The NAR issued its latest metropolitan areas price report this week.

The most interesting finding is that in the fourth quarter of '07, 73 out of 150 metropolitan statistical areas showed increases in median existing single-family home prices from a year earlier, including 11 areas with double-digit annual gains and another 12 metros showing increases of 6 percent or more; 77 had price declines including 16 with double-digit drops.

Here are the numbers for New York State (minus NYC):

Binghamton: 15%

Buffalo-Niagara: 6.2%

Syracuse: 4.3% 

Glens Falls: 3.7%

Rochester: 2.7%

Kingston: 2.2% 

Capitol District: 1.7%

Nassau-Suffolk: .05%

Whire Plains: .02%

Elmira: -6.0%

The NAR issued its latest metropolitan areas price report this week.

The most interesting finding is that in the fourth quarter of '07, 73 out of 150 metropolitan statistical areas showed increases in median existing single-family home prices from a year earlier, including 11 areas with double-digit annual gains and another 12 metros showing increases of 6 percent or more; 77 had price declines including 16 with double-digit drops.

Yes, the sales prices in half of the nations MSA's were up--and some by double digits!

Last night, I spent a few hours looking at the numbers and distribution of Latinos across some 125 separate communities which comprise Nassau County. Unfortunately, the data is from the 2000 census, so it's utility is limited. Nonetheless, I'm struck by how dispursed the population was/is. Every hamlet, village, city and town has their share of Latinos. While some some percentage of these Latinos are of the immigrant laborer variety, most are not. Indeed, most have above average incomes if they own property anywhere in Nassau County. Some are very affluent as they live in some of the toniest places in America. 

I have a few questions:

1) Do any of you target Latinos on a regional basis (that is, you're not neighborhood-based)?

2) Do you serve Latinos across the full-spectrum of class, national origin and education?

3) Most importantly, what language are your marketing materials in given the diversity of the population?

BTW: My preference is for English language materials since most folks I know are fluent in English and many don't read Spanish. Am I wrong?

The other day I did a cma for a friend on a house she's thinking of buying. It's a nontraditional purchase in that she's buying it from the estate of her grandmother. The purpose for the cma is simply to establish the property's current fair market value. It's the 2nd cma as apparently one was done a year ago.

Obviously, a great deal has changed over the last 12 months making a new cma essential. The original cma showed a market value of $365K.

The home, a 4 bedroom/2 bth cape in need of renovation, is in a community I don't know well. Nevertheless, I collected information about the home from my friend; did a review of the property; confirmed the essentials through the county assessors office, and pulled together comps off of MLS. I only chose comps for similar neighborhood homes that have sold within the last three months. 

What I found was the following:

1) 367 capes were for sale in the last 12mos; 43 sold at an average price of $390K

2) overall, 330 homes are for sale right now; 112 are capes

3) 3 updated capes near my friend's property are stalled at $365-395K price points

4) 1 handyman special is on the market nearby for $299K

5) avg price for 4 recently sold capes in need of substantial updating was $333K

Bottomline? My friend's house is worth substantially less than a year ago by about 30K. While prices may very well perk up given further rate drops and increased sales, but at the moment it's in my friend's interest to go to contract right-away.

I attended a session today at the local Quaker Meeting on the subprime mess and what, if anything, members can do to help people in need. I had never attend a Quaker gathering so it was really refreshing to be among people whose commitment is to make a better world.

The session was facilitated by my friend whose the head of a regional council of churches and the panel included a lawyer versed in foreclosures and short sales and mortgage banker from a major commercial bank. Listening to the questions from the attendees it became quickly clear that the issue at hand was not an abstraction or foreign. What was being discussed were a set of circumstances that in some way affected many of the people in the room--either directly or indirectly. Some were younger people with modest incomes with fewer routes to home financing. Others were elders that seemed way too familiar with the downsides of the reverse mortgage trade. Yet others knew people, mostly professional types, that due to life problems (health issues, divorce, loss of employment), found themselves cascading towards bankruptcy, foreclosure and IRS troubles. 

According to my friend from the council--who, btw, has been helping church leaders figure out ways to help their distressed parishioners, many of the folks that are teetering are middle class folks that bought bigger, pricier homes at the height of the bubble. He says that they are all around us on Long Island but may not be recognizable. Their homes are not shuttered, most are employed, and they're probably still driving late model cars. But many are cruising towards financial ruin. He says that this is a class of people that have a particularly difficult time accepting the reality of their financial problems--and that many may indeed be in denial.

What are the signs of these private crises? The ubiquitous "for sale" signs during a contracting market. 

Not satisfied with the notion that there's little anybody can do to fix the problem, a member of the Quaker Meeting announced that her group was exploring setting up a fund to help--even if only a few families--afford their mortgages. Another discussion centered around the use of land trusts, entities that hold land in common and, thus, reduce the cost of home purchases. These ideas contrast dramatically w/the current system, but I have to hand it to the Quakers: They are alert to the problem and they're doing their part to fix it.

In Local numbers defy "doom and gloomers" I presented data for my region dispelled the notion that we are doomed. The data shows a market holding steady with some areas down a little and others up bit. It also shows that the condo market is up by double digits in some places.

Seems good but what about my specific community? How is it faring? Is it flat, too, or is something more dramatic happening? What's the data show?

There are about 500 homes in my bayside community of colonials, capes, ranches, splits and antiques. The  affluent part of town it's actually two strips of land that jut out into the Great South Bay like two thumbs. Each is trimmed by waterfront homes, canals and marinas.

There were 72 homes on the market in 2006. Of those, 42 sold at an average $545K. In 2007, 65 homes were listed--but only 12 sold! However, the average price was up $36K.

Local realty firms that rode the wave are now taking hits to their professional reputations. Frustrated homeowners are pulling their properties off the market or re-listing them but with other firms. I've actually seen properties that have been listed with 3 different Realtors in one year.

The bottomeline, though, is that homes in my area are not selling for one simple reason: prices are too high.

Since I'm focusing on just my town in '08, I thought I'd look at the performance of my competitors using available MLS data. 

After crunching the numbers for last year's activity, I can tell who the top five firms are in total sales, and I can also identify the top producers in terms of average price and volume. I can even map sales and other indicators for by firm over time. 

Here are some what I learned:

- There were over 500 homes on the market last year

- 97 firms (182 offices) were active in my town (listing/selling homes)

- Of those firms, only 5 had any significant market (between 4-15% each)

- Together these 5 firms controlled 45% of the market

However, not being satisfied in just knowing this level of information, I wanted to know something about how efficient these firms are. I decided to look at what I'm calling the "failure rate", that is, the percent of listings that were not sold--either because the listing expired or was withdrawn. (I'm sure many readers will say that including those withdrawn is not necessarily a sign of failure and, therefore, shouldn't be included. But the way I think a withdrawn listing is evidence--except in rare circumstances--of failure--be it in properly setting expectations, communications, pricing, follow-through, etc.) 

When I look at the failure rate (expireds/withdrawals divided by # of listings), I learned a few interesting things. For example, the biggest listers had relatively low failure rates (16-35%), but not the smallest. A couple of modest size players had failure rates below 10%. 

On the other hand, a few of the big producers also had rates of failure of over 50%. And one firm w/lots of listings and an army of agents in the region earned a an 80% failure rate in my town! 

As a group, however, the segment with the most troubling failure rates were those with 3-10 listings in the mostly minority Northern half of town. Most of these firms had rates of failure between 50%-100%. Yes, a few completed the year w/out a single sale or contract extension. Very disturbing!

I'm wondering what people here think about this type of analysis? Is it fair? Is it useful? Are there better ways to measure or success or failure, or to evaluate the performance of competitors?

And, are firms w/high rates of failure acceptable to an industry already held by many in low regard?

Last night I attended a session on market knowledge as part of my company's on-going effort to keep its agents ahead of the competition. I especially enjoyed the session because it was on analyzing and using data smartly. 

The presenter--an experienced agent having a banner year--looked at '06 and '07 data for 6 fairly representative communities on Long Island. She found a much more favorable picture materialized. For example, while sales dipped in 4 of the communities, they were up in 2--with one up 17%. 

In terms of price, the MLS data shows that '07 prices held steady from '06 levels. Of the six communities, 3 averaged 1.5% higher prices, while the other 3 averaged a minuscule 3.4% drop.

Quite a contrast to the 20% drop suggested by the media, right? 

(BTW: She ran the #s for another 6 or so  communities suggested by attendees and the pattern held true.)

But what really caught my attention was the condo/coop market. That segment across my region appears to be up--and in some cases up big-time. For example, condo/co-op sales in a Queens community rose 8.7% and prices 10.8%, or an average of $32,000 more than in '06. Part of it is a spillover from the still hot Manhattan market. 

However, while the market is doing OK on Long Island, many homes are sitting w/o attracting much attention. The problem? Asking prices out-of-alignment w/local markets. The presenter's advise to agents? Really know your market--and homes accordingly. Good advice for agents everywhere.   

Can real estate agents be sued by people that later conclude they purchased homes at inflated prices? Apparently, yes! We'll see how the case is decided, but the NYTimes is reporting that a Carlsbad, California woman has sued her buyer agent for failing to inform her that the property she purchased at the peak of the housing boom was worth substantially less. Before filing her lawsuit, the angry homeowners spent a year picketing the local ReMax agency.

I suspect we'll now hear of many more such cases.  

I'm wondering what folks believe are--or should be--the responsibilities of buyer agents to clients in terms of home valuations?

I'm struck by the parallels between winning listings and sells and winning political office. Here are just of few of the similarities:

Name ID 

The first thing most people notice about either activity are the lawn signs, newspaper ads, mailings and door-to-door visits. I come out of a campaign background, so flooding the community w/images of the politician is essential. Simply put--voters vote for the person they know--or think they know. The goal is to market your candidate in a way that results in your candidate gaining a higher level of name recognition than the opponent.

Geography specific

Realtors--like politicians--carve out a geographic area. While politicians are forced to because of the way political boundaries are set, Realtors do it because it maximizes their ability to raise their name ID--making it easier to identify and persuade prospects. 

Winning the vote/sale

Politicians organize campaigns in order to win a party's endorsement and then to win a plurality of votes on election day. Realtors conduct campaigns in order to win listings and then to sell the homes.

Engaging and expanding their base

From day one in office, politicians look for ways to promote themselves to the voters. The idea is to stay in regular communications with your supporters and to expand the number of people that know and support you. Realtors also must work constantly to keep in touch w/clients--and to cultivate new clients.

Promises

Both professionals involve identify people's real needs and offering to fix them. But in both professions there are people who are better at promising than in delivering, and, of course, there are voters and sellers/buyers that expect the impossible. Trust is a vital commodity in both professions, but it's something that is so easily betrayed.

Bottom line is that both professions are essential to the health of market-based democracies. I believe that most politicians as well as most Realtors are honorable, accountable and conscientious people. But all it takes is a few rotten apples to ruin things for everyone.