Monday, August 13, 2007

The paper today...

There is a front page article in the Kingman Daily Miner today. This blog was referred to and I was even contacted for a few quotes. Article is linked here.

This was the first time I spoke with Aaron Royster about an article. I think he did a fine job, but I do want to clarify a few things from the story.

In July, there were 131 single-family residences listed in the Kingman, north Kingman and Hualapai Mountain areas.

A little less than half of the homes listed were sold. The 62 sold in July is close to the 65 sold in July 2006.


What I emphasized above to me reads incorrectly to me. I'm using this as feedback though and maybe other are interpreting the data the way Mr. Royster did. Of the actual newly listed homes last month, I doubt any of those 131 have actually sold at this point, and certainly not 62 of them. These are two different numbers that represent two different things... 1) newly listed homes, and 2) recently sold homes. The sold homes normally do not come from the newly listed homes data.

There were 173 listings in July 2006. That month was the pinnacle for single-family residences listed in the past years, according to information compiled by Realtor Todd Tarson.


The emphasized is likely a typo... God knows there are plenty seen right here at MOCO all the time. Just in case though, since I've been tracking new listings, the high water mark is 185 new listing for the month of March in 2006. And if that was only meant to say last year, then it is correct.

What Tarson is lacking, as well as all other real estate agents is how many homes listed are vacant.

Tarson said an accurate number couldn't be created because vacant home listings do not always include developers' homes. He estimated 20 to 25 percent of listed homes in the Kingman area are vacant.


When I read the first emphasis, I thought for just a second my wife may have talked to Mr. Royster about me not vacuuming last week... but reading further I realized that what I lacked was accurate data on listed home that were vacant... whew!!

I wanted to make the point that it is difficult to gage how many vacant homes are on the market. I have seen people refer to a number of 1500 homes that are sitting vacant on the market right now. As of last month I only showed 742 total SFR's on the market. Other ridiculous numbers suggest that hundreds of brand new homes sit empty as well.

I took the following from the Kingman city-data.com page.

Single-family new house construction building permits:

* 1996: 300 buildings, average cost: $74,200
* 1997: 289 buildings, average cost: $76,800
* 1998: 276 buildings, average cost: $81,500
* 1999: 272 buildings, average cost: $77,100
* 2000: 189 buildings, average cost: $89,100
* 2001: 238 buildings, average cost: $89,100
* 2002: 299 buildings, average cost: $91,000
* 2003: 416 buildings, average cost: $91,600
* 2004: 635 buildings, average cost: $85,500
* 2005: 884 buildings, average cost: $110,400
* 2006: 309 buildings, average cost: $167,400


Now I know that folks like to embellish to make certain points, but if 'hundreds' is the number then those folks are suggesting that no new homes have sold in a least a year.

Yes, I cannot accurately mine the data for vacant listings but it cannot be as bad as some are saying out there in the community.

With such change and being the first down market he has experienced, Tarson said he wouldn't make any guesses about the future of home sales.

"It's crazy because no one can answer that," Tarson said.


I may have said it just like as it is written, but it is not normally how I think or speak to others on this subject. I actually do think there are folks that can provide an answer on future home sales. Many people can in fact. Those people are the buyers and sellers themselves.

Overall though, I want to thank Mr. Royster for the article and I'm happy to provide information anytime.

No comments: