IBJNews

Home sales pick up for second straight month

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Home-sale agreements in the nine-county Indianapolis area rose 16 percent in June compared with the same month a year ago, marking the second straight month of year-over-year increases after 14 months of declining sales.

Sales agreements climbed to 1,967 last month, up from 1,694 in June 2010, according to a report released Tuesday by F.C. Tucker Co.

The back-to-back increases were the first year-over-year rises in home-sale agreements since April 2010, when potential homebuyers rushed to sign contracts prior to the expiration of a generous federal tax credit. The special credit provided up to $8,000 for first-time homebuyers and $6,500 for some repeat buyers.

Sales fell dramatically last year after the tax credit ended, depressing residential real estate transactions for several months afterward.

While much higher than a year ago, June’s sales were 14 percent below what they were in the same month of 2009.

Year-to-date sales agreements are down 9 percent compared to the same period of 2010.

Marion County saw a 13-percent rise in June sales agreements from a year ago, from 781 to 886. Hamilton County deals rose 23 percent, from 328 to 402. Madison County saw a 33-percent increase, from 83 to 110.

Available homes for sale in the nine-county region dropped 7.5 percent in June, with 15,722 homes on the market. Marion County’s inventory dropped 11.5 percent.

Year-to-date sales prices are up 0.5 percent in 2010, from $147,257 to $148,030.

So far this year, sales agreements have been reached on 62 homes in the area priced at $500,000 or more.


 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. PJ - Mall operators like Simon, and most developers/ land owners, establish individual legal entities for each property to avoid having a problem location sink the ship, or simply structure the note to exclude anything but the property acting as collateral. Usually both. The big banks that lend are big boys that know the risks and aren't mad at Simon for forking over the deed and walking away.

  2. Do any of the East side residence think that Macy, JC Penny's and the other national tenants would have letft the mall if they were making money?? I have read several post about how Simon neglected the property but it sounds like the Eastsiders stopped shopping at the mall even when it was full with all of the national retailers that you want to come back to the mall. I used to work at the Dick's at Washington Square and I know for a fact it's the worst performing Dick's in the Indianapolis market. You better start shopping there before it closes also.

  3. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  4. If you only knew....

  5. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

ADVERTISEMENT