of people pulling listings for whatever reason

It's not a clear sign of anything.
The caledonia example I cited for example.
In one day they put up over 20 "new listings" and deemed them "already in contract."
And that's why keep asking Noah and streeteasy how are these treated.
I know when a listing goes to "in contract" it is removed from "inventory."
So in this particular case,do these 20 go to the "new listings" tally yet don't increase total inventory tally. And that's if these listings are even legit and don't end up listing removed instead of sold for 90+ days!!

Click on each "listings in contract to see what I'm talking about.
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/building/the-caledonia

example apt 2506
01/05/2010 Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by Related Sales at $2,170,000.

i see what you're saying;as you point out absent any data about this type of transaction, its impossible to know if this is so prevalent as to be affecting the totals.

Nice jump this week in inventory.

It was all so knowable that inventory would bump prior to bonuses as the siren song of bankers trying to outbid each other grew louder in the media and brokerspeak.

So Id say 11k bf summer. Rents continue freefall, sellers finally get broker's advice is worth about a car salesman and start getting serious. Another leg down on sales numbers (prices) for two more quarters signals 'capitulation' mentality for anyone who thought this was just a pricing 'break'. Lemming buyers start 'whispering' to friends of their mistake, another buyer's strike in fall/spring 2011, leads to only desperate sellers/bk/short sales as 'mkt' for a few quarters. Slow grind in prices for 2to3 years. Rents may firm one or two quarters signaling a 'false' bottom. Premature equity buys again in this period but will earn just cost of capital in the 5 yr ownership experince.

Funny truthseeker, my wife knows a guy that worked on the set of tropic thunder. Apparently they decamped in a house in kapaa, where they split the $4k/month per person housing stipend amongst the 4 of them for a $1k/month rental. Nice $3.75k 'salary' pickup. :) $200mm budget, but well worth it for the 'full retard'scene alone. Haha.

> In one day they put up over 20 "new listings" and deemed them "already in contract."

There is shadow inventory for you....

How much does rent cost while you wait 1, 2, 3... 5 yrs in anticipation of those last few points of correction? How much additional correction do you need in order to make the wait worthwhile?

Spin, I know that I am a special case as a buyer, but I dont rent while I wait...The foreign buyers can also wait.

You are in a unique situation mimi and the clear advantage goes to you and others like you. But paying Mnh rents and betting that further corrections will offset those costs to the extent that it's financially worthwhile to do so seems a long shot at best. Unless of course you are not in a position to buy anyway, in which case you have no choice.

"How much additional correction do you need in order to make the wait worthwhile?"

That's an easy one. Zero. Cost to rent is less than cost to buy, so if there with no correction you come out ahead every month. If you can save on monthly cost for 1, 2, 3... 5 yrs and then buy at today's price (i.e., no further correction) that's much better than buying today. The right question is not how much additional correction do you need, it is how much must the property appreciate in order for buying today to make sense with 1, 2, 3... 5 yrs of hindsight.

Bingo. Renters are being paid to wait.

I've said it a number of times, its not "oh the market is guaranteed to go lower". Its just that the odds of it going up with any significance are low, and we're being paid to see if there will be further declines. Not a bad place to be.

You're assuming your rent and buy properties will be equal, which I think is rarely the case.

hahhahahahaaaaaa....... four walls, a roof, doorman, water, toilet, closets.... you're right renting FEELS so so so different than "owning."

In economics the "substitute" for owning would be...... ?????? So your argument is NOTHING LIKE owning... that's like saying my 30 ft boat is "special" and I don't need the 50footer, even if its newer, faster and (wait for it)... ( wait for it)....CHEAPER!

Well, if they're not - I'm assuming you mean you'll rent a crappier place - then its *even more* slanted toward renting.

In the end, the rent buy calculations says you can pay less for the same thing renting vs. buying, or get more for the same dollar.

Either way, sounds like a pretty nice deal while you wait it out.

spinnaker, I think that's a bit of tough case to make. I'd say on average, there's a lot more crappy rentals, so it certainly seems that way at times, but there are definitely quality rentals out there too, so it's definitely doable if you're willing to spend the money. I also feel like I was willing to spend less on renting than on mortgage+maint (hence my belief that most people are willing to pay a premium to own, albeit much less than what it had come to be in many apartments), so the quality perception suffers because of that as well. Having said that (I can no longer use this phrase without laughing thanks to Larry David), for all those looking for the mythical "cheaper to own than to rent" example, here's a pretty good one in my neck of the woods: http://streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/590534-rental-72-berry-street-williamsburg-brooklyn

So give us some numbers 67th. Are the four of you crammed into a 2br and therefore the longer you wait for 3br prices to drop is money in your pocket? That makes sense.

One problem though is primo uws 3br's are selling rather well at 1000psf+, so unless you're eyeballing the fringes I'm not so sure the wait is any guarantee.

actually, spin, it's not hard at all now to rent a very nice condo. at much less than it would cost you monthly, after taxes, if you bought. you might have a better argument if there seemed to be something that would propel rents upward in the near to medium term. and for some, the interest rate might be compelling. otherwise, no harm in sitting tight.

w67
I think robert Downey jr is one o fthe best actors of my genenration.
How many can get away with playing a role in black face today.

spin spin suga
you took a side remark of w67 and turned this into another buy vs rent thread.

Let's keep this puppy focused on inventory

sorry truthskr. thought this was kind of interesting. on the "already in contract" theme, a number of units "went on the market" today at 100 eleventh. including this one, 15C. lots more of this to come, i think, but this is at a much talked about starchitecture building, in the much hyped high-line area.

10/02/2009Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by Corcoran at $5,800,000.
01/15/2010Listed by Prudential Elliman at $5,800,000.

All depends on which bldgs you're focusing on. W67 can absolutely rent for cheaper where he wants to buy. You, spinny, not so much.

aboutready
Ya Caledonia is just one building I remembered. This nonsense goes on in a ton of buildings.
Nice find, 100 eleventh is likely to follow caledonia's smoke and mirror "our building is special and it's own market" routine.

Problem is without clarity and breakdown on "in contracts" figures, it's a poo poo stat.

truthskr, i know. and just think, it's so much clearer than it used to be. the building that is currently on the top of my list for lack of clarity is the visionaire. from not listing unit numbers to recording the sales at the wrong address they are doing their absolute best to ensure people don't have a clue what's going on.

Actually let's be fair with 100 eleventh.
Looks like their first closing is that 22pha on 12/2009.
Let's give this building a month or 2 and see how many of the 33 in contracts close.

truthskr, that's why this is so surprising. can you recall another building that openly started relisting units that fell out of contract before they had gone through and closed all that they could?

one madison. but that's not a nice comparison.

A year ago, the SE crowd had a pool of when the inventory would hit 11,000. Nobody would have believed it would go below 8,000 so soon. Still probably a lot of shadow inventory out there, but there was back then too.

aboutready

I'd have to really think about them,the problem is the listings in contract category is a floating column and not a permanent fixture in streeteasy. So if a broker/sponsor delisted these units or changed them in some way out of "in contract," that 20 unit list of "listings in contract" is gone. Leaving you the only option of going to each and every individual unit and reading it's individual history, a daunting task.

Another 11th ave building (200 11th) that I thought may have be doing the same but memory is failing me so I couldn't say for sure. I'd have to click on each individual prior listing and check it's history and match up dates.
One amusing unit's history from 2007 in that building showed this history
10N
StreetEasy History
05/11/2007Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by Prudential Elliman at $6,490,000.
06/26/2007Price increased by 10% to $7,139,000.
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/88530-condo-200-eleventh-avenue-chelsea-new-york
So it was listed in May, but already in contract, didn't close apparantly and a price increase and still in the listings in contract column here in 2010. So I'm left wondering, how is even this unit's existence treated. Is it included in current streeteasy figures as "in contract?" Is in the main RE database as well and included in Noah's figures?" Is it in shadow inventory?
It certainly leaves this area of information a ripe venue for broker/sponsor shenanigans in creating a 2/3 month window of false market conditions, especially for that specific building and to a smaller extent total figures on the month for total market data. But if a major broker added 10 to 20% of false "in contracts" to most of their buildings, that "smaller extent" get a bit larger.

I remember the building Loft 14 for 2 years was always making sure they had at least 3 units listed "in contract." As many of the units were identical, trying to create a false "action" in the building.
Every unit was also listed twice, with secondary listings having an "A" after the floor #.
A couple units have now since managed to close, and all the "a's" at the end of the duplicate listings were removed (except for unit 7) and I guess have been changed to RES#?
I don't know, I'm not the real estate listing police, but in my quest for truth I come across some really shady sh#t.

Here is a classic bait and switch. Car dealer lists a car very competitively. You come in they say 'oooops just sold that car wih those options and in the advertised color and sold for $3k more bc two ppl bid on it'. Then spend 2 hours with you negotiating on your next favorite color. If your deal starts to fall apart... A salesguy comes in and whispers something. The manager says 'oh that guy couldn't get financing, if you pay the $3k over we'll sell it to you, otherwise I'll call the 2ns bidder.'.

Now tell me, do you think desperate developers/sellers/borkers r above the fray? Hahahahaha. On a macro level, data cannot be manipulated excep when you stop mkt to mkt for banks. Flmao. Forget the data, go with the 'force' by which I mean 'w67'. It is so easy to see sell mkt cannot stabilize bf rents which are in freefall and carrying costs of purchase which will go up with taxes/+ ir. So so easy to see.

"A year ago, the SE crowd had a pool of when the inventory would hit 11,000. Nobody would have believed it would go below 8,000 so soon."

partially because they changed the way it is measured, which dropped a lot of listings from the count.

don't look now, it just went up again...

on UD look at the inventory numbers (1 day, 7 days, 30 days): the ratios are not pretty. Although I do have to say UD umber are at least a bit buggy when the 30 day inventory is listed at 7,998, today's inventory is listed as 8,147, but the chart immediately below is has the change in inventory for 30 days as DOWN 2.61%. One of the figures has to be wrong.

30yrs
Maybe one is reflecting corrections to the tallies and the other is not?

Another thing I noticed was "1 day new listings" seemed traditionaly heaviest at the beginning of the week (particularly mondays) but since the new year, it's been the end of the week (thurs,fri).
Today has 190 new listings!
This signals to me (and highly speculative on my part) that there is a lot of inventory playing chicken with the market and last minute deciding of, "let' catch this weekend's traffic, I don't want to wait."
We may be in for an avalanche of inventory sonner than later.

________________1-day 7-day 30-day
New Listings ______190___486__1,385
Price Cuts _______3 ____36 ___168
Contracts Signed ___30 ___136 __625
Total Inventory __8,338 8,179 8,004

UD snapshot Jan 22,2010

Another building with the "already in contract" new listing.

This time it's Core Group

52 east 4th st #5S

StreetEasy History
05/07/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by Luxury Lofts & Homes at $1,325,000.
09/24/2009Listed by CORE at $1,195,000.
12/07/2009Luxury Lofts & Homes Listing is no longer available.
12/11/2009Price decreased by 4% to $1,150,000.
01/13/2010Listing entered contract.
01/21/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,150,000.

unit # 4N
StreetEasy History
05/08/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $1,095,000.
09/22/2009CORE Listing sold.
09/22/2009Previous Sale recorded for $(insiders only)
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,095,000.

unit#4s
StreetEasy History
05/08/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $675,000.
07/08/2008CORE Listing entered contract.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $675,000.

Same old questions. What does this do to new "in contract" figures?

53 Warren st Core Group again

#4
StreetEasy History
05/09/2009Previously Listed by CORE at $1,750,000.
05/14/2009CORE Listing sold.
08/18/2009Previous Sale recorded for $(insiders only)
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,750,000.

#2
StreetEasy History
08/07/2009Previous Sale recorded for $(insiders only)
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,750,000.

#3
StreetEasy History
08/19/2009Previous Sale recorded for $(insiders only)
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,950,000.

141 Fifth yep, Core group
#9
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,525,000.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,525,000.

#5
StreetEasy History
05/07/2008Listed by CORE at $1,825,000.
05/23/2008Listing entered contract.
01/21/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,825,000.

#25
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,725,000.
01/21/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,725,000.

#21
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $2,750,000.
05/23/2008CORE Listing entered contract.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,750,000.

#6
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $2,825,000.
10/17/2008CORE Listing entered contract.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,825,000.

#10
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,875,000.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,875,000.

#39
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Listed by CORE at $3,150,000.
09/30/2009Listing entered contract.
01/21/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $3,150,000.

#7
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $3,200,000.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $3,200,000.

#20
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $3,700,000.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $3,700,000.

#24
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $3,800,000.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $3,800,000.

#36
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $4,100,000.
03/14/2008CORE Listing entered contract.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $4,100,000.

Streeteasy, Caledonia listings by Related was the same situation. You reported that Related claimed it was a glitch in their system. Apparantly Core has the same "glitch?"

If this is a widespread practice and I suspect it may be, it is an open door for manipulating "in contract" figures by brokers and developers, making that stat for you and UD falsely high.
It is also not a new "glitch" which means previous "in contract" are innacurate.
Without a tracking of "in contracts" to "closed" or "sold" percentage rate included in figures, this category is useless.

so "in contrat" numbers are inflated?

Hell of a week for Core. Those folks should take the rest of the first quarter off.

LOL...ya think?
Just want to have a thread that has a snapshot of padding in the act. Will revisit in 3 months and see how many actually closed.
I think a necessary stat is a percentage of "in contracts" that "close"
example
Jan 40% Feb 43% etc.
Listings are already somewhat tracked, following one to the end provides a lot clearer snapshot of the market for a prior quarter, rather than guessing what the market is by assembling 5 different stats.

Call it failure rate,... or hit rate,(red zone,green zone) whatever spin anyone wants to put on it.

I'll try not to to full retard on your thread.

Growing up in the 80's, on every corner was a 3 card Monty tble. Randomly 3/4 fluffers would start playing, and then a 'crowd' would gather. One of the players would win like $400. He'd leave and the dealer would say 'next person'. Some kanadian tourist would plunk down his renovation budget and loose it all. Everyone, me included knew that kanadian was the 'mark'.

The NYC re mkt of today reminds me of those good ole days. Ha.

Too many oooooooooooooo sorry

LOL, you made me think of one of my 3 monte experiences.

I was living in queens and came into the city with another friend and got roped in. I kept telling him don't do it,your gonna get fleeced. The fluffers were really bad too, I would have laughed out loud if I weren't scared (keep in mind we were 15). He plops down $20, wins $40. I keep telling him let's go. Plops the $40 back down and wins $80. Cops come jogging towards the table and the montes dismantle in 3 seconds flat. One guy grabs the cards, the other tosses the mock table top cardboard box to the curb, and everyone parts in different directions like cockroaches.
We duck into a store with the $80. One of the fluffers is tailing us. We get outside and I'm flagging a cab. As the fluffer is closing the gap on us now my friend is nervous and I'm bold. The fluffer is saying you have to give back the money and I'm yelling get in!
Friend pussied out and gave him the $60 back.
I was so pissed.

30 YRS - yea something is off with that widget and chart system. The new system is totally different, broker sharing system is source, data is updated real time about 6 times a day, and we are putting way more time into building the platform right so everything is more accurate...taking a long time to get it right, but I think new system will be worth it

Some more possible padding to "in contracts" figures;

Core again, the building, William Beaver House

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/building/william-beaver-house

44a
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Listed by CORE at $3,100,000.
05/07/2008Listing entered contract.
01/31/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $3,100,000

44c
StreetEasy History
02/16/2007Previously Listed by Corcoran at $1,325,000.
06/13/2007Corcoran Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $1,395,000.
02/14/2008Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,820,000.
01/31/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,534,500.

17e
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,925,000.
01/31/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,925,000.

36a
StreetEasy History
02/16/2007Previously Listed by Corcoran at $1,815,000.
06/18/2007Corcoran Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $1,890,000.
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,145,000.
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,890,000.

24a
StreetEasy History
02/16/2007Previously Listed by Corcoran at $1,635,000.
06/18/2007Corcoran Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $1,695,000.
02/14/2008Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,850,000.
01/31/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,695,000.

28b
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,360,000.
01/31/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,360,000.

29c
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,420,000.
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,298,000.

34b
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,422,500.
10/26/2009CORE Listing sold.
10/26/2009Previous Sale recorded for $(insiders only)
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,298,000.

34g
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,322,500.
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,221,000.

25b
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,260,000.
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,199,000.

23c
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,270,000.
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,193,000.

15c
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,170,000.
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,170,000.

33b
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,410,000.
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,155,000.

11c
StreetEasy History
05/13/2008Listed by CORE at $1,132,500.
06/16/2008Listing entered contract.
01/31/2010Also Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,132,500.

27g
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,235,000.
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,122,000.

15f
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,147,500.
01/31/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,056,000.

there's some weird shit going down at the beav. recently there was a bulk sale to some llc that seems to be having some success flipping the units (foreign marketing, maybe?). maybe this reflects another bulk sale of units that were once in contract but that never closed.

core just doesn't scream integrity to me.

aboutready

I am just creating snapshots of "in contracts" that are suspect so it can be revisited 60/90 days later to see if they close. If these listing statuses are changed, they won't be in a neat pile on the building's streeteasy page at that future time.

As some shils may use "in contracts" to suggest a market change, would like to know what affect these listings, or shall we call them shillings, are having.

In this particular building, yes your explanations are certainly possible. Add to the list, bulk sale to a rental management company as well.

Case in point, the Caledonia which started me on this endless dig, had over 20 units in contract.
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/17573-caledonia-has-record-day

Have since removed all those listings (only showing 1 in contract now). So are those 20+ still in UD's january total of 700 contracts for January?...were they adjusted?... or did they never make the tally?
------------------1-day 7-day 30-day
Contracts Signed----8-----172---700

And yes 20 alone are not that big a deal on 700, but those are the only 20 I caught. These 30+ core listings make that total over 50. (again if they are indeed shillings)
Now I did these with just new listings and already in contract. How many were done in another way?

I think streeteasy,urbandigs,and whomever is using "in contract" figures will need to find a way towards better verification methods somehow.

It's being done with inventory figures. UD shows active at 8466 today, streeteasy shows around 11,400.
So weeding out the listings (and if it was done accurately) shows a false rate difference of 26%!
Imagine if that's the case for in contracts.

I have active inventory in my beta site at 7,833 listings...just to add one more metric to the fire. We spent a looong time though focusing only on data accuracy and how to correctly measure these new data tools I will soon launch

2 sneak peaks on my latest post on urbandigs.com

http://www.urbandigs.com/2010/02/manhattan_markets_things_keep.html

it will never be perfect and will never be 100% real time to the hour. But get us to 92-95% and limit the lag to 1-2 days max, and you are fairly on top of things real time!

Noah
And it is greatly appreciated. So the divide is even greater in the listings figure.
How will and if at all will you or can you address in contract figures, a category instrumental for real time or near real time market assesments? Would be more than satisfied with an over 90% accuracy in this category.
In contracts seems to be the most available area to manipulate and the toughest to reign in for obvious reasons.
Maybe an in contract failure rate figured on previous months and quarters will "help" for an adjustment?

didn't realize we hit 8500 again...

http://www.urbandigs.com/charts.html

discuss.

;-)

Well if you read what Noah wrote, it is soon to be adjusted to 7833, so one end of the spectrum is going to come to us "cleaned up"(inventory), but the other end will seem to remain "dirty" (in contracts).

This may actually serve to make market conditions less accurate.

> it is soon to be adjusted to 7833

Yes, but you have to compare apples to apples. You can't compare the 7800 to the "under 8000" of the post, nor to previous highs/lows.

The measure talked about in the OP is the one that has jumped since.

I'm all for more accurate measures, but you need to compare like measures to see time effects.

Surprisingly, quite a bit of activity: http://www.urbandigs.com/2010/02/manhattan_markets_things_keep.html

Actually, it's more average. With 8000-9000 closings per month that averages to 708 per month.
The 30 day average is showing 716.
Don't start dancing on rooftops yet ;)

" Recall that Manhattan averages about 8,000-9,000 closings a year (around 708 contracts signed a month) and it was only the euphoric peak year of 2007 that saw over 13,000 closings (or about 1083 contracts signed a month on average)"

------------------1-day 7-day 30-day
New Listings---------35---439--1,836
Price Cuts-------------2----34---203
Contracts Signed-------21---170---716
Total Inventory -----8,421--8,452-8,178

UD snapshot feb 2,2010

truth, better to post the whole paragraph, no?

"The point is there is action out there. Not everything sells at once and to see weekly contracts signed trends at or above 225 or so is very healthy! Recall that Manhattan averages about 8,000-9,000 closings a year (around 708 contracts signed a month) and it was only the euphoric peak year of 2007 that saw over 13,000 closings (or about 108 contracts signed a month on average). Given the seasonality of our markets and that we are in the active time of year, its healthy to see this level of activity this time of year. This is especially true when considering where we came from and the delayed seasonality effect that we experienced due to our markets adjustment process late 2008 into early 2009."

I'm not dancing on any rooftops - I'd actually prefer to pick up a place on the cheap, but it's ultimately self-defeating to turn a deaf ear to what's actually going on out there.

Who's turning a deaf ear? I just don't put much stock in a single months activity, in either direction.
And Ive been consistent on that, I find quarterly info much more important.
With the crazy year that it's been, seasonality is less a factor imho.

I'd rather overpay 10% when the market is for sure on the way up than gamble to save 10% or worse for a blip.

As a buyer, it is not discouraging to see a stable month, but that's all it is, a month. And "average" in the face of manipulating market factors that aren't going to last (interst rates,etc) is not encouraging either.

And still #1 on my list is the rental market.We can play with metrics all we like but if this market cannot remain stable for a quarter, sales cannot stabilize.

truthskr, definitely did not mean you specifically were turning a deaf ear (my apologies for not being clear) - I was referring to a certain cadre of posters who would likely knee-jerk dismiss this or ignore it altogether. The point is that this isn't just a "single month"'s worth of activity - this has been going on for the better part of a year now. It's really impossible to deny that the more recent pricing levels are attractive to a healthy number of buyers, which is a good thing. Of course, that doesn't preclude another leg down, but it does lower the odds of that happening anytime soon.

"I'd rather overpay 10% when the market is for sure on the way up than gamble to save 10% or worse for a blip."

I understand this sentiment, I really do, but I think it assumes that there will be a lot more clarity in the future than there ever has been. How will you know "for sure" that the market is on the way up? If there's virtually no perceived risk, chances are you'll be paying a lot more than you think. And no, I'm not saying there will be another bubble; I'm saying there will always be risk, so the chances of your feeling that confident are slim.

"definitely did not mean you specifically " well since I am most assuredly hogging this thread like I imagine Rex Ryan at the salad bar (love you Rex), it may have seemed that way.

I do however see the first 6 months as a tsunami, the last six months as the wave pull back, with a second wave size to be determined, but a definite second wave.
The flipping investor is shell shocked. The rental market is trading at near the worst level we've ever had (rent to sale multiple),and the commercial market is only beginning. The commercial market includes all those 10,20,40 unit apartment buildings as well as the high rises. No one will pay premiums for buildings with rent controlled tenants for at least 4 years. And if those commercial lofts stay empty long enough and get cheap enough, people will buy them and convert them to residential.
Tax benefits are shrinking, you know some units I used to look at and think, ok the taxes are high but the cc ain't so bad, I can deduct it.....no ..ooops, forgot about the AMT tax. And we are not done. We have a government that thinks all of us in ny are high flying bankers and 250K a year is the same here as it is in missouri. We have at least three more years of this attitude. And oh yeah, mortgage rates are below 5%! How long will that last? I won't even touch Jobs.

And yes, I was guilty of thinking the correction would be fast and furious. It might have been healthier if it were. But it's not happening. And with this lesson I learned a recovery is going to be just as slow.

So how do I know when we are on the way up? Can't say with 100% certainty. I do know what I'm renting right now destroys any comparable to what I want to buy. ANd that mentality is slow to appreciate but I cannot deny the clarity. The difference in "pressure" between having a lot of cash in bank and being able to move in three months time anywhere I want far outweighs the benfit of "having my home" while thinking about what if this or that go wrong and need cash or have to sell with my aprtment on the market for 6.9,12 months.

NYC re is like Robert Downey junior, After the sex tape and first re-hab. There was a 50/50 chance he'd end up dead. It took several more rehabs bf he cleaned up.

Continuing the analogy, we just saw the sex tape and 50% of population doesn't think it's Downey cause the angle is bad on the film.

Oh crap I'm getting old, that was Ron lowe. Hahaha

Haha....well Youngblood was a great movie.
Keanu Reaves at his best, only 2 lines and playing a faux frog(canadian) goalie.

Inventory number seems to have just hit, up another 50-75 or so this week.

Actually now that I think about it, seasonality aside it's not even an average month unless 100% of those in contracts close.
There's that pesky in conrtracts to actual closing elephant in the room.
Can we assume at least 10% of in contracts don't close? 15%? 20%?

I think for future widget tallies, Noah, it may be advantageous to include closings with the other stats?
-------------------1 day---7 day---30day
New Listings
Price Cuts
Contracts Signed
Closings/sold
Total Inventory

Whatever makes the trend more accurate....no?

"Actually now that I think about it, seasonality aside it's not even an average month unless 100% of those in contracts close.
There's that pesky in conrtracts to actual closing elephant in the room.
Can we assume at least 10% of in contracts don't close? 15%? 20%?"

Based on what? We're comparing signed contracts across periods, no? Unless you're arguing there's a disproportionate number of contracts signed now that don't close? I'd believe that maybe 12 months ago, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that it's unusually high at this moment.

Are you kidding? You don't see how 10% of in contracts don't close for some reason in any time period?
Poor financials? coop rejection? change of heart?
How about the 30 or so in contracts I posted on this thread? You think they are all closing? I bet 50% of them dont' close in the next 6 months days. I'll bet $1000 on it.
Now where and how they live in the data for streeteasy,UD, J Miller, I have no idea.

Let's look at the one of many I posted
141 Fifth yep, Core group
#9
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,525,000.
01/21/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,525,000.

This unit padded '08 numbers and now it will '09. You don't see that?

"We're comparing signed contracts across periods, no?"
Yes of course, and it's obvious that contracts signed in jan and closings in jan are different inventory. But it is useful to have them as a running total month to month.
And it's useful to show the running average percent of failed or succesful closings.
This very metric would have obviously explained the strong 3Q '09 to the poor 1Q and 2ndQ '09.

Corrections
"This unit padded '08 numbers and now it will '09. You don't see that?"

This unit padded '08 numbers, '09 numbers and likely '10 numbers. You don't see that?

"Are you kidding? You don't see how 10% of in contracts don't close for some reason in any time period?"

No, that's not what I'm saying. There will almost always be signed contracts that don't close for a number of reasons. My point is, we're looking at signed contracts over time, so you'd have to make a case for there being an unusually high number of broken contracts now relative to other time periods, which I'm not convinced is the case. I thought you were arguing that the signed contracts Noah reported was somehow inflated relative to the reported average figures.

"How about the 30 or so in contracts I posted on this thread? You think they are all closing? I bet 50% of them dont' close in the next 6 months days. I'll bet $1000 on it."

If those contracts were actually signed now and the building doesn't explode, I'd take that bet. But I'd agree there's something fishy going on at that place, though there are people living in the building (I work in the area).

Yeah it's easy for things to get lost in translation. In addition, I think many momentarily interchange new contracts figures with closings figures.

My point was January's NEW CONTRACTS was 700. And if they 100% close whether 30,60 160 days from now yes it meets the average. Meaning, if as Noah said manhattan average CLOSINGS is 8000 to 9000 per year (avg 708 per month) It is an average month. If less than 100% of those contracts close, it is less than average (and seasonality aside).
Over the course of a year(s) figures, an average has to develop.
And I have to believe as reasons given in earlier posts all contracts don't go to close. I have a good 60 apartments Ive been tracking on my personal page. Around 50%, that's right 50% of those that went "to contract" have not closed. Some back on the market, some off the market, and some went to rent.
I'm not suggesting the all of NYC's failure rate is 50%, just my great luck. But is has to at least to me be a bare minimum 10% and especially this year.

Then add the erroneous or dubious listings and they are a factor as well. At the early part of this thread I mentioned the Caledonia. It had 20 units listed and listed as already in contract. I even had a thread on it. Meanwhile these 20 go to january's NEW CONTRACTS figure. Now we are in February. Apparantly those listings were in error and since removed. So they inflated January NEW CONTRACTS figures, never affected new listings figures because when a unit goes in contract it's removed from inventory. As these units were ALREADY IN CONTRACT they never show in TOTAL INVENTORY figures.
Now this is a sample of supposed or seemingly erroneous listings.

THen I went on to find if you really read this thread (and just the ones I found) some 30 listings or IN CONTRACTS in several buildings by CORE. Which I consider of the dubious kind which will remain to be seen.

That's 50 in contracts for January, that are questionable at best, and only the ones that were glaring.

PS- you gave the Shil Shil-er thread credit for backing up his blog posting with some facts and research. Please note my data is not out of the air. :)

"My point is, we're looking at signed contracts over time, so you'd have to make a case for there being an unusually high number of broken contracts now relative to other time periods, which I'm not convinced is the case. I thought you were arguing that the signed contracts Noah reported was somehow inflated relative to the reported average figures."

To reemphasize the point, yes we are looking at signed contracts over time, but they come home to roost eventually, and will fall into a spot of a monthly average, especially over a year. And '09 probably had the highest number of broken contracts in 10 years. (there was a graph somewhere reflecting so and Im sure Noah would acknowledge the point)

yes closings will be there! as well as offer accepted/contracts out, but those are minimal...

truth, sorry, I think we're mostly in agreement here; I'm admittedly not always as clear as I could be. There's definitely some easy fudging of inventory and contract numbers that goes on - it's one of the many reasons I am uneasy about contract data to begin with, and I would almost never use it to get a sense of current pricing. One of the problems is we're dealing with so many different brokerages (let alone actual brokers), and they never do the same things. I know my building has always been reflected accurately (and fairly timely) in terms of inventory, but others have been way off. It hurts the integrity of data, to be sure. And your data are definitely not out of the air - if anything, you've shown to be one of the better posters here and it's much appreciated :)

9000x10 years= 90K units traded btwn 2000 to 2010 in nyc re. What is the total unit stock in manhattan? anyone know?

Does anyone know how many helocs were done in manhattan during 2000 to 2010? you see where I am getting at?

hmmm, good questoin W67th...maybe around a total of 300,000 coop + condo total units, mostly coop obviously? Maybe another 850,000-900,000 rental units?

this was from a conversation with JM in mid 2008

http://www.urbandigs.com/2008/06/the_manhattan_inventory_argume.html

So 30% traded in that time, now it seems to me in certain bldgs the same units traded maybe 2 to 3x in that same time period... so it could be that the $1000psf proclamations could be based upon maybe 10 to 20% of the entire "own" stock and probably in the MOST bubbly/investor/high # transaction type of bldgs.. hmmmmmm.. met thinkz another nail in the coffin in NYC, especially given 850K rentals probably did not change hands as much and given most of the old time "rental" bldgs' cost basis is very low, i.e. these LLs can cut rentals to the bone and still be "profitable."

in closing, get more popcorn.

Back to my original post...seems like dip below 8,000 was seasonal/holiday. We seem to be full steam ahead to a major depreciation.

As for the home equity issue, the majors (Citi, BAC, JPM) each have over $100 Billion of HELOC exposure. Upside is that they have been cutting these lines to protect themselves.

Sorry positivecarry, I kind of hijacked your thread, but it is related. If all these units are falsely in contract they are creeping out of the shadow, and their rightful place should be inventory totals...no?
Because they are "in contract" they don't go to inventory tally.

Core just added another boat load for 15 William Beaver House;

14g
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,022,500.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,022,500.

40a
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,750,000.
10/29/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,185,000.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,185,000.

42a
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $2,900,000.
03/05/2008CORE Listing entered contract.
10/16/2009Previous Sale recorded for $(insiders only)
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,900,000.

9d
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $945,000.
05/07/2008CORE Listing entered contract.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $945,000.

24b
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,247,500.
10/20/2009CORE Listing sold.
10/20/2009Previous Sale recorded for $(insiders only)
01/13/2010Previous Sale recorded for $(insiders only)
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,247,500.

11d
StreetEasy History
05/13/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $965,000.
02/03/2009CORE Listing entered contract.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $965,000

41c
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $1,595,000.
06/16/2008CORE Listing entered contract.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,595,000.

24g
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,147,500.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,147,500.

22g
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $1,122,500.
03/05/2008CORE Listing entered contract.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,122,500.

17b
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,200,000.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,025,000.

8c
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $1,095,000.
05/26/2009CORE Listing is no longer available.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,095,000.

31f
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,362,500.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,362,500.

14d
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $985,000.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $985,000.

8d
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $935,000.
05/26/2009CORE Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $885,000.
05/27/2009Previously Listed in StreetEasy, but temporarily delisted, by Prodigy International at $0.
10/20/2009Prodigy International Listing sold. Last priced at $935,000.
10/20/2009Previous Sale recorded for $(insiders only)
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $885,000

39e
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,350,000.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,350,000.

7d
StreetEasy History
05/10/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $995,000.
05/26/2009CORE Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $945,000.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $945,000.

8g
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed by CORE at $960,000.
06/16/2008CORE Listing entered contract.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $960,000.

That's 17 more units to the already 16 units from 4 days ago.

And folks, I don't think some of you realize this has a doubling affect on falsifying market data.

These 33 units have a 66 unit divide. They raise the in contract column and at the same time subtract from the inventory column.

truth, I believe Streeteasy keeps the listings in inventory even when in contract, no?

For sure in the search listings metric as well as duplicates, but I don't know about everywhere else, like their quarterly reports, etc.
For sure Noah confirmed for UD any listing in contract is not in inventory.

bjw, you just run a search excluding properties in contract if you want to compare apples to apples. but if that number is being defalted by properties that are no longer in contract and thus should be moved to active inventory, then it is deceptive.

correct, the SE should have a rule that active inventory excludes listings whose status was changed from active to contract signed, pom, tom, etc

The golden question for you Noah which you've never really answered.

Are these types of "new contracts" entering your monthly metrics and totals?

example
40a
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,750,000.
10/29/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,185,000.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,185,000.

Did this make it as a new contract in your FEB 08 total? your October '08 total? And now in your FEB '10 total?

ar, thanks. Does SE not move broken contracts back to active inventory? Glad that Noah is addressing all the stuff at least.

UD snapshot Feb 4,2010

-----------------1d 7d 30day
Contracts Signed 14 201 748

William Beaver House alone has 33 "new contracts" in 7 days which are highly suspect. You have 201 new contracts in the last 7 days. These 33 represent over 15% of the new contracts in the last 7 days, just in one bulding.

UD snapshot Feb 4,2010
Total Inventory 8,495 8,466 8,222
If these 33 don't close (and highly likely most won't) they are certainly 33 + 8495= 8528.

I understand the concept of shadow inventory, but here we have a double whammy. Inflated in contracts along with the shadow.

Keeping the inventory sharp and kept without in contracts sharp and kept(granted don't see what solution could be implemented)actually makes the market picture less accurate.

sorry must have missed your questions...let me check, hang tight

I have 40A status changed from

TEMP OFF MARKET on June 19th, 2007 To CONTRACT SIGNED on June 20, 2007

After that, there is a repeated listing update of CONTRACT SIGNED every 7 days and last update of CS on Dec 29th, 2009.

28B - same thing
37C - same thing
28C - same thing

20G - CS on May 20th, 2007, then same pattern as above.

So, our system ignores repeat status updates with no change and is set to handle blgs classified as NEW DEV differently than existing buildings, for pending sales metric...as new dev contract signed may take 12-18 months to close and listing history may have 100s of status updates of same status during that time.

To me, it seems this sponsor dumped a ton of updates on broker sharing systems on June 19th, 2007, many of which were already in contract.

12D - I have as being ACTIVE all the way until entering contract May 1, 2008 and CLOSED March 13, 2008 as SE does..Much of the closed listings I have same data for, but it seems many of the in CONTRACT LISTINGS were dumped all at once onto sharing systems

29G similar thing as 12D - ACTIVE all the way until May 1st, 2008 when it entered CONTRACT..it seems this building has a few main dump days: June 20th 2007, May 1, 2008, etc..sometimes they do it this way for new dev units...

Now here is one flaw with our system we had to fix: One area where we found a lag in broker status updates was from CONTRACT SIGNED to CLOSED! Its like the broker lost motivation to update from this point and just wanted their check processed. So, we have some listings that stay as CONTRACT SIGNED, or changed to POM/TOM, or exceeded their listing agreement expiration as defaulted to what we call OFF EXCLUSIVE; when in actuality the listing closed and was recorded as SE finds.

So, we had to link up ACRIS rolling sales data to our existing db catching status updates and write rules to overwrite status/date of update/closing price/recording date, etc. when broker system missed the update or got the update at a lag that may skew how we calculate some metrics...this is one example of tons that we had to do to make our system as accurate and real time as possible.

it will NEVER be 100% perfect and you will find some flaws if you look hard enough, but we got most of them!

Thank you!
as you wrote;
"So, our system ignores repeat status updates with no change and is set to handle blgs classified as NEW DEV differently than existing buildings, for pending sales metric"

OK so if I read correctly, and we'll stick to the same unit to keep this as less confusing as possible;
40a
StreetEasy History
02/14/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $2,750,000.
10/29/2008Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,185,000.
02/04/2010Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by CORE at $1,185,000.

This February in contract DID NOT go to your NEW contract figures for february because it's treated as an old one.
That's important! And I appreciate the time.

Something Streeteasy will have to tackle.