We recently updated our Panama City Beach condo sales data through the end of April 2008. The statistics don’t look much different than earlier this year. The graph below illustrates the number of monthly re-sales from the 70 Panama City Beach condo buildings in our database. The 2008 monthly re-sales through May mirror the number of re-sales from the same period in 2007 even though there have been a substantial number of new units come on line.
The market trend line is illustrated below. It is structured to show a sale price trend measured in terms of the percentage sale price as of a particular date. The starting date used was March 1, 2007 so we could show the price trend for the past year. We chose units from a variety of buildings of different ages and sizes that had a sufficient number of sales as to be statistically significant. The units used in the analysis were:
Boardwalk Beach; Opened in 2005; 1,380 SF; 2BR/2Ba
Calypso; Opened in 2006; 1,226 SF; 2BR/2Ba
Celadon; Opened in 2004; 846 SF; 1BR/2Ba
Grandview East; Opened in 2005; 1,492 SF; 3BR/2Ba
Gulf Crest; Opened in 2003; 1,388 SF; 2BR/2Ba
Emerald Isle; Opened in 2005; 1,146 SF; 2BR/2Ba
Treasure Island; Opened in 2005; 1,370 SF; 2BR/2Ba
The Summit; Opened in 1983; 912 SF; 1BR/1.5Ba
Regency Towers; Opened in 1975; 1,114 SF; 2BR/2Ba
The March 1, 2007 market value for each type of unit was determined by analyzing sales data from January 1, 2007 to April 1, 2007. The sale price of each type of unit is only compared to the typical sale price of that particular type of unit as of March 1, 2007. In other words, a unit type with a March 1, 2007 market value of $400,000 is represented as 1 or 100%. An October 2007, $380,000 sale of that type of unit is depicted as .95 or 95% of the March 1, 2007 sale price. The sale prices and sale dates were charted with a price trend line for each type of unit. The chart contained in the price trend analysis is a trend line of the trend lines of the sale prices of each type of unit from the nine buildings. Foreclosure sale prices that were unrealistically low were not included. The analysis does not try to skew the price trend in any direction. The data is just the data.
The data indicates that the rate of price decline slowed over the past four months (2.5%) when compared to the previous four months (5%). This could be misleading as the rate of decline from January 2007 through May 2007 was somewhat less than to the rate of decline from January 2008 to April 2008. The steepest decline over the past year came during July through December 2007. The rate of price decline could accelerate again during the last six months of 2008.
There is no empirical evidence that the market has stabilized. The evidence suggests we still have more pain to come.
As for anecdotal evidence, well we will leave that for another contribution.