The home price in the middle
Last month, half the people who bought homes in Maryland paid less than $237,000 and half paid more. That's the median sale price -- and it's 23 percent less than the peak in 2007.
That's a $70,000 drop, for those of you who prefer dollars to percents.
Like most reporters, I'm in the habit of comparing year over year, but it's useful to take the longer view. Or painful, if you happen to have bought around the peak.
Maryland home sales are well below the peak as well: about 2,800 last month vs. 6,000 (!) in February 2005. (Sales were 20 percent above the Feb. '09 trough, at least.)
But back to price:
It's probably no coincidence that the median is solidly in the range that many of you say you'd pay for a home, if you were buying today. The $200,000 to $249,999 price range was the second most popular in a recent Wonk poll, chosen by 17 percent of you. Narrowly edging it out: $300,000 to $399,999 -- which is, after all, a bigger range.
No. 3, with just over 12 percent: $400,000-$499,999.
No. 4, with just under 12 percent: $150,000-$199,999.
No. 5, with 11 percent: $250,000-$299,999.
Throw the $200s together, and they're tops, followed by the $100s ($100,000-$149,999 was the sixth most popular choice by itself). Which suggests that you beloved readers are a lot like the buyers out there right now.
A number of you would buy more expensive digs -- 16 percent chose price ranges at or above $500,000 -- and a few opted for under-$100,000 homes.
Meanwhile, a dozen of you said you can't afford to spend a dime on a home. These topsy-turvy days, that just might be because you already have one.
Does your mortgage or rental payment comfortably fit your budget?






Comments
Today's median sales price is more of a reflection of the mix of home prices rather than a decrease of 23% of home values.
Sellers with homes in the $1,000,000 plus price range requiring a Jumbo mortgage are sitting on the sidelines. Financing for these larger loan amounts have become expensive in comparison to the 2005 interest rates.
Prior to the housing bust the spread between a Jumbo mortgage and conforming loan was about 1/4 to 3/8% . Today that spread is 1 to 2% depending on the quality of the borrower.
You will get no argument from me that home values in Maryland have declined however I don't think we have seen a 23% decline in value across the board. It's more about the mix of home prices being sold today.
Posted by: TC | March 17, 2010 12:16 PM
Hi, TC -- thanks for noting the impact of home-sale mix. That definitely has an impact (though the jumbo-loan issues were already in place in 2007, so it's not completely apples to oranges).
It's not an analysis I can repeat often (if ever), but I did look at years of home sales last fall to see how much homes went for when they resold. That's apples to apples if anything is. In the metro area, homes that sold in 2006 and resold in the first half of 2009 had a 20 percent drop in price.
Posted by: Jamie Smith Hopkins | March 17, 2010 12:31 PM
Jamie, the huge increase in spread from Conforming to Jumbo loan amounts didn't hit until near the end of 2007, August /September.
This almost overnight increase of 1 1/2% spread from the prior 1/4% was a direct result of the collapse of the two Bear Stearn's Hedge Funds. After the collapse a month or so later an auction of their Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS) was held selling for 96% of face value. This auction created a 4% discount to all MBS market values instead of the prior 100% of face value.
Yes there was an limited amount of impact in 2007 but nothing like 2008, 2009 and today.
Your comment on a 20% drop in price from a 2006 purchase reselling in 2009 is reasonable. In hindsight this was the beginning of the end in run away home appreciation. :-)
Posted by: TC | March 17, 2010 1:28 PM
Oh, that's right -- the tightening that had already hit subprime hadn't worked its way to jumbo until the summer. (I should have remembered that, since I wrote a story in August '07 about jumbo troubles.) Thanks for the details!
Posted by: Jamie Smith Hopkins | March 17, 2010 1:32 PM
Someone missed the day they taught the difference between median and mean.
Posted by: To TC | March 17, 2010 2:05 PM
To TC, both the average and the median can be affected by the mix of homes selling. Or were you getting at something else?
Posted by: Jamie Smith Hopkins | March 17, 2010 2:19 PM
Trimming a small number of large units at the top extreme does not have a meaningful impact on the median. The number of sales close to the median outnumber the outliers too much to allow for it.
Posted by: To TC | March 17, 2010 2:45 PM
There were a lot of high-end sales in the boom years, though -- especially if you look at everything over $500,000. So I'd expect that the sharp drop in those sales would have a noticeable effect on the median as well as the average. (How much that's true of now vs. '07 -- as opposed to now vs. '05 -- I just don't know.)
But the average price can get skewed more easily, that's for certain.
Posted by: Jamie Smith Hopkins | March 17, 2010 2:49 PM
Jamie, my comments are directed at the average or median sales price mix of homes being sold today verses 2006.
We had a higher number of $700,000 plus price homes being sold in 2006 than today. These higher priced homes will drive up or down the average or median price depending on the number of units sold.
My other point was part of this decline in higher priced homes sales was due to rapid increase in Jumbo mortgage interest rates.
Posted by: TC | March 17, 2010 3:03 PM
I know, TC. My previous two comments were responding to the "To TC" commenter. Oh the confusion!
Posted by: Jamie Smith Hopkins | March 17, 2010 3:09 PM
TC-
If I recall, it has been over two years since FHA and Conforming loans increased their loan limits up to 729k depending on the county you live in. Most people who buy million dollar homes have at least 30% to put down on the purchase. Do you not think that they would be eligible for that type of financing? The spread on those rates are minimal. Regardless, most people that have million dollar homes have personal relationships with the banks they deal with. A portfolio loan from their local bank is most likely who they would deal with anyway.
Posted by: Frank Rizzo | March 19, 2010 7:36 PM