September 17, 2007

SF: State of the Market; 9/8/07 to 9/14/07

gg SF: State of the Market; 9/8/07 to 9/14/07As Anna noted earlier today, it doesn’t look like sales or prices slowed down in San Francisco last week. Looking a little bit closer at sales in the City of SF, all indicators from last week point toward a market that is heating up, rather than cooling.

Week ending September 14th: activity last week was up slightly with 61 sales (compared to 55 the week prior). The average property spent just over 41 days on the market before an offer was accepted (down from an average of 64 days last week). The average sale price was 106% of the initial asking price, which is up from 102% last week. 11 properties sold for less than asking with an average time on the market of 36 days. The remaining 50 properties selling for at or over asking strangely averaged more days on the market – just over 42.

The biggest winner this week was 3299 Folsom in Bernal, which sold for $260,000 (or 26%) over asking. No really big discounts this week – just a handful of properties selling for 96-99% of asking.

A reader pointed out last week that looking at what has not sold might be useful in determining the state of the market. SocketSite ably tracks the number of listed houses and condos on the market. According to their latest report, the number of listings is up 24% over the last two weeks, though that spike appears to be normal for this time of year.

It’s still a little early for charts of this data to be interesting. If I continue this feature (I’m even boring myself with it, so I may not), future posts will include some charts to highlight which way the data is trending.


Comments (4)

gfw said:

Looking a little bit closer at sales in the City of SF (as opposed to the entire County, which the Chronicle tracks)

Er, the city and county of San Francisco are the same thing.

gfw said:

Anyway, this feature is useful. Keep it going, and thanks!

scott.h said:

Hrm – for some reason I thought the county picked up some stuff to the south that isn’t in the city. Looks like you’re right though. I’ve corrected the post – thanks!

anon said:

Please continue with this feature. It’s very useful!

Post your comment




close