San Francisco Sales and Median: September 2010 (
Recorded home sales volume in San Francisco fell 17.5% on a year-over-year basis last month (442 recorded sales in September ’10 versus 536 sales in September ‘09) according to DataQuick, down 2% as compared to the month prior which was down 12.3% on a year-over-year basis.
For context, September sales figures for San Francisco from 2004 to 2008 were 763 (2004), 665 (2005), 567 (2006), 469 (2007), and 458 (2008). And on average, from 2004 to 2009 sales volume fell 9.8% from August to September.
San Francisco’s median sales price in September was $620,000, down 4.6% compared to September ’09 ($650,000) and down 5.0% compared to the month prior.
For the greater Bay Area, recorded sales volume in September was down 19.6% on a year-over-year basis, down 5.4% from the month prior (6,334 recorded sales in September ’10 versus 7,879 in September ’09 and 6,698 in August ’10) as the recorded median sales price rose 8.2% on a year-over-year basis, up 2.6% as compared to the month prior.

Last month foreclosure resales – homes that had been foreclosed on in the prior 12 months – rose to 27.9 percent of the Bay Area’s resale market. That was up from 26.1 percent in August but down from 32.3 percent in September 2009. Foreclosure resales peaked at 52.0 percent in February 2009. The monthly average for foreclosure resales over the past 15 years is about 8 percent.

Government-insured FHA loans, a popular choice among first-time buyers, accounted for 25.1 percent of all home purchase mortgages in September, up from 24.8 percent in August and 24.9 percent in September 2009.

At the extremes, Alameda recorded a 27.1% drop in sales volume (a loss of 455 transactions) on a 3.6% increase in median sales price in September while Napa recorded a 3.5% increase in sales volume (a gain of 4 transactions) on a 6.4% decrease in median.
As always, keep in mind that DataQuick reports recorded sales which not only includes activity in new developments, but contracts that were signed (“sold”) many months or even years prior and are just now closing escrow (or being recorded).
Bay Area September Home Sales Second-Lowest in 19 years [DQNews]
San Francisco Recorded Sales Activity Down 12.3% In August [SocketSite]
He’s It’s Back: California’s $10,000 Homebuyer Tax Credit Returns [SocketSite]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by sfrenegade

    Wow, even Santa Clara County sales are down 22.5% YOY. Santa Clara County sales recently may have been even hotter than SF, especially in Palo Alto.

  2. Posted by tipster

    Maybe NVJ and other boosters can tell us again how Zynga is going to “save” SF real estate. From the Chronicle today:
    “Facebook Inc. game developers Kabam and Zynga Game Network Inc. said they will increasingly turn to Chinese software designers to make games for the website, tapping engineering talent in the Internet’s largest market.
    Kabam, maker of the game Kingdoms of Camelot, in May set up a Beijing studio that has two unannounced titles under development, as many as are in progress at the company’s U.S. studios, said Andy Lee, Asia managing director for the Redwood City gamemaker.”
    Should be a real barn burner for SF real estate.

  3. Posted by A.T.

    Unless we get a big rush in the last 10 days, the 2010 volume decline is going to continue in October. From 10/1 to 10/21 we had listed sales of:
    In 2010, 96 SFRs and 72 condos/TICs
    In 2009, 136 SFRs and 135 condos/TICs
    Not a lot of competition out there for the would-be buyers.

  4. Posted by FormerAptBroker

    Socket site wrote:
    > The monthly average for foreclosure
    > resales over the past 15 years is
    > about 8 percent.
    I don’t have the data in front of me, but I know that this number is high, I think that 0.8% is even high since for most of my life there were very few foreclosures in the Bay Area.

  5. Posted by badlydrawnbear

    @Tipster … what do you think the odds are that Silicon Valley turns into the Detroit of the new millennium?

  6. Posted by anon

    Lotsa moolah sloshing round Sf
    Zynga and AAPL and Faceb, oh my
    None left for perma-bears
    Too bad, renters forever

  7. Posted by J

    …All that sloshing is certainly having a profound effect on sales volume…

  8. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    When did I ever say that tipster? Do you mean what I said back in July:
    “Nice to see tipster and deimos come around to the slow steady grinding school of real estate loss.”
    On last year:
    “… another year of moderate declines (5-15%) for a total peak to trough drop in nominal home prices of ~25%, followed by a decade or so of below trend price gains, most likely about 0% nominal and negative 3-6% real — as that is what I expect the inflation rate to be.”
    When did I ever say that “Zynga is going to “save” SF real estate”? Sometimes I do post after a few glasses of wine, so maybe I said this and don’t remember it, but I kind of doubt it.
    Inflation is taking a bit longer to get started up than i expected, I will admit to that, so perhaps more of the loss is going to have to come from nominal prices, but I have faith Helicopter Ben will live up to his moniker.

  9. Posted by tipster

    Geez, looking over the new listings and price reductions in the last 24 hours is like reading a tale of woe.
    ORH investors, losing money hand over fist for the last two years are giving up and throwing in the towel.
    You can just see that a lot of listings are there really just to tell the owner that it will make sense to strategically default: their listing prices are off what they paid by their downpayment amount, and yet still much higher than the market. Mission bay has essentially stopped listing altogether – the Realtors are obviously telling their clients not to even bother.
    And then there are listings like 2052 Green street #2. Bay view, excellent location, great shape, the kind of place that probably had a stampede of people at the open house in 2005, yet still $400K off their $2.1M 2005 purchase price and not selling. Remember the “bifurcated market” arguments in 2008: the low end would take the hit and the high end would keep selling strongly? Their high end condo is in no better shape than 2185 Bush #213, purchased for $725K in 2005 and now languishing at $559K.
    One of the few that might do well is 1960 Hayes street, listed for $249K, but was purchased for $199K. In 1996.
    How could this have happened? Prices continue to sink, and the weather is turning bad and yet more and more listings pour onto the market, desperate to stop the bleeding and not have to wait another 6 months to sell, at a lower price and after throwing more money away on non rent.
    So 850 Powell #601, a beautiful nob hill condo with a commanding bay view sells for $438 psft? At least they made it out before the next set of price reductions.
    Will it be like Detroit? Doubt it will be that bad – the Unions and politicians have chased all the businesses out of that region, but who knows. With regard to silicon valley, if you don’t do your development out of the area, you basically no longer get funded, at least not for long.
    My tech customer base used to be mostly here. Now, the new customers we get are largely locating in China. If they go public or get acquired, only a fraction of the money will stay here, most will be distributed to out of area investors and far flung developers. We’re seeing almost no new tech company formation in Silicon Valley any longer. What has been formed is all moving off shore. You can’t put that toothpaste back into the tube: it’s only a matter of time before the developers take over product design and kick us out of the picture entirely.
    So I think it won’t be as bad as Detroit, but I think it heads back to 1996, with no adjustment for inflation. The inflation we had was all caused by fake bubbles, and we’re seeing wages fall right back to those levels with no inflation adjustment at all.
    It’s not just here, it’s everywhere. From Bloomberg: “New York City’s financial industry, whose executives fuel high-end Hamptons demand, lost 1,600 jobs in September from August, the state Department of Labor said today. Professional and business services — a sector that includes lawyers, accountants and architects — lost 9,000 jobs, the most for September since at least 1990. Wall Street firms may cut 80,000 jobs in the next 18 months and year-end bonuses could be the lowest since 2008, Meredith Whitney, founder of Meredith Whitney Advisory Group, said in a Sept. 30 Bloomberg Radio interview. ”
    Helicopter Ben just got told he’s not fully in control. China and the rest of the countries that actually make things have a lot of resources at their disposal, and it’s looking like they might be able to have a greater influence than the fed would like. A quarter point increase in Chinese interest rates erased a mountain of interest in what the fed might do. Stay tuned on exactly what the fed will be able to do if China doesn’t go along.

  10. Posted by NoeValleyJim
    “Technology jobs in Silicon Valley appear to be bouncing back more strongly than in the rest of the nation, in an upbeat signal for the local economy.”
    Everyone hires overseas now, there is simply not enough local talent to meet the demand. Plus the VCs demand it. Remember San Francisco has 500 start-ups, more than at the peak of the boom in 2000. The best hires I have made lately have been people that I have brought in from outside the area.
    Silicon Valley will re-invent itself, it always does, as the knowledge, skills and products it has become commoditized. It happened with electronics, then computer chips, then PCs, then networking, now The Web. I don’t know what the next wave of invention will be, probably something related to energy, but there is no greater combination of intelligence, research, capital and entrepreneurship anywhere else in the world.
    Just as Hollywood has remade itself and prospered and helped grow the Los Angeles economy, Silicon Valley will continue to drive economic growth in the Bay Area. I do think it means that the economic and political center of gravity will continue to move south though. San Jose hasn’t really realized its power yet and most of the billionaires want to live here in San Francisco. I don’t think that will continue forever. A lot of the new money is already in Atherton.
    It is an interesting idea that China is raising rates in response to a threatened loosening by the United States. The “G2” countries of US and China acted in unison in the early days of the economic crises, which is part of the reason we escaped so lightly, but our interests are clearly divergent now. But the US still holds most of the trump cards, China is still much more dependent on our demand than we are on their capital or goods. It is an uneasy alliance that could easily break up badly though. Until China can figure out how to replace overseas demand with domestic demand it should continue to stay in place though.
    If you see China implement widespread old age pensions akin to Social Security though, watch out, the next move will be to pick a fight with the US over currency.

  11. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    And oh, 1960 Hayes St #9 sells for much more than $249,000. At least 50% more.

  12. Posted by lyqwyd

    That 1960 Hayes st property is interesting, it was listed at $288,000 and then dropped to $249,000 two days ago
    Anybody been in there or know what’s going on with that place

  13. Posted by tipster

    1960 Hayes Photos here:
    It looks very small and not updated.

  14. Posted by sfrenegade

    A.T. posted the Clear Capital national housing numbers on another thread. According to Calculated Risk, these numbers tend to foreshadow the Case-Shiller numbers:
    Too bad they don’t provide the regional breakdown data beyond their monthly reports (for free anyway). The monthly reports only display regional data and then the 15 highest performing MSAs and the 15 lowest performing MSAs.
    Case-Shiller August numbers are out next Tuesday. Anyone have predictions?

  15. Posted by Treeman

    I already gave my prediction on the last set of CS numbers. Down. And drastically over the next 6 months or so (maybe longer). There is nothing good about the current economy.
    I got mocked for such a prediction. I call that internet balls.

  16. Posted by tipster

    And oh, 1960 Hayes St #9 sells for much more than $249,000. At least 50% more.
    Posted by: NoeValleyJim at October 21, 2010 11:34 PM
    Really? Because it didn’t appear to sell at its “auction” and so it’s BOM at $249K. Maybe you should rush over there and buy it, since it worth “much more than $249,000.”

  17. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    1960 Hayes St #9 is now listed for $499,000. When it turns out I am right are you going to buy me a cookie? 🙂

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles