San Francisco Listed Housing Inventory: 6/01/10 (
Inventory of Active listed single-family homes, condos, and TICs in San Francisco rose 0.8% over the past three weeks versus an average 1.1% decline for the same three weeks over the past four years.
Current inventory levels are down 3% on a year-over-year basis but up 17% versus the average of the past four years (up 24% if you exclude 2009) and up 40% as compared to 2006/2007. Inventory of single-family homes in San Francisco is up 6% on a year-over-year basis, down 1% versus 2008 and up 46% versus 2007.
36% of active listings in San Francisco have undergone at least one price reduction (almost double what others are reporting) with the percentage of active listings that are either already bank owned (70) or seeking a short sale (146) hovering around 13%.
The standard SocketSite Listed Inventory footnote: Keep in mind that our listed inventory count does not include listings in any stage of contract (even those which are simply contingent) nor does it include listings for multi-family properties (unless the units are individually listed).
SocketSite’s San Francisco Listed Housing Inventory: 5/10/10 []
Will Pent-Up Demand Outstrip Pent-Up Supply? [SocketSite] 

36 thoughts on “SocketSite’s San Francisco Listed Housing Inventory: 6/1/10”
  1. Inventory closer to Q2 2009 (a.k.a. “the bottom” per official industry message) than Q2 2008. This fall will be very interesting to watch. That’s maybe when I’ll start my real shopping.

  2. What’s shocking about this number is that it represents even more inventory than 2009, when prices dove.
    These sellers are mostly serious about selling. Many, many sellers in 2009 were only testing the waters to see if they could get peak prices, so the inventory numbers were artificially inflated by people who had no intention of selling at current prices (and who ultimately withdrew the listing). Although there are still some of those around, the message has sunk in that peak prices are a thing of the past. This high of an inventory level is truly shocking.
    Of course, it is somewhat balanced by the fact that there are more buyers now than in 2009.

  3. ^ Definitely more qualified buyers this year. Last year, the loan situation was much more difficult, so many potential buyers couldn’t actually borrow.

  4. maybe this is why the inventories in SF are headed up.
    Are they? The lines all seem to be following the same yearly pattern. Whether or not June shows a regression could be telling.

  5. Well, from Jan. 1 to June 1, the slope of the curve (i.e. the increase in inventory) is definitely steeper for 2010 than any of the four previous years. But the patterns are all pretty different for each of the last five years other than as a general trend direction.

  6. It looks pretty similar to 2009 except for the last few months, which have also seen a lot more volume sales YoY, and higher prices. Good properties are moving, but that’s not to say that sellers aren’t also trying to move properties that aren’t any good. Because they are. Will this summer hold an inventory regression? If not, then maybe there will be a shock effect. Right now, fifty less is fifty less.

  7. tipster – now that annonn isn’t around to put you in your place – do you plan on just going completely over board with utter nonsense? You say there’s even more inventory than 2009 when clearly there isn’t. You get to your imaginary numbers that contradict the chart by making up a bit of market psychology – stating that last year sellers weren’t serious but this year they are. Where did you get that info? Yes I know – no where.

  8. Remember, also, that around this time last year (and probably before) prices stopped diving, and actually arguably started increasing slightly.

  9. How can inventory be close to last year, if last year was the bottom. Shouldn’t we see an inverted curve?

  10. Because more people are buying, more people are attempting to sell. It does not mean they’re selling good property. Undesirable properties can and will accumulate, adding to inventory. But people are actually buying better things right now. Compare that to last spring when nobody was buying. There’s your difference.

  11. “Because more people are buying, more people are attempting to sell.”
    So the inventory levels must have been really high in 2006 because lots and lots of people were buying then. And levels must have been really low in 2009 because there were so few buyers.
    Or, maybe inventory levels are higher than in past years because of the combination of fewer buyers and more sellers right now. Just a possibility.

  12. What are you talking about? Look at the chart. Levels were not low in 2009.
    2006 had both the supply and the demand. That’s why it’s got the record volume and the near record price.

  13. “Because more people are buying, more people are attempting to sell. It does not mean they’re selling good property. ”
    This is utter nonsense. the inventory level is not climbing because more peeople are buying. Please re-read your statement and if it still makes sense to you, you are in serious trouble. Is thsi the NEW realtor economics.

  14. Sales volume is up YoY, and everyone should know that by now. But because the market is more active, sellers see that, and attempt to sell. But lesser properties are not moving in 2010, and they add to inventory as they linger. You’re welcome to discuss that with me without rancor. Otherwise I’ll tune out.

  15. From Friday’s WSJ:
    For years, Jennifer Metz and her husband John yearned for a bigger home in San Francisco. Three months ago, the couple started looking, figuring that in this shaky economy, their $3 million budget should provide them a pick of attractive homes and accommodating sellers.
    Luxury Going Fast
    They were wrong. Hours after seeing a 5,000-square-foot fixer-upper in Presidio Heights with an asking price around $2.7 million, the Metzes put in a bid—and lost. Soon after, they made another offer on a four-bedroom in Russian Hill. Their bid was rejected.
    Last week, the Metzes rushed over to a large, dilapidated home in Pacific Heights that needed a lot of work but was asking the (relatively) low price of $2.25 million. The Metzes put in their over-ask bid the next day, but lost that one too: There were nine offers; the winning bid was $2.56 million.
    “It’s frustrating,” says Ms. Metz, a 44-year-old stay-at-home mom whose husband works in finance. “You think you put in a good offer but, no.”

  16. fluj/anonn/anon, sorry, I thought my sarcasm would be obvious simply by looking at the chart, as you did. Spencer made the point more bluntly. More buyers do not correlate to higher inventory, but to lower inventory. Your assertion was ridiculous.

  17. Just anon, thanks. So in addition to disputing YoY price increase, you are disputing year over year sales volume increase, then? Is that not more buyers?

  18. 2813 Pine got 14 offers last week. It was a total fixer, west of Divis, at 998K, not huge at 1600+ feet, and in need of probably 600K worth of work.

  19. anonn’s assertion makes total sense, anecdotally. There HAVE been more sales in the market, and that is convincing more sellers to take a chance. That can result in both higher sales and higher inventories. And from what I’ve seen, anonn is also right that alot of the less desirable places are lingering. I don’t know enough to know whether that is unusual or not.
    Obviously, things were stuck for the past year. There is now some light at the end of the tunnel, with prices at least stabilizing. That is going to dislodge a certain number of sellers who want to (or have to) sell.
    My own armchair analysis, particularly with the current stock market gyrations, is that we are heading for a very interesting fall…with more on the market but still not a whole lot of buyers out there. If so, this spring will be the dead cat bounce and this fall will be a great buying opportunity.
    But I’ve been wrong many times before….

  20. fluj/anonn/anon responded to the question: “How can inventory be close to last year, if last year was the bottom” with the assertion: “Because more people are buying, more people are attempting to sell.”
    That can only flow if potential sellers noticed more buyers out there and because of that decided to sell, and if the number of these additional sellers flooding the market exceeded the number of additional buyers. It is a nonsense proposition, supported by nothing as is fluj’s standard m.o. The result would be lower prices, in any event, per the law of supply and demand. But inventory is higher than in previous years because of the combination of more sellers and fewer buyers. It is simple arithmetic.

  21. The point made is a point based upon sales volume being up YoY, price is up YoY, and inventory is only slightly down YoY. These are all facts. The idea that would be sellers wouldn’t have noticed more buyers returning to the market over the course of a quarter or so is what’s hard to fathom. And again, not all properties are equal. Add a flight to quality into the mix.

  22. The “flight to quality” was the same pattern seen by buyers before the prior big drop. The prices that people were paying for non quality properties had to drop dramatically before people would buy them, leading the realtors to exclaim “it’s on a busy street” whenever socketsite started posting applies in 2008.
    No one had the luxury of a flight to quality in 2006. You only get a “flight to quality” when there are far more people trying to sell homes that people wanting to buy them.
    A flight to quality, a big runup in inventory and evaoprating demand in the rest of the country was a leading indicator of a big drop in prices last year. And I noticed the mortgage banking association releasing numbers that show new home purchases are at their lowest level since 1997, even lower than the darkest days of 2009!
    Demand is absolutely evaporating.

  23. “price is up YoY . . . These are all facts”
    Some facts to support your “facts” would be nice, but I won’t hold my breath.

  24. This site has been delivering volume and price reports nearly weekly all spring in threads you have commented within.
    [Editor’s Note: Please don’t confuse median (or even average) sales price trends with appreciation (or “prices are up”), especially not in a market when a shift in mix – be it a “flight to quality” or disproportionate rise in volume at the top end – is in play.]

  25. No one is confusing those terms, or else they shouldn’t be. Because all of this was clearly being spoken about in YoY terms. And nobody thinks 2009 was a banner year.

  26. Some facts to support your “facts” would be nice, but I won’t hold my breath
    May 25 @ 3:32 p.m. in response to a query about higher end SFRs you were given very SF-centric data regarding 1mm+ sales YoY. In response you chose to criticize based on sample set size even though they were not small, but rather 160+ and 240+ in number.

  27. fluj, see the editor’s note, in response to your 10:37 post, on medians and averages. Then take a look at an intro textbook on statistics.

  28. The editor’s note is an opinion that conflates “prices up” and “appreciation” without bothering to consider specific periods were being compared, solely. You were shown that price is up YoY in terms of median in not small sample sets for 1mm+ SFR properties. You chose to criticize sample set then. Now you are choosing to conflate appreciation and median price.

  29. What is the purpose of showing this statistic?
    It’s pretty meaningless in my point of view. All it shows is current actively listed inventory. I can put my house up for sale w/ no real intention of selling it.
    We should be looking at real sales data, which is another discussion.

  30. Also, notice the editor’s point about the high end volume being up YoY. That also contradicts numerous posts you’ve made.

  31. “It’s pretty meaningless in my point of view. All it shows is current actively listed inventory. I can put my house up for sale w/ no real intention of selling it.
    We should be looking at real sales data, which is another discussion.”
    It’s not completely meaningless. It certainly tells you something if a lot of supply is available and isn’t moving.
    But note that “real sales data” doesn’t tell you everything either because sales numbers fluctuate year to year. The editor does publish this sales data, usually from DataQuick I believe.
    Months of inventory is a valuable stat IMO. Based on 428 sales in April 2010 (vs. 402 in April 2009), we have a little under 4 months of inventory. We’ll see if May numbers change that.

  32. When I look at various graphs, I try to make sense of them and figure out the take-away message.
    Here are the numbers for the previous month:
    I know the intent is to show insight into the supply side of things, but without any specifics you cannot draw any conclusions. What fraction is bank owned? Did the number of active listings change because there are more sellers or less buyers?
    Note that it’s also a lagging indicator. It takes time to build and diffuse inventory. The market popped sometime in 2006 or 2007, but inventory didn’t peak until end of 2008.

  33. Inventory increase combined with volume increase equals price drop.
    Higher inventory is not a sign of increased buyers. Supply and demand does not work that way. this is total voodoo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *