jump to navigation

The Real Truth on Real Estate Values June 19, 2009

Posted by John Watch in AccuriZ Reports.
Tags: , , , , ,
trackback

Since the mid 1980’s reputable groups have published information regarding real estate values and trends by regions of the country.  Because many organizations lacked access to specific property data, most importantly the total living area; sales data was always presented as the Median Sale price or in some cases the Average Sale Price.  Over the past five to seven years, the Median Sale Price is the constant. 

As valuation consultants serving the assessment industry, we have discovered over the past ten years the weakness in presenting only the Median Sales Price.  Most importantly, what are we comparing to for the baseline?  Our analysis focuses on the sale price per square foot, a factor used by the assessment and appraisal industry.  Over the past 18 months, we have monitored reports relating to the change in property values and the significant declines.  Many economists correctly state that home values exceed the level of affordability as compared to income levels. 

Based on this one standard, there appears to be wide spread belief and acceptance relating to the current declines in property values.  We do not dispute the adjustment, but rather the statements of how significant the adjustments have been.  The following is a perfect example of why we need to study the market on a rate per square foot basis, based on public records:

Median Sales Price for Zip Code xxxxx in 2006 was $303,000

Median Sales Price for Zip Code xxxxx in 2007 was $283,000

Median Sales Price for Zip Code xxxxx in 2008 was $244,000

The pattern indicates a decline in values of 6.7% from 2006 to 2007, 13.8% from 2007 to 2008 and overall for two years 19.5%.

By adding in the median square footage of the sales and presenting the sale price per square foot, a similar pattern of downward valuation occurs, but the rate of decline is lower:

Median Sales Price for Zip Code xxxxx in 2006 was $303,000, 2,144 sf  $141.32 sppsf

Median Sales Price for Zip Code xxxxx in 2007 was $283,000, 2,080 sf  $136.05 sppsf

Median Sales Price for Zip Code xxxxx in 2008 was $244,000, 1,980 sf  $123.23 sppsf

The pattern indicates a decline in values of 3.8% from 2006 to 2007, 9.5% from 2007 to 2008 and overall for two years 12.9%.

Analysis of sales activity and valuation increases since 1996 indicate two clear patterns:

1. The median house size increased because of new construction, with typical homes exceeded 2,100 square feet versus existing homes with a median square footage of 1,850.  So part of the valuation increase is based on larger homes selling, not market appreciation.  New homes are on average 12% larger than homes built prior to 1996.  We have collected and measured this data for over 30 million properties, notably Arizona, Florida and Nevada where there is a oversupply of housing.  Each state have different median square footage values, but similar patterns. 

2. Market appreciation or depreciation can be measured on the quality and condition of the home as well.  When a market is appreciating, property owners will maintain their homes because of the potential added value for selling a home in good to excellent condition.  Real Estate Brokers and Agents stress this constantly when selling and showing homes.  Buyers also seek houses with low cost of maintenance and repair in a stable and appreciating market.  Conversely, when values decline property owners may have limited funds to maintain values and most signifcantly distressed sales have an impact on property values. 

Distressed sales indicate a change in the purchaser profile as well. When foreclosures dominate the market, few buyers are willing to pay top dollar for quality homes, opting instead to acquire a baragin or fixer-upper.  These trends in real estate values have occurred in prior down cycles and will reverse to the up cycle trend in the future.

As we emerge from this current down cycle, there needs to be s hift in the manner for which data is presented and anaylzed.  Over or understating valuation changes will only lead to further instability and significant shifts in the real estate cycle. 

I look forward to commentary from other professionals relating to this issue.

Bookmark and Share
Advertisements

Comments»

No comments yet — be the first.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: