Evidently the market as a whole (shorthand for analysts, who are often wrong). The market was looking for 440K, but only got 402K.
They were probably also thrown by the large existing sales number last week.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by nyc10022
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 9868
Member since: Aug 2008
> Who was surprised? The reporter for CNBC?
Ha, was just about to say the same.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by 30yrs_RE_20_in_REO
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 9913
Member since: Mar 2009
"New single-family home sales fell 3.6 percent to a 440,000 until annual pace from a downwardly revised 417,000 units in August, The Commerce Department said Wednesday. Analysts polled by Reuters had expected sales to rise to a 440,000 unit pace from August's previously reported 429,000."
WHAT???????????????????????????
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by milkmanjones
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 35
Member since: Aug 2009
30yrs, I noticed that too, but I chalked that up to a mistake by the Reuters author. If you look at the numbers (http://biz.yahoo.com/c/e.html), you'll see that:
- August was revised down from 429K to 417K
- The market estimate was 440K but the actual number was 402K
Who was surprised? The reporter for CNBC?
{Manhattan real estate agent.}
Evidently the market as a whole (shorthand for analysts, who are often wrong). The market was looking for 440K, but only got 402K.
They were probably also thrown by the large existing sales number last week.
> Who was surprised? The reporter for CNBC?
Ha, was just about to say the same.
"New single-family home sales fell 3.6 percent to a 440,000 until annual pace from a downwardly revised 417,000 units in August, The Commerce Department said Wednesday. Analysts polled by Reuters had expected sales to rise to a 440,000 unit pace from August's previously reported 429,000."
WHAT???????????????????????????
30yrs, I noticed that too, but I chalked that up to a mistake by the Reuters author. If you look at the numbers (http://biz.yahoo.com/c/e.html), you'll see that:
- August was revised down from 429K to 417K
- The market estimate was 440K but the actual number was 402K
So these numbers are bad on two fronts
SteveF was surprised, I guess.
steveF pls advise