by Kris Berg on March 13, 2010
It’s the middle of March, and I have a several very large shoe boxes staring me in the face, which can only mean one thing. It’s tax time. While I am quite determined to tackle this tremendously fun task by Monday lest I go to jail and find my blogging privileges revoked, I can procrastinate a little longer. That’s what Danger Girl does.
What’s more fun than filing tax returns? Looking back at the real estate market that was February for the I-15 corridor — well, most of it, anyway. Here is a snapshot of activity is some of our favorite I-15 zip codes (and a couple of other zips that sneaked into my screen shot). Information is courtesy of the San Diego Association of Realtors. Data is from the Sandicor Multiple Listing Service for detached homes closing in February, 2010.
According to SDAR:
Median sales prices continue to rise slightly each month. The median sales price for detached homes increased 1.6 percent, while attached increased 2.4 percent since January. When comparing median sales price to February 2009, the increase is 10.4 percent for detached and 16.2 for attached. Overall, median sales price is up 14 percent compared to February of last year.
This statement reflects activity county-wide, and as we have discussed before, median sale price is but one way to look at things. Price per square foot is another, and this statistic reflects not only price tag but what buyers are getting for their money. The bag of chips may be cheaper, but what’s inside the bag?
Scripps Ranch Detached Homes
Feb. 2010: Median $/SF = $275
Feb. 2009: Median $/SF = $305
Jan. 2010: Median $/SF = $286
Jan. 2009: Median $/SF = $286
Granted, this is a small sample, and two months don’t make a year, but it seems that February buyers were getting better value than a year ago, price aside. Taking a look at Rancho Bernardo (92128), where we have more sales, we find this.
Rancho Bernardo (92128) Detached Homes
Feb. 2010: Median $/SF = $273
Feb. 2009: Median $/SF = $260
Jan. 2010: Median $/SF = $270
Jan. 2009: Median $/SF = $264
That’s a little better. So what does this mean? Are we stabilizing “for reals?” Or, are we just having a Spring fling on the heels of a sunseting home buyer tax credit, among other things?
Beats the heck out of me. I’ve got taxes to do.
I’ll be back on Monday, Form 1040 willing. Have a great weekend.
by Steve Berg on March 12, 2010
(Editor’s Note: This morning, we welcome a guest writer, Steve Berg. Sure, his picture is on the side bar and all, but we rarely see him around these parts — rarely, that is, until he gets a little bee in his bonnet. So, join me in welcoming Steve. Let’s make him feel at home.)
photo credit: elecnix
Please, just shoot me. I don’t mean fatally, but maybe just maim me a little. It will be a much more pleasant experience than the last fifteen minutes I spent going through my email inbox. I’ve hit the unsubscribe link so many times this morning, that I risk a serious onset of Carpal Tunnel syndrome.
It has become a daily ritual for millions of people. And don’t think that this constant drip of irrelevant information is not topical for a blog where we sometimes talk about real estate. My spam is all real estate, all day.
The problem is that I didn’t ask for it, I don’t need it and I don’t want it. If I am looking for a home for a client, I am already searching the target areas using my “MLS thingy.” I know every home that is available. The last thing I need is for a gazillion listing agents to assume that I am an idiot, unable to unearth their offerings should they be right for my client, and consequently crash my inbox party in droves.
Most of the daily e-flyers I receive are a monumental waste of cyber-space, presumably sent only for the bragging rights at their next listing appointment. “Forget that loser agent Steve and his fancy Google ranking. I market your home to every agent in the lower 48!” Only, I don’t really need to know that you have just listed a lakefront in Kennebunkport, because my clients are looking for a home in San Diego. So, what you are really doing is selling your would-be client a bill of goods, right?
But, here is the kicker. These same agents are also marketing to a massive list of unsuspecting civilians. It’s the old numbers game, a modern version of the intrusive cold call. Many times, it is arguably a case of bad marketing happening to otherwise good agents.
Drip Marketing Vendor: “You will not believe how many leads you will get when you subscribe to my water torture, err, drip e-mail campaign. For just a few dollars, we guarantee that you will piss off, err, reach hundreds of thousands of live ones, uh, customers!”
Otherwise Good Agent: “Cool! Can I get my picture on it?”
We have been down this road before, ad nauseam. How is it that so many agents buy into this ridiculously irritating, unwelcome, intrusive method of marketing? I vote for “lazy.” Reach the most people with the least investment of both time and money.
Allowing people to opt in – to a feed or a newsletter – is one thing. Spamming the daylights out of your potential clients, not to mention your fellow agents, is another. You risk alienating the customer and driving business to another agent who respects the new rules of permission engagement and designs his marketing around results, not just…
Um, never mind. I think spamming is brilliant! Go for it.
on 
on 
on 
on 
on 
on 
on 
