Just noticed that the Q4 update to the National City / Global Insight Housing Valuation Report has been released. According to their study, Sacramento is now considered to be fairly valued! How bout that. We have come down from our peak of 53% overvalued to just 7%.
With the credit markets in such disarray, the economy teetering on the edge, and no end to the onslaught of foreclosures and NODS, Sacramento is likely to overshoot the mark.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A blog dedicated to my obsession with buying in the Sacramento housing market
Bubble Basics & Buying Resources
Feeding My Obsession
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(287)
-
▼
March
(26)
- It's Not Broke, Please Don't Fix It
- This time, it really is different.
- Another Sign of the Times
- A tragic 401k reminder from Bear Stearns ...
- Bottom's Up
- WWYD - What Would You Do?
- The Weekly Screen Scrape - So Far
- Increasingly Impatient
- Humble Pie
- Are we There Yet?
- House of Cards
- Recourse of Course
- Febuary March 2008 Month's Inventory
- The Mighty Misleading Median
- Stop the Presses - The Bee has a Blog
- The Weekly Screen Scrape - Spring fling or flop?
- March 2008 Asking Price Distribution
- A Taxing Debate
- March 2008 Inventory - Inventory Takes an Unseason...
- All's Fair?
- The Weekly Screen Scrape - Mixed Signals
- March 2008 Good Buys & Offers to Builders
- Bubble, Bubble, Toil and Trouble
- Due Diligence
- A New Meaning to the Term Bedroom Community
- Agent Inquiries Only
-
▼
March
(26)
Labels
- Affordability (39)
- Anecdotal (123)
- Asbestos (5)
- Auburn (3)
- Auctions (2)
- Average Buyer Blog (29)
- Bear Stearns (2)
- Economy (59)
- financial planning (14)
- Financing (42)
- gated developments (5)
- Good Buys (14)
- Headlines (92)
- Investors (4)
- Market Outlook (120)
- Market Stress (33)
- Neighborhoods (28)
- Offers (3)
- Pet Peeves (14)
- Purchase Criteria (32)
- RE Services (20)
- Renting (27)
- Resources (21)
- retirement (2)
- Service Recommendations (4)
- Stats (180)
- Tactics (44)
- Tradeoffs (26)
- Waiting it Out (53)
Posts
6 comments:
I think that's because they only had us at a fantasy 30% over instead of the 50% that was real.
Now if I brought up National's study, you'd all poo poo it.
I think they still showed 7%, but thats within reason.
Like Sac Real Stats, sometimes you have to "create" your bottom through the offer process.
If it's fairly valued now, projecting backwards (using Shiller's data) that would mean it was a downright STEAL for most of the 20th century. Obviously this is nonsense.
And gwyn is right. Funny though, that 30 was considered overly pessimistic at the time.
Actually, it showed that at the peak the Sacramento market was overvalued by more than 50% -- specifically, 52.4% in Q32005.
Try again.
Sippin, it shows 7% over as of the end of Q42007, which as shown in its data corresponded to a median price at that time of $302.2K. The median has dropped another 10% or so since year end, so I would think that as of now that 7% (and likely somewhat more) has been erased.
Yea I think I looked at that. Plus or minus 10% probably no bid deal.
Notice that the really underpriced places happen to be WHERE NOBODY WANTS TO LIVE. Where the price to income ratio is low because income is moving away....
Post a Comment