This is clear as mud! 15% from what? Now? 2008? 2007? The “peak” of the market?
As is often the problem with reporters writing stories based upon sound bites when they don’t understand what they are writing about. It is EXACTLY this type of article that causes confusion and panic with the public. Not that there is not enough reason for concern and confusion already with the accurate and clear reporting out there.
That being said, prices have fallen 19% in Manhattan and 13% on the East End in the first quarter of 2009.
The writer refers to the Case-Schiller Index, which is a lagging report, at least 3-4 months behind the market, but is that what the economist Kenneth Rosen is referring to? C’mon guys, Bloomberg is a big company…you can do better than this!
1 comment
April 15, 2009 at 7:41 pm
laurie mindnich
A guess: the areas that are indicated as recovering first show an area income that is commensurate with a 28% ratio house payment to income. I received a really interesting article that showed that many states are in that range, after the pricing plunged- they are the areas earmarked for an earlier recovery.
The problem with NY is that the front end ratio was STILL something like 65%- far too high to guestimate a recovery, if it’s predicated on house pricing vs. income. Also, an indicator that prices will drop further, until that ratio is achieved.
Now that the lender restrictions are so much tougher, the point of the article is that that’s the figure to watch: a state’s average income vs. the front end ratio for a house. If prices are still way above that earmark, they view the area as having future drops.
Notice at the top I said, a GUESS!