California median home prices in freefall: down $200,000 in year, $3,800 per week, $549 per day

[Liberal_in_LA]

The median price of a CA home lost $549 per day, 2007 to 2008!

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laland/2008/06/freefall-califo.html

Freefall: California median home prices down 35% in May

California's housing market continued its historic decline in May, as a flood of foreclosed homes for sale drove down the median price paid for a single-family home by a stunning 35% from year-earlier levels, the California Assn. of Realtors reported today.

The median price paid for a single-family home in the state dropped by almost $200,000, from $594,530 in May 2007 to $384,840 in May 2008, the association reported. That drop represents a decline of $3,800 per week, or $549 per day, and is the highest ever measured by the association. The price decline appeared to be accelerating from April to May, as median prices dropped by 4.7% in that period.

[w4rma]

1. Good. Housing will eventually be affordable again. (nt)

[onenote]

2. delete

[Amerigo Vespucci]

3. The median price climbed to a peak of $750K for run-down "starter homes" in bad neighborhoods

No kidding...Silicon Valley, CA. It may sound shocking when it's posted in the L.A. Times, but when you drive down these streets and see these s**tholes up close, dropping from "from $594,530 in May 2007 to $384,840 in May 2008" feels like a reflection of the home's fair market value.

[Liberal_in_LA]

5. Prices were out of control in LA also. 700K for sheds with no garage. Prices had to fall.

Hysteria drove the market.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

8. On my street, about 8 months ago...

...one of these "single family ranch homes"...3 bedrooms, but SMALL bedrooms, one bath, one car garage...went on the market for $650K.

The Realtor put postcards on everyone's front door.

A month and a half later, there was another postcard. It sold for $450K.

This is basically a working class neighborhood. A lot of "gansta" pricks living with mom and dad. Homes 50 years old and older. There's no way it's a $750K neighborhood. Even calling it a $350K neighborhood is overly generous, but a hell of a lot more reasonable than $750K.

:patriot:

[Liberal_in_LA]

10. Sadly, many people paid 650K for houses of that type/location. They must be besides themselves with

frustration. I know I would be. 200K loss in equity?! :-(

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. WOW I may even be able to afford a home now

[Disturbed]

6. The home prices were inflated for three years, now they are

more realistic.

[Prefer]

13. My street in North Atlanta

House that went on for $629 is now $479.

[slackmaster]

15. Yes, if you have saved yourself up some down payment money

:hi:

[David__77]

7. Still waiting for further drop.

I'm a renter, former owner that sold out last year. I'm waiting here in Sacramento for prices to drop further. It's not a gamble, because this trough will be wide and flat. We will not see considerable price inflation any time soon.

[Liberal_in_LA]

11. You'll be able to afford a castle soon. castle with a moat.

[Oeditpus Rex]

12. Except the moat will effectively be a ditch

since there's no water.

[David__77]

14. A McMansion perhaps.

I wouldn't mind 2,500 square feet, but don't need more. It's interesting how the market mix was so altered by developers making bigger houses each year. Now the prices cannot in the long run commensurately inflate because incomes are not higher in the aggregate.

[slackmaster]

16. Can I have sharks?

With frickin' laser beams attached to their heads?

[FreeState]

9. In my zip code that is not true (San Diego)

Im one of the fortunate ones who have only lost 8% of the homes value do to its good location. We have one home on our street in foreclosure (due to a second on the mortage - the second bank refuses any offer bellow the value of the home two years ago). We also have 3 homes that have sold with in a month of going on the market. However other area's of San Diego are just as bad as LA's market - our location is the only thing that has saved us.