Flipper Alert: 550 N. St. Clair Flips Coming on the Market
Let the flipping begin in 550 N. St. Clair in Streeterville.
I don’t believe any units have officially closed yet but already there are 15 units on the market out of 112 units. It appears that nearly all of floor 13 is back up for sale, with several units available from the developer’s agent- which is Weichart Realtors.
Unit #1303: studio, 600 square feet
- Currently listed for $288,500 (parking is $45,000 extra)
- Emarket Realty has the listing
Unit #1304: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths
- Currently listed for $598,500 (plus $45,000 for parking)
- Weichart Realtors, First Chicago has the listing
Unit #1305: 2 bedrooms, 1.5 baths
- Currently listed for $498,500 (parking is $45,000 extra)
- Weichart Reatlers, First Chicago has the listing
Unit #1306: 1 bedroom, 1 bath, 800 square feet
- Currently listed for $399,000 (parking is extra)
- Emarket Realty has the listing
Unit #1307: studio, 600 square feet
- Currently listed for $319,500 (parking is extra)
- Emarket Realty has the listing
A larger flip has also come on the market.
Unit #1508: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1625 square feet
- Currently listed for $749,900 (plus $50,000 for parking)
- Caren Real Estate has the listing
Unit #1708 is going to have to compete against the developer. Weichart is trying to sell Unit #908, same size unit, for nearly the same price: $748,500.
The investor on Craigslist a few weeks back is still out there looking for help:
I am an investor and I need to sell a few units I bought at 550 n. st clair. This is a beautiful building in Streeterville, close to Michigan Ave where there is an array of shopping and wonderful restaurants. My intention was to live in one and manage the others as high end rentals; however, I have decided not to move forward. I can either lose my earnest money, or sell my units at the price I contracted them at 3 years ago, which in some cases are up to 10% less than what the Developer is asking for now.
There are also a few rentals available already on Craigslist.
Stay tuned. There will certainly be more action in this building in the next few weeks.
550 St. Clair [website]
What I find incomprehensible are the prices at 512 N. McClurg, just a block away. Not brand new construction. Bigger units, but not “luxury.” And yet owners are asking the same prices as in 550 N. St. Clair. There are close to 30 units being offered for sale in 512; I don’t remember seeing one actually sell since I’ve been looking at it the last two months.
Why would anyone pay the same price at 512 that they’d pay at 550? Why would anyone pay the same price at 550 that they’d pay at 600 N Fairbanks? Is *everyone* insane in Streeterville?
512 does have bigger units guest parking and better views… is that worth the premium maybe?
I agree with Kenworthy. There are big differences between a building like 512 N. McClug and this tower. I was suprised as well that prices seem to be similar between 550 and 600 N. Fairbanks since I think 600 is a nicer building. After spending a weekend looking at units around the city, I am amazed how many sellers still think it is 2005. BTW, one agent told me she heard a low floor 2bd at 340 on the park was coming on the market at 495,000! That should cause the 1bd flippers some heartburn.
I like this building, it turned out well. The huge balconies are a big plus, looking out over Michigan Ave will be great. I think they should have made the building taller, though. I checked out the sales center and the views are really not going to be very good at all compared to the other buildings in the area. This is definately a good addition for Chicago, though, and I bet it will end up holding value well.
D
Fairbankslover, true they are bigger. Many of the views, though, are about to be blocked by construction coming up around it (though the tippytop floors will literally be in the clear). Still, they’re not “luxury” by any stretch and weren’t meant to be. They don’t have nearly the amenities of a 550 or 600 (to their credit, I think) which should further lower prices. As for guest parking–even if it’s free, it couldn’t possibly justify tens (even hundreds) of thousands of dollars in price premium. You could buy parking vouchers for your guests every time they came to visit and even at downtown prices you’d still come out way ahead.
a buyer in 550 told me the parking entrance is in the alley. Thetr won’t be much of a lobby b.c. of retail. Anyone confirm? Also what was the reason for the delays?
anoncondoshopper,
Have that broker’s name and contact info?
Whoops. I just read my comment and the price of the 2bd-2ba that might be popping up at 340 On The Park, was mentioned to be at $595,000. (I did not catch the agent’s name, this was at an open house at 653 N. Kingsbury, and she was with her client and I was not minding my own business) I apologize for the typo. I still think that is a great price, but I am curious as to whether or not that includes parking. I called the sales office at 550 N. St. Clair and this weeks “promotion” is very attractive. Taking a look tomorrow afternoon, though I am still more attracted to a loft style unit at this point.
It’s not insanity. It’s people ASKING and not getting. No one is buying.
it’s insanity on the part of the sellers.
I’ll be charitable and just say they are uninformed. 🙂
Deaconblue,
How can you say it will hold value when in fact it is dropping as we speak? The sales office was marketing #908 in the 800s and now they are trying to sell it for ~750k. In the meantime they are offering incentives to buyers right now.
If you meant that it will hold it’s value AFTER it’s current drop (which should continue throughout this year) then maybe I’d entertain that argument. Otherwise, I am just baffled by your optimism.
ja, what are the incentives? and you are talking about 550 N StC, right?
Yes- please tell us the incentives. I’m interested as well. Free parking?
I just meant in general I think this is the type of building that will weather the current storm better than others. It’s a nice building that has some character and a great location. Is “ja” just “g” under another name?
D
The Chicago Tribune article will certainly help with sales in 600 N. Fairbanks.
Not every building will be hit in the same way during the downturn. It’s still about location, pricing, amenities, popularity etc.
I have no idea who “g” is, but I don’t appreciate the implicit accusation. I think that in general your posts have been overly optimistic, especially as we are seeing prices fall before our eyes (if you were talking to sellers now you would know that – many are desperate).
Clearly you have some vested interest in protecting the prices in Streeterville. If you think posting on message boards will have any effect you are seriously wasting your time. I have a very negative outlook on the market and I give reasons for this position (the opening of US markets tomorrow should further validate my belief – take a look at the meltdown in the global markets today and 4% decline in futures trading for the DOW today).
Sabrina,
They wouldn’t give me details of the incentives over the phone, they wanted me to go in.
But at Park View condos by MCL they are currently offering 10k toward closings costs as an incentive. Doesn’t seem like much to me personally, especially since they’re only 75% sold per the saleswoman.
ja, do you live in the streeterville area or just enjoy posting about it
The local condo market will crash just like the stock markets are around the world right now.
The price of something is a function of the market fundamentals. Right now, there are a lot of stubborn sellers who will never get their wishing prices. Buyers will wait and wait because who wants to buy something when they can potentially lose 10-200k within months or years.
These new ‘luxury’ building are indeed gorgeous, but way overpriced. Builders inflated the prices because they could. Greedy flippers bought them like crazy. Creative mortgage financing really added fuel to the flames. Now that the music has stopped and realization has set in that prices are unreasonable to local wages and such, a huge correction will set in.
The math simply does not add up. One cannot rent these condos for a profit. Also, the income necessary to own with a debt to ratio of 40% requires an income way beyond the median income of the Chicago area. There are thousands and thousands of condos 400k and above. I do not believe there are that many twenty and thirty somethings with an income in the six figure range. I would gather that most were speculators even in these beloved buildings in Streeterville that the owners speak so highly of. I would not be fooled. Most people even if they were not investing or speculating, were buying with the intention of making a hefty profit when selling. If you disagree, you are lying to yourself. When people see falling and stagnating property values, they will add to the inventory since it is only economical to own a condo if property is appreciating at a rapid rate. Another thing is that the turnover in condo buildings is big. I own in a building in LP that was built in 2002. Since that time(less than six years), almost all the units have been resold or the current owners are renting the units, probably for a loss. Condo living is very transitional in nature.
None of the buyers on these boards will admit that they made a bad decision by buying in Streeterville in the last couple years, so it is moot to argue. The views and units are beautiful and very enticing. Owning is wonderful compared to renting, but in this market, it is better to wait and keep renting. As they say only time will tell. Peace!
“I do not believe there are that many twenty and thirty somethings with an income in the six figure range.”
I just want to agree with Mike in that when I sold my condo in San Francisco before moving here, the buyer paid 950,0000 and had an income about HALF of mine! Sure he was able to get a package of financing to purchase the unit, but with less of a down payment than I made 6 years before. (I don’t think he would be ablet to get the same package today btw). By the way, it was a 1bd unit which shows you how insane the cost of real estate is in the S.F. Bay Area.
I have chose to remain conservative, will be putting at least 20% down, and am not willing to spend more than $600,000, even though I walked away with a little more than that in cash from my California sale. What I have been seeing in sales centers and open houses are a lot of people who should not be looking in the price range they are. It seems that some of the younger shoppers have no clue what a four or five hundred thousand dollar loan will REALLY cost. They talk numbers as if it is in cents instead of dollars, and I am afaid many of them are going to get hurt and have ruined credit. Sure, Daddy may be giving them a 100,000 down payment, but what if one looses their job or the building has a special assessment?
I am beginnning to think I might try to continue my rental lease for another 6 months. This whole market is perfect for creating anxiety, sleepless nights, and upset stomachs.
anoncondoshopper,
You should definitely wait. Why buy now? The added expense of owning over renting will just add to the loss in market value yet to come. There is no benefit in buying now, especially for someone fortunate enough to have cashed in on this national bubble. Why give some of that back?
Excellent post, Mike. You are correct, some recent buyers (I won’t name names, Deaconblue and Sally) will never admit it. Instead we will see them attempt their silly personal attacks. I’ll cut them some slack though since they overpaid for the right to hopelessly defend their purchases.
I maintain my optimistic view about the return of affordability in the Chicago housing market. What kind of heartless b******s see improving affordability as a bad thing?
G,
how do you know that we overpaid? perhaps we got in first….who knows where you live G….maybe you don’t own anything and that is why you like to be a pessimist.
Sally,
You overpaid. Being first wasn’t early enough for a building delivered in 2007.
I have to ask again: What pessimism? I am optimistic about increased affordability. How greedy and heartless must someone be to see this as a bad thing? I await your reply.
in your opinion i overpaid. time will tell if this proves to serve my needs well.
i am not heartless and hope you can aford to move somewhere one day. btw, where do you currently live and are you renting so you can save money and use your wisdom better than us?
G,
oh and BTW, suppose i went to contract oct 05 vs oct 07…..doesn’t look as bad now, huh?
I’m out for a while but will look forward to checking this tonight.
Lighten up, guys.
Sally:
First, again, it doesn’t matter, for purposes of judging anyone’s position, whether or where they own real estate. If owning of the asset were a reasonable basis for ignoring analysis, then virtually all equity analysts would be de fecto ignored.
Second, once there is an actual closing of a resale unit of the same type as yours, then you (and if you share, everyone else) will know whether you “overpaid”. Until then, it’s all speculation. You’re happy with your purchase, which is great, but that by itself doesn’t eliminate the possibility that G is correct.
Third, you give the impression that you are taking as personal attacks any statements about the market which might in any way involve 600. Please, please, knock it off. It comes across (to me) that you are distinctly worried that you might lose money on the unit–maybe I’m wrong, but if so, you should alter your posting atyle. Deaconblue certainly agrees with you about 600, but manages to avoid bilious posts and coming across as defensive, so I know it is possible.
That should be “not owing an asset”.
Anoncondoshopper: What part of SF was your old condo in? Just curious. I have friends that live in the city so I’m familiar with the neighborhoods.
Good for you for cashing in and joining us in the relatively sane market that is Chicago. Your purchasing power is greater here.
But I concur with others who said you should wait. I think I said before that there will be a lot coming on the market in the next month or so and you might find some of it priced well. There is no reason to rush into a sale right now with the peak buying season yet to come and sales dropping. Sellers will be willing to deal.
Keep us up to date on developments!
As an aside- I think we have no idea what Chicago real estate will do in the next year. Sales are dropping, which usually indicates that prices will drop next. How much is anyone’s guess.
If you intend on living in 600 N. Fairbanks (or wherever you may have bought) for a long, long time- then you’ll be fine. What does it matter? Real estate is a long term investment.
Those who are nervous right now are the flippers/investors, people who need to refinance, owners who can’t afford their mortgage payments, and anyone else who needs to sell into this bad market (for whatever reason- death, divorce, job relocation etc.) Everyone else can just live in their home and ride it out.
riding it out is what i’m doing folks. sorry that you think i’m attacking. sure they may be validity in what everyone says, the truth is…..we don’t know yet. So while G and Ja like to make all this noise they have yet to mention where they live or why they are so concerned with the streeterville area. makes me wonder what they are nervous about.
Sabrina, I lived in “The Marina” district in San Francisco at the corner of Scott St. and Prado, which is about a block from the waterfront. I actually found Cribchatter from a posting I think you did on Socketsite, and I hope this site does as well as that one has in S.F. I have grown to really love Chicago, and all of my friends who come to visit are very suprised at what a fantastic bargain this city is for us Californians. I actually think Chicago is coming into a very good period and this city feels “younger” than San Francisco, probably because younger people can afford to live here.
You can make $250,000 a year in San Francisco and feel “poor” because of the cost of living in that city. If 550 St. Clair were in the SOMA district, the two bedrooms would be about 1.3 million, and good luck hoping the building has deeded parking. My purchasing power here is 50% more, the restaurants are easier to get into, the streets are cleaner and safer, the architecture is better, and I even like the snow (!), so I guess I am sticking around here for a while.
neat blog showing there are indeed people buying…
http://chicago.blockshopper.com/. Also,
Sabrina is correct.
Buying real estate is a long-term investment. Based on where we are in the market cycle you need to have a long time horizon. (probably 5 years to break even) If you think your going to buy a place hold it to year and sell at a profit your dreaming.
I beleive real estate is one of the cornerstones to personel wealth creation. And buying more house than you cannot afford is a huge mistake especailly in this market.
Think about this if you take out a 15 year mortgage after 15 years you own it out right. If you rented for 15 years what do you have to show for all those rent payments. My parents purchased their home for less that $20,000.00 and now its worth around $300,000.00. This is what happens when you buy and hold for a long period of time.
I agree with Valasko
Even if you don’t make a lot of money on your home, the monthly payments eventually pay it off and it’s a great way to build a nest egg.
Additionally, you shouldn’t underestimate the psychological comfort you get from owning your own place.
My advice is to invest in a home for the long haul and don’t worry about the short term ups and downs.
On the other hand, I personally would never buy real estate for investment purposes. I think there are too many costs associated with holding property and too much risk unless you’re a professional, have lots of money, and can take use the tax advantages (none of these apply in my case!)
Sally,
Fed has an emergency meeting to cut rates 75bp – the first such meeting since 9/11, and a rate cut not seen in probably as many years.
World economy is being hit hard.
Markets have priced in a recession in the US.
Current home affordability is out of whack. Rent does not even come close to covering payments to own.
Do you really think home values are going to hold? Do you have rebuttals to the facts rather than ad hominem attacks? Where I live, how much I make, and other such personal data have no bearing on the facts I list above.
Anoncondoshopper: I agree about how poor you can feel in San Francisco. The building you’re looking at lofts in – 154 w Hubbard- would be at least double in SOMA/South Beach. Look at the Oriental Warehouse. They’re nice and all but they’re now selling for $1.2 million.
Have you ever seen sales figures for that building? Originally they sold in 1995-96 for only like $150,000! ha!
Chicago IS more affordable.
It’s interesting that you say that Chicago feels younger. I never thought about that (as I was living in San Francisco during the dot-com boom when it was all young people) but I did read once that something like 40% of the residents get the majority of their income from stock dividends. It’s the highest in the nation.
I’m assuming that’s not 20-somethings making up that statistic.
You’ll have a lot to choose from when buying in Chicago. Our housing stock is almost an embarrassment of riches.
A lot of inventory is showing up in Lake Shore East as well now. I’ve also noticed that a certain brokerage house, who has some affiliation to the developer of the area, is trying to artificially buttress prices. They are asking 100k more than another resale for a lower floor of the same unit type. It also applies to a few other properties, including 340.
Very interested to see where things go from here. Inventory growing but buyers not biting in enough numbers to stabilize.
I had been predicting winter of 2008-09 to be the time when the market really takes a beating, maybe it’ll happen sooner. Or maybe it will be worse than I expected.
ja: Yes, there is a ton of inventory in Lake Shore East. I haven’t talked about all the buildings in that development yet, but the Regatta is at least 30% rented (that’s about 90 units) and you know some of those will come back on the “for sale” market soon enough.
It seems that many sellers are holding firm on their prices in that development- for now.
“Clearly you have some vested interest in protecting the prices in Streeterville. If you think posting on message boards will have any effect you are seriously wasting your time…(the opening of US markets tomorrow should further validate my belief – take a look at the meltdown in the global markets today and 4% decline in futures trading for the DOW today).”
You have me all figured out! I’ve been trying to prop up the Streeterville housing market via this message board! I’ve also been desperately been trying to hide the fact that I own at 600 N Fairbanks too! How’s that short position on the stock market treating you?
D
I called the short last week. It is treating me quite well thank you. Had you listened to me you would have benefitted from it as well. Volatility is a good thing for profits, as you clearly don’t know.
So I guess that’s what happens when you have no arguments left? We’re all dying to hear the REASONS and FACTS for why you are optimistic about the downtown Chicago housing market. We are all awaiting your words of wisdom.
“I’ve also been desperately been trying to hide the fact that I own at 600 N Fairbanks too!”
How’s that long position treating you? By my estimates you’re down about 50-100k.
Are we going to talk about the stock market everyday? Seems that with the volatility- everyone is “right” for at least part of each trading day.
I guess a bigger question is- will the decline in the stock markets also affect the housing market by:
1. Making people again think real estate is “safer” and a “better” investment (as they did after the dot-com bust)
Or
2. People will have even less money for a downpayment now
People will not shift their money from the stock market into RE because they think it is a safer investment. I think the general public attributes the problems with the stock market TO THE DOWNTURN IN RE ITSELF. Whether that’s justifiable, I won’t argue, but it is many people’s perception.
ja, if you had read my post, you would have seen that I mentioned I had a market neutral portfolio and didn’t care what the market did. I also called the rally. I think it’s funny that you were completely wrong in what you said and instead turned it around and attacked me personally. How old are you?
Anyways, I have already laid out my views on the housing market ad nauseum, so you and Malin will just have to go re-read my posts, I’m not going to write them again. As for my “long position”, I got my unit pre-construction so I have a cushion and there is no evidence that it’s down at all but I’m not selling it anyways so I don’t care. All this pessimism is usually the sign of a bottom in any market.
D
Deaconblue,
My point was had you listened to me and taken even a slight bear bias in your market neutral portfolio you would have made a lot of money. When you know the direction is headed in a certain direction no point in staying neutral. And to repeat as it is clear you don’t understand why VOLALITILITY IS KEY TO PROFITS, you take off your short postions in dips and short the peaks. You make more when a market drops from 2700 to 2200 when it doesn’t go there in a straight line. Again, you are a novice and show you don’t understand even the basics of trading. If you think an intraday rally is a sign of the market turning from bear to bull, well that speaks volumes about your expertise.
Now let me ask you, what kind of market neutral strategy do you employ? The reason I ask is becuase you say you don’t care which way the market is headed, but anyone investing in a market neutral strategy knows that things can go very wrong when volitility unexpectedly jumps.
Also, thanks once again for NOT giving your reasons and justification for being optimistic about the housing market. I have to admit though, I didn’t really expect you would try to argue the point (since there is clearly no argument for optimism).
Deaconblue,
We’ll enjoy our places in Fairbanks while the naysayers just TALK about us. Who cares what they think anyway. We are in a great building in a great location that is one thing that can’t be argued.
Sally
Now you get it, Sally. You are stuck anyway so you might as well enjoy.
Yours will be a cautionary tale repeated for many years.
Sally, long term investment you will be fine. I would hate to be in some of these other markets on the East/West coasts.
Metro Area
Home Price(median)
Median Mortgage(% of income)
Price change(5 years)
Worst one-year decline
Forecast growth to April 2008
San Francisco $837,000 54 56.8 -8.8 90-’91 0.7%
San Jose $740,000 45 54.1 -11.6 00-’01 -1.2%
Santa Ana, Calif. $713,000 53 116.9 -8.8 92-’93 -4.9%
Ventura County, Calif. $647,000 48 110.4 -10.7 90-’91 -2%
Honolulu $635,000 52 105.9 -51.9 80-’81 0.6%
Oakland $630,000 44 70.4 -5.7 90-’91 -2.5%
San Diego $574,000 52 93.7 -6.8 92-’93 -1.3%
Los Angeles $547,000 57 138.5 -11.9 92-’93 -5%
Stamford, Conn.$545,000 33 53.1 -8.7 89-’90 -0.2%
Nassau/Suffolk, N.Y. $483,000 31 76.3 -6.6 89-’90 -6%
New York City $482,000 48 82.1 -6.4 89-’90 -3.9%
Bethesda, Md. $465,000 28 99.5 -3.8 81-’82 -4.6%
Stockton, Calif. $450,000 46 99.1 -5.2 94-’95 -5.4%
Cambridge, Mass. $431,000 28 27.1 -7.7 89-’90 1.3%
Washington, D.C. $421,000 28 96.2 -5.1 90-’91 -3.9%
Sacramento $408,000 36 93.9 -6.4 92-’93 -0.9%
Riverside, Calif.$407,000 41 147.9 -9.2 93-’94 -4.4%
Seattle $399,000 31 62.8 -7.8 81-’82 0.6%
Newark $397,000 27 71.5 -7.4 89-’90 -2.4%
Boston $379,000 28 41.2 -8.2 89-’90 -0.4%
Essex County, Mass. $372,000 28 33.8 -9.2 90-’91 -1.2%
Edison, N.J. $362,000 24 76.3 -7.3 89-’90 -3.2%
West Palm Beach, Fla. $340,000 31 118.7 -4.9 90-’91 -2.5%
Miami $335,000 41 149.3 -4.3 81-’82 -8.8%
Fort Lauderdale $325,000 31 128.4 -3.1 92-’93 -5.5%
Las Vegas $325,000 33 110.8 -17.0 82-’83 -8.9%
Fresno $311,000 39 149.7 -9.7 82-’83 -4.2%
Portland, Ore. $293,000 26 67.4 -16.6 80-’81 -1.1%
Poughkeepsie, N.Y. $288,000 23 82.9 -19.0 82-’83 -4.5%
Providence $287,000 26 74.7 -7.7 80-’81 -2.6%
Bakersfield, Calif. $287,000 35 168.1 -5.4 94-’95 -5.4%
Chicago $281,000 23 46.7 -1.0 81-’82 2.2%
Sarasota $278,000 28 103.3 -2.6 81-’82 -3%
Lake County, Ill. $275,000 19 38 -8.4 81-’82 1.1%
Baltimore $275,000 22 95.3 -4.1 81-’82 -1.9%
Tacoma, Wash. $273,000 26 64.5 -3.6 81-’82 0.8%
Phoenix $271,000 26 103.8 -6.0 81-’82 -5.5%
Allentown, Pa. $270,000 24 69.1 -12.2 81-’82 -0.7%
Orlando $269,000 27 107.1 -1.4 91-’92 -4.4%
Worcester, Mass. $268,000 22 38.2 -9.5 89-’90 -0.4%
Denver $268,000 22 12.6 -2.3 87-’88 -2.2%
New Haven $264,000 21 60.2 -7.4 90-’91 -0.1%
Hartford $256,000 19 48.2 -8.2 89-’90 2.8%
Wilmington, Del. $244,000 19 69.7 -8.3 90-’91 0.2%
Virginia Beach $244,000 24 99.1 -0.6 94-’95 -3.4%
Minneapolis/St. Paul $240,000 18 38.9 -1.6 82-’83 0.7%
Instead of talking about bitter renters, we soon will be talking a lot of bitter owners who are stuck in a underwater condos or homes.
Anything relevant in there, city agent? Maybe you would like to look into the correlation between the timing of inventory increases in those markets relative to their current housing depreciation. Not everyone is in the same stage of the bubble.
“Long term investment you will be fine.” Did you forget to add the obvious to that? “But you would have done a lot better by renting (in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009…) and waiting to buy.”
That is, unless “investment” doesn’t mean what I think it does.
Personally I’ve noticed there is a lag of 3-4 months from inventory spikes to price drops. But that’s not from the Chicago market but out east.
On that note, a lot of inventory is being added daily to the market in LSE and Streeterville. MCL just added a few more units to the MLS for Park View Condos as clearly it has stalled and closings are nearing.
JA,
I’m simply pointing out the median price for “METRO AREA” is 281k. Please take a second look at the other 30 cities above us??? Your telling me cities like “Oakland California” should have double the Median Price than a Global City which Chicago has and will continue to become.
If you don’t think some of those other Median prices look “funny” but hey your the Expert. I praise you for having so much knowledge aboout all of these “Local” markets around the country.
If you can’t agree that people buying on the East/West coast in the last 5 years have gone “more nuts” than the people in the Midwest then your looking and reading in the wrong places. But hey you look at these numbers everyday and you can justify everything your posting right now because your an expert.
Just so you know in the last 24 calender days there has not been a lot of new inventory added to MLS AREA 8024 (in Streterville, LSE, Gold Coast, Old Town, River Norht Area) “compared” to last couple years. Out of these new listings 10% are being offered by the developer/investor…
Just like some buyers will sit and watch from the sidelines I have a sense that a lot of sellers can and will “stay put” depending on their specific situations…
100-200k 13 New Listings
200-300k 51 New Listings
300-400k 47 New Listings
400-500k 48 New Listings
500-750k- 49 New Listings
750k-1M- 18 New Listings
1M-1.5M- 21 New Listings
1.5-2M- 9 New Listings
2-2.5M- 3 New Listings
2.5-UP- 1 New Listing
CA:
1. Lake County is a separate line in that chart at $275k. Do you know if “Chicago” includes just the city, all of Cook or something more?
2. “Oakland” certainly means more than the city of Oakland–perhaps just Alameda County, but possibly also Contra Costa. And Oakland itslef is now a lot more diverse, economically speaking, than you would think based on recent history.
3. Do you actually think that the city-wide, county-wide or metro-wide medians or averages have anything really to do with the sub-markets that get discussed here? I think that they are only useful as a very basic trend.
JA and G are both experts so make sure you listen to EVERYTHING they say. They remind me of Jim Jones. Hang in there city agent.
City Agent,
What were the new listings numbers for the first 24 days of 2007? Without knowing that, it’s impossible to know what the numbers you reported mean…
Anon,
Chicago “Metro Area” certainly means more than the city of Chicago- perhaps Northbrook, Winnetka, Northfield, Kenilworth, South Barrington, Barrington Hills, Inverness, some of the weathiest families/homes in all of the USA reside…
The top 10 counties with the highest number of millionaire
residents are:
1. Los Angeles County, California: With 268,136 millionaire
households, Los Angeles County has the largest number of
millionaires among the counties in the U.S. The County has 23 %
of California’s millionaire households and 3 % of those in the
country.
2. Cook County, Illinois: Cook County, which includes Chicago,
has 171,118 millionaire households forming 40 % of such
households in Illinois and 2 % in the nation.
3. Orange County, California: Orange County consists of 10 % of
California’s millionaire households with 116,157 millionaire
households. It forms 1 % of the nation’s millionaire
households.
4. Maricopa County, Arizona: With 113,414 households, Maricopa
County has the 4th largest number of millionaire households in
USA. This makes 62 % of Arizona’s total millionaire households
and 1 % of the nation’s.
5. San Diego County, California: The fifth county in the U.S.
and the 3rd in the State with the most number of millionaire
households, San Diego has 102,138 millionaire households that
make up 9 % of such households in California. It also accounts
for 1 % of the total millionaire households in the country.
6. Harris County, Texas: With 99,504 millionaire households,
Harris County accounts for 16 % of those in Texas. Harris
County forms 1 % of America’s total millionaire households.
7. Nassau County, New York: This New York County has 79,704
millionaire households forming 13 % of the total households in
the state. Nassau County accounts for 1 % of the nation’s
millionaire households.
8. Santa Clara County, California: The third county in
California to have the highest number of millionaire
households. Santa Clara County has 74,824 millionaire
households and consists of 6 % of the state’s and 1 % of the
nation’s millionaire households.
9. Palm Beach County, Florida: With 71,221 millionaire
households, Palm Beach County consists of 11 % of Florida’s
total millionaire households and 1 % of such households in the
nation.
10. King County, Oregon: At tenth position, King County has
68,390 millionaire households forming 33 % of such households
in Washington and 1 % in U.S.A.
CA:
I know what the Chicago metro area is, generally, but I don’t know what “Chicago” refers to in that chart you posted this morning. But since “Boston” doesn’t even include Cambridge, I don’t know what to think.
If you’d cited to where you got it (a good idea, always, including this most recent post–which I think I recognize from Forbes), I would be able to find out myself.
Kenworthey,
I don’t know where City Agent got his MLS numbers from, but here are mine for area 8008 (river to the south and west, north avenue to the north, lake to east; all attached residential.) One reason for the difference might be that mine include relisted properties, and maybe CA only presented ‘new to the market’ listings. Mine are definitely apples to apples, so there has been a large dropoff:
1/1/05-1/24/05 377
1/1/06-1/24/06 504
1/1/07-1/24/07 642
1/1/08-1/24/08 396
The listings have dropped because many who are already upside-down on their mortgages are hoping for a miracle that will not happen. Rising foreclosures will account for some of them soon enough.
There really isn’t a surprise with these listing numbers. But check out the closed sales for the same dates:
1/1/05-1/24/05 147
1/1/06-1/24/06 151
1/1/07-1/24/07 243
1/1/08-1/24/08 96
You can bet that many of those 96 closed on new deliveries contracted in prior years. I’ll bet the number of new contracts is nowhere near that number.
wow–the drop from closings in January 07 to closings in Jan 08 is pretty stunning. Of course, 05 was already a bubble year–I bet 03 had numbers that look more like 08. I think your numbers also suggest that for Chicago, the “peak” was sometime between mid 06 and mid 07, not 05 like many in the press have said about other areas of the country. Thanks for the 411, everyone.
Kenworthy, sorry I’m using numbers from (AREA 8008) as well… I just looked to double check #’s and I get the same 267 new listings (same breakdown I posted before) 12 under contract, 7 price changes, 9 temp off market since 01/01/2008.
I went ahead and checked detached(single family home) and multiple units(2-4 flats) just in case your numbers are including this, there is only 2 new listings.
I don’t know what MLS service you are using but you must be including a website that hasn’t updated its system or not typing in the right search requirements.
# of closings by themselves do not indicate where prices were, so it could still be the case that 05 was the peak for Chicago as for the rest of the country in terms of prices. Areas I am familiar with have continued to set records for number of closings even in 2007 yet prices have declined 10%. The reason being all the new development did in fact attract more demand, but not enough to keep pace with supply.
I’m not sure which way it was in Chicago, maybe someone else could chime in.
CityAgent,
I have no idea why you addressed me in your post before as I was not mentioning anything you said. nor did you controvert any of my statements. What was your point incidentally?
City Agent, Kenworthey requested a comparison to prior years and I gave her an “apples to apples” comparison. I see that you still haven’t responded to her request.
I presented the total number of properties listed between the dates indicated. Some may have been cancelled, some sold, some pending, etc. Regardless, it is an accurate comparison of MLS numbers over the past several years. I think Kenworthey can decide for herself if the data is useful.
One correction, the final total for yesterday is now available so the correct number for 1/1/08-1/24/08 was 412.
Here is the historical MLS data for closings of attached single family in area 8008:
Year Total 4th Q Oct Nov Dec
1997 1,627 404 146 123 135
1998 1,984 412 152 131 129
1999 2,258 734 203 153 378
2000 2,202 530 196 166 168
2001 2,027 393 161 126 106
2002 2,926 749 260 209 280
2003 3,492 1,118 418 232 468
2004 3,953 1,023 238 368 417
2005 4,270 1,001 236 287 478
2006 3,287 654 215 230 209
2007 3,136 719 260 261 198
And here is the data for year-to-date through January 24th:
Year 1/1 – 1/24
1997 75
1998 73
1999 82
2000 106
2001 105
2002 83
2003 109
2004 146
2005 147
2006 151
2007 243
2008 98
Do not forget to look at this in the context of all the new inventory constructed in recent years. Only 98 closings to date in 2008 is a much lower percentage of inventory as compared to the years at the start of the bubble.
To all my fellow Real Estate investors. I have a few listings at the 550 St. Clair building , which will be opening soon and one at 210 DesPlaines. If your looking for a market analysis of these properties or need help with the re-list for one low flat fee visut me at http://www.eMarketrealty.net