Surf Festival Weekend

This weekend brings out some of the best, and craziest, of life in MB.

Here's hoping you take advantage of the International Surf Festival events. (Click for complete calendar.)

Among other things, we're happy to see the lifeguard competition back at the MB Pier. It's quite a show. The utter seriousness of the guards' work was on display last week during the high surf, with hundreds of rescues and one tragedy that inevitably colors this weekend's battles. This is a good time to show your support.

The 6-man volleyball tournament is its own thing, a serious sporting competition disguised as a hilarious romp – or maybe it's the other way around. Do be careful what the kids see.

We live at the beach, right? That's what this weekend celebrates.

Please vote in our poll to let us know your plans for the festival. Of course, you can select all of the options that apply. We'll close voting at 9pm Sunday night.

And use the comments here to describe your favorite, or least favorite, aspects of this year's events, or memories of years past.

East MB Bucket (9)

We've been so unfair to our east-of-Hwy. 1 brethren.

It has been literally months since we last opened up an East MB Bucket for discussion of the goings-on so near, yet so far away.

Since that last one, the home we led off with (1407 12th) has actually sold – for $560k.

Not too bad for a well-worn 1950s cottage (3br/1ba, 1300 sq. ft.) that had begun as a FSBO at $1m.

But that seems much more than was paid earlier this year for a transcendentally marginal East MB offering that was featured in a different bucket last October. 1856 Marine, at the corner with Aviation, fetched $480k in February. That's $200k less than when we discussed it last Fall. Also, curiously, $420k less than a June 2007 sale that, frankly, looks wrong.

Of course East MB is not just about these small, cheap homes.

There's 1501 9th, a very big (6br/10ba, 8550 sq. ft.) new home on a rare double corner lot, featured in our late-March bucket. It started at $6.5m, and this week took a nudge down to $5.995m.

A newer listing at 1416 9th is also newly down $500k, but that's a bigger proportion of the asking price.

This 6br/5ba, 4275 sq. ft. home is clear evidence that you get more for less in the East, offered at $444/PSF, though $1.899m still won't strike anyone as cheap, per se.

Those are some opening observations. Please share yours here as well – make the bucket work for you.

Final open questions, prompted by the destruction of the old Alberton's this week:

• Do we really need a big new drugstore?

• Hey, why no drugstores west of Sepulveda?

------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this "East MB Bucket" thread to post information about all listings and goings-on east of Sepulveda, data, critiques, news, etc.

MB vs. CA & U.S. Trends

No doubt there's a little buzz growing – well, someone's always trying to grow it – to the effect that the local housing market is on the road to recovery.

A couple sources of that talk are a recent data release by the California Association of Realtors (click here for the CAR press release) and an uptick in the Case-Shiller home price index (click here for the Case-Shiller news page). Among the happy highlights:

• Statewide, the number of homes sold (closed) rose 20.1% in June 2009, compared to June 2008 (CAR);

• The Case-Shiller index, a barometer of home prices tied to same-house sales, rose 0.5% in May over April;
  

• A press release accompanying the Case-Shiller data says, amid various qualifications, that the figures represent "the first time we have seen broad increases in home prices in 34 months. This could be an indication that home price declines are finally stabilizing."

• The CAR press release gives MB an honorable mention as the second-highest-value market in the state. Only Beverly Hills 90210 ranked higher than MB's SFR median of $1.475m for June 2009. (Not all markets are on the list, and MB hasn't been for about a year, having failed to hit the threshold of 30 sales per month. But for now, MB is back in the mix.); and
  

• The number of sales locally (SFRs in all of MB) increased from May to June, from 20 to 29.
  

On the other hand...

• Sales across California in June were actually slower than in May by 6%, according to CAR, suggesting a slowdown as we enter Summer, despite increased chatter about the market warming up;

• Median prices statewide were down 26.4% year-over-year, down 23.5% in LA County, and down 15.7% for the beach cities of MB, HB, Redondo, El Segundo and Playa Del Rey (see Daily Breeze chart);

• MB's median price for June was down a whopping 25.7% year-over-year – as seen in the same CAR press release. Though we don't usually react much to one month's data with a small sample size, that figure is actually pretty consistent with MBC's finding earlier this month that the median for SFRs (west of Sepulveda only) for the full first 6 months of 2009 was down 22.4% against the first 6 months of 2008 (see "Pace Slower, Prices Lower");

• Those Case-Shiller data show the end of a downtrend nationally, but for the LA area, declines continued (-0.1% for May, compared to the positive 0.5% nationwide);

• Prices in the LA area were down 19.8% year-over-year, worse than the 16.8% decline for Case-Shiller's 10-market index, and 17.1% for their 20-market index (note that this number is calculated much differently than median prices); and

• MLS-recorded sales of SFRs in all of MB in June 2009 were flat with 2007 & 2008 at 29 (there were 29 last year and 30 in 2007), well below recent years, which ranged from 38-59 (see Kaye Thomas' post on month-by-month sales in this decade).

• The sales pace west of Sepulveda remains below 2008's record-setting low, 76 SFR closings in the first half of this year versus 89 last year, and last year was the slowest on record for 20+ years.

There's something for everyone in the data. They clearly don't point in just one direction.

The CAR press release, which generated news before the Case-Shiller figures came out, doesn't speculate much on prices. It does note, as a hopeful sign, that "many distressed properties are receiving multiple bids" (i.e., underpriced REOs drawing several buyers) and that "year-to-year price declines are diminishing."

So what might be on the horizon? CAR predicts an increase in supply at the lowest end of the market from "another surge of foreclosures" later this year, yet also expresses the hope that median prices won't be much affected. Maybe not.

Deal Done Down Low, High on the Hill

For more than a year we've been tracking the huge, gorgeous new home at 218 N. Dianthus.

Huge: 4br/5ba and 6100 sq. ft., with very big upstairs entertaining spaces and ocean views. We once likened the kitchen island to an aircraft carrier, and we now see that the listing claims it to be "the size of Capri." (We've been on both, and, yes, each description exaggerates a bit.)

Gorgeous: A name architect, lush interior with fine materials, great landscaping. If the layout downstairs was a bit maze-like and peculiar, at least we can say that was in the interest of maximizing private spaces.

But 218 Dianthus crashed against an increasingly dreadful reality – spec construction in the Hills is not working out these days for most of the builders.

Coming on the market in March 2008 at $6.75m, the listing was priced as if the Fall 2007 pre-meltdown financial meltdown hadn't happened, and demand would soon pick up in MB's prestige market.

Well... the price was down to $5.495m (-$1.255m/-19%) by year end, and down further to $4.695m (-$2.055m/-30%) in March this year, meriting a mention at MBC in "2 Classy Hillies Down $2m." It was last at $4.249m.

Now, 218 N. Dianthus has closed at $3.920m (-$2.830m/-42% from start). Yes, that's quite nearly $3m off the top. We're all accustomed to sellers starting a bit high, but 40% too high?

This data certifies the listing as the biggest-dollar cut MBC has recorded in almost 2.5 years online, and it nears the 48% cut from start at 560 36th earlier this year (see "Some of the Biggest We've Seen").

Look at the drop in PPSF as well:

• Start: $1,100/PSF

• Close: $642/PSF

Looking at other new construction in the Hills, that's down from the $685/PSF paid for 930 John in February this year (5br/6ba, 5400 sq. ft., $3.7m).

And if we might dial back quite a bit further, almost 2 years ago, a new home at 300 N. Dianthus (6br/6ba, 5500 sq. ft.) went for $4.175m, equivalent to $759/PSF.

That puts 218 N. Dianthus down 15% on a square-foot basis over 2 years, a punishment that's even worse if you consider ocean views vs. city views at 300 and the more private master at 218 versus the not-so-private front-yard master at 300. (See "Privacy is Overrated.")

PPSF among active new construction in the Hills ranges from $623/PSF (903 10th) to $1,026/PSF (645 9th), with many near the mid-700s. There was a time when you could get closer to $1,000/PSF for new.

We're not privy to this project's details, but we do know the lot for 218 N. Dianthus was acquired for right about $2m in Dec. 2005. Setting aside carrying costs, and estimating costs of sale at around 4% in this case, that would leave about $1.75m to cover construction costs – $286/PSF. Can you build a luxury home in the Hills, seeking absolute top-dollar when you hit the market, for <$300/PSF? Doubtful. It had to be below replacement cost at the end.

Now, why again did people think, at the end of 2005, that a tricked-out luxury speckie was a good idea?

And how long before someone rolls the dice like this again?

A Couple Sunday Opens (7/26)

Face it, AVP or not, this is not a busy season for open houses.

We'll take a modest break here at MBC by simply pointing you to 2 listings featured earlier this week in other stories that are debuting (again!) this weekend.

Of course, you can click here for the complete list of opens published in the Beach Reporter, or at any time use the link in the right-hand column under "Prop. Search Tools."

As always, click on any highlighted address for more pics & details via Redfin. We ask MBC readers who visit these homes – or any open houses – to also report back in the comments here. Tell us what you see, what you like and what you don't like.

In the Sand Section, up on the plateau is 445 30th (3br/3ba, 2600 sq. ft.). MBC has labeled this home "a pretty sweet and spacious Spanish, an older home with some additions and nice updates."

An extra bonus: the lot next door, to the west, may be for sale, too. (Same owners.)

In March 2008, this listing came up at $1.999m. The price trickled down to $1.795m by July, when the listing simply quit.

Now, a year later, the listing begins at $1.575m, as noted in "Welcome Back." Open Sun. 1-4pm.

2812 Elm (4br/4ba, 2500 sq. ft.) is back at $1.299m, after failed attempts to sell from 2007-2008. (See "Elm is Back, Too.")

It's now offered as a short sale and with a note that buyers must take it in "as-is condition." (The listing also says it "looks as good as new.")

Location is nice, the curb appeal is great, the kitchen and living spaces are appealing, and the shady back yard is sweet as well. It's a very decent home that does suffer from a slightly odd layout. One bedroom (more a natural office) is off the kitchen, and the second story is sort of a split level.

Sellers paid $1.584m in June 2005, it's almost $300k below that now. Is it finally a deal? Open Sun. 2-5pm.

Big, Beautiful, Too Much?

In case you haven't whizzed by recently to see for yourself, it's news that they're almost finished building the new home at 212 The Strand.

This is the famous, or infamous, three-lot merger on which construction began nearly 18 months ago after plenty of wrangling and preliminaries.

The project was almost dragged down by the ongoing "mansionization" debate. But the very day after the owner got the green light from the city to proceed, back in early 2008, the bulldozers busted loose, and the long birthing process began.

What we see now is a giant, beautiful new home with plenty of beach character. Plans called for 6br/11ba and 16,000 sq. ft., including nanny's quarters and guest spaces. And yes, that's big.

Still, you'd be forgiven for thinking that, in person, the home looks like a smallish, 5-star hotel. Somehow, the near-final product does not dominate or overwhelm in the ways we might have feared. Count us as pleasantly surprised.

We'll note that the regional fish-wrapper ran a story in early 2008 sampling all sorts of negative sentiments. The prospect of this new home had "struck fear into the hearts of neighbors," by the estimation of the writer. One neighbor said simply, "Three lots is way too much."

Is it?

The L-shaped home, tucked mostly to the rear, leaves a lot more open space near The Strand, where locals and neighbors might care most about an imposing mega-structure. Surely, a row of 3 separate max-out-the-lot homes in the same space would create a firmer façade.

Is the space along the walkstreet a "large yard," as promised in a 2007 description of the project in the Easy Reader? We'll call that a stretch. Most Strand homes have zero yard; we'll grant you that. But a narrow 1/8th to 1/6th strip along the walkstreet hardly qualifies as a big chunk of "open space."

We should take note of the dollars involved here. We truly do not have firm data, but it appears that the 3 lots were acquired for $15m or so dating back to 2001. The LA Times estimated the value of the land last year at $29m. We hear tell of the construction costs hitting $15m+.

The southernmost part of the South End Strand keeps remaking itself. There's one terrific home on the north side of 3rd, about 5 years old now.

Moving south, you have the triple lot in this story, then 208 and 204 The Strand, sold to the same buyers for a double-lot conversion at the end of March this year for $12.8m combined. (That was $6.7m for 208 and $6.1m for 204. The latter was intended as a non-public price, but the county assessor published it anyway – whoops!)

Finally, at 200 The Strand there's a lot purchased for $5.5m in Sept. 2004 and now at advanced stages of construction for a new home.

The parts of the Strand furthest south are helping to redefine MB, but none so boldly as 212 The Strand. Can we handle the size with the sizzle?

Elm is Back, Too

Today there's another comebacker listing that might have made it into our story the other day (see "Welcome Back"), but for popping up a bit late.

2812 Elm (4br/4ba, 2500 sq. ft.) probably deserves separate treatment anyway. (Click for pics & details via Redfin.)

Not so long ago, a long-running listing of this property set the high-water mark for DOM at 773 DOM (yes, seven hundred and seventy-three), by our count, having been continuously on the market from Sept. 2006-Oct. 2008. (Nearly 350 DOM ticked off without a bogus re-list, but one was filed in Sept. 2007, to our chagrin – see "Couldn't Hold Out Forever.")

A listing will only hang around that long if the home is dreary and/or priced wrong. For 2812 Elm, it was mainly a pricing problem for this attractive remodel.

The current owners paid $1.584m in June 2005. In trying to move on less than 2 years later, they priced it at $1.769m (+$185k/+12%), and kept the price at that stratospheric level for much too long.

By January 2008, it was offered at $1.599m, nearly flat to the 2005 acquisition price, but the world was different then, and this was no longer a $1.6m house. (See "Really, Don't Hurry," our story about a sales pitch on this home – "HURRY... this home will not last!")

Now 2812 Elm is back at $1.299m, offered as a short sale and with a note that buyers must take it in "as-is condition." (The listing also says it "looks as good as new.")

When this listing quit last October, MBC opined: "Marked to market, this one might have been at $1.3m-$1.4m these days." Here we are now at the low end of that guess.

The new list price is also the same amount someone paid for the same house in early 2004. They got out 16 months later for a tidy profit of $285k. (The go-go years.)

So we're looking here at a value for Elm that dates further back into the mid-bubble years than we often see around town. We often say MB is living in 2005 prices, but more and more we see a push back further in reverse.

We should say on the plus side for this home that the location is nice, the curb appeal is great, the kitchen and living spaces are appealing, and the shady back yard is sweet as well. It's a very decent home that tends to crash for buyers due to its slightly odd layout. One bedroom (more a natural office) is off the kitchen, and the second story is sort of a split level. It can be made to work, but people do hesitate.

Price can overcome obstacles and issues. If the lender is going accept the hit – virtually every dollar below the acquisition price appears to be the lender's loss – then someone is going to wind up with a decent Tree Section home at a non-stratospheric price. It's almost time.

Close the Books on the Twins in the Trees

It took 18 months, but finally, finally, both of the "Twins in the Trees" have sold.

3307 and 3309 Poinsettia were developed on a double-lot that was split. The homes were built by the same developer, were the same size (5br/5ba, 3250 sq. ft.), had the same layout and were priced exactly the same to begin.

One (3307) had Cape Cod styling, and it went first – in December 2008.

The other (3309, pictured) was more Caliterranean and lingered much longer.

Here at MBC, we were struck by the apparent overreaching in the initial prices: $2.795m. At the time, with very limited exceptions, new construction in the Trees was barely hanging around $2.2m-$2.3m. So we called a pricing poll (see "Pricing Poll: Twins in the Trees") to ask what readers thought might happen when these newbies finally found buyers.

It's a bit of a chuckle now to look at the results from that poll: 70% of poll respondents thought the Twins would sell for more than $2.2m. (See "Poll Results: Twins in the Trees.")

No, no, no. Neither home went in that territory.

The Cape Cod twin found love last December at $2.1m.

On Monday, the Caliterranean got a new owner at $1.9m, another 10% off the other Twin's price.

Drops from start:

3307: -$699k/-25%

3309: -$895k/-32%

Inevitably, the Twins seem to suggest something about the direction of the local RE market.

Both Twins stand for the proposition that it was a bad idea to overprice in early 2008. The Troubles had begun in late 2007, and the outlook was not good. Spring, then Summer, came last year and then Fall, well, fell.

$2.1m must have seemed like a sacrifice for Twin #1, until #2 came in.

Are we really down 10% since December? On a $4m plot over by the refinery, a bit of evidence suggests "yes."

And the future? We won't know until one of the Twins comes back to the market – or both do – however many years hence.

We're Trying

By and large, MB residents are trying to comply with the new Stage 2 water restrictions.

That's according to results of an unscientific poll here at MBC. (See "The Browning of MB?" and "Complying, or All Wet?")

Notwithstanding the city's dedicated efforts at befuddling residents (see "Thursday is Wednesday, 'Permanently' - Got That?"), most are trying to follow the new rules.

Given the option to anonymously self-report bad behavior, just 24% said they were "mostly ignoring" the water limits. Another 2% said they had been warned after violating the restrictions. (Click graph to enlarge.)

That left 74% of MBC readers claiming some degree of compliance. A quarter of readers volunteered that they had made "some mistakes," which suggests some awareness of the rules and a desire to get water use in line.

On the disappointing side of the ledger, only 12% reported that they were using the occasion of the new restrictions to try to make other improvements in their water use to save extra.

In the MBC household, this "saving extra" is a matter of some debate. Your blog author is thinking we've shortened showers and cut back on lots of little things. Plus we've got the brown patches outside to prove we're legit. But Mrs. MBC seems to think that a couple of extra loads of beach laundry each week are wiping out any benefits from the small steps. Perhaps so, but it won't be Summer forever.

The city, which was forced to implement these "permanent" water restrictions after the Metropolitan Water District declared a Stage 2 shortage on April 15, is actively encouraging neighbors to report on others whose water use does not conform. (This is supposed to help generate awareness, not help neighbors settle grudges among one another.) The city follows up with warnings first. Citations and possible misdemeanor charges are further down the road.

We wondered: How much noncompliance are people seeing among their neighbors?

A second poll question found 45% of readers reporting that they had seen "brazen violations" of the water restrictions by others. Another 17% had seen "rare violations," which tends to underscore the idea that some folks are willfully running afoul of the restrictions, and looking like it, too.

That said, only 4% of readers claimed to have reported anyone, even though the city makes it easy with a dedicated email address: waterwaster@citymb.info (click to begin an email).

Only 10% of readers thought their neighbors were really being careful and cutting back, pretty close to the 12% self-reporting above-and-beyond compliance.

And not everyone is being a fuss-budget about their neighbors' watering. Our poll found 27% of respondents saying they "haven't noticed" one way or the other. There are, apparently, other things to worry about.

Welcome Back

A few listings from seasons past have now returned after some time off.

In 2 cases, we see substantially adjusted asking prices as the reality of our local market has begun to dawn on the sellers. In another, we see the first open recognition that a sale will mean losing money on a fairly recent purchase (2005).

Let's start with the biggest-dollar listing that's now below its 2005 value.

616 29th is a 4-year-old Craftsman home with 4br/5ba and 3500 sq. ft. (MBC has said before that the Craftsman styling seemed to be more around the edges, rather than a real commitment by the builder; we think you'll agree.)

The current owners paid $2.425m new in Aug. 2005. They faced a job transfer and tried to sell for a very small markup in April 2008: $2.475m. Over the course of 5 months, the price came down to dead-even with the acquisition price (a net loss after costs of sale). However, rather than book the loss, the sellers rented out the home last year.

616 29th came back last month at $2.379m, down almost $50k from the purchase price.

The sellers might feel buoyed somewhat by the recent deal made on 700 35th (still in "backup offer" status), a slightly bigger home last priced at $2.349m. (See "Unloading 35th?") That's at least some action in the $2m+ range. The ultimate value on 29th could tie back to whatever the closed price turns out to be on 35th.

On the flipside, a much larger, brand-new home at 660 33rd (5br/5ba, 4475 sq. ft.) is now priced the same at $2.379m – a once-$3m home now hanging out in the same league.

500 14th (3br/3ba, 2250 sq. ft.) is a mid-century-style home with some recent remodeling that boasts proximity to parks, downtown and the beach. Not so eagerly touted in the listing: it's set just above busy Ardmore.

The owners paid $1.290m in August 2004 – that'd be 5 years ago, mid-bubble. Ready to unload for the "right" price, they tried 3 years later – offering it for $1.849m (+$559k/+43%) in Sept. 2007.

That listing logged just 30 days, but it came back at the same price in April 2008. Over 2 months, the price came down a bit to $1.699m (+$409k/+32%).

That listing, too, expired after a short try. Here it is back this week at $1.499m, a comparatively modest markup of $209k (+16%) over a 2004 price.

The market will tell us what the right price is now – if the sellers will meet the market – but one reference point has to be 512 12th (formerly 1148 Ardmore), a 3br/3ba, 2300 sq. ft. total gut-and-rebuild that recently closed for $1.605m. (See "More Tree Closings.") We're thinking that's not a good sign for a price at 14th with a 1.4 in front.

Up on the plateau, they're offering 445 30th again. MBC has previously called this 3br/3ba, 2600 sq. ft. home "a pretty sweet and spacious Spanish, an older home with some additions and nice updates."

An extra bonus for those who may be so inclined: the home and lot next door, to the west, also belongs to these sellers, and they may sell that lot, too. Last year, they also offered to rent out some yard space in the back of the neighboring house to a potential buyer of 445 30th.

In March 2008, this one came up at $1.999m. The price trickled down to $1.795m by July, when the listing simply quit.

Now, a year later, the listing begins anew at $1.575m (-$424k/-21% off last year's start).

When sellers decide to drop out of the market rather than sell at what appear to be dropping market prices, it's surely in the back of their minds that maybe the market will improve, and they'll get a better price – if they just take some time off.

Comparing this year to last year, no, that's not worked out to be the case. Median prices have dropped 17% for SFRs west of Sepulveda in just a year, comparing Jan.-June 2008 with the same period this year. The drop is 22.4% from 2007 to 2009. (See "Pace Slower, Prices Lower.")

Now, if you're going to sell, it's going to be at a markedly lower price than you may have hoped for in prior years. And there's no sense sticking an unduly high price on the listing and hoping for someone to fall in love and overpay – not in an environment of slower sales.

Each of the homes has some real appeal. But to get them sold, in their own ways, each of these sellers is showing some grudging acceptance of the new price environment.

Sunday Opens (7/19)

Much of the real estate world seems to recognize that this is a holiday weekend, of sorts, in MB. It can be tough driving anywhere near town, and impossible to get around downtown – except in flip-flops. But the volleyball's good.

The open-house list below offers just one debut for the week, plus a few others worth a drop-by if you haven't seen them yet.

Click here for the complete list of opens published in the Beach Reporter, or at any time use the link in the right-hand column under "Prop. Search Tools."

As always, click on any highlighted address for more pics & details via Redfin. We ask MBC readers who visit these homes – or any open houses – to also report back in the comments here. Tell us what you see, what you like and what you don't like.


Hill Section

645 9th (6br/6ba, 7750 sq. ft.) is a huge new "green" home that could top the charts among MB listings if only it had some real views.

The entire home is a real achievement, worth anyone's time. Fine details, cool bonuses (that awesome movie theater) and a step-by-step lesson in green materials (with placards scattered around the house) make the trip much more of an experience than your typical open house.

Still priced at $7.95m. Open Sun. 2-4pm.


822 John is a boxy, brick house with plenty of space (5br/4ba, 3725 sq. ft.) that's hogging a semi-prime John corner-lot.

The home has some updates since its 1989 construction. We haven't seen much feedback from readers on this one yet.

After its first cut this week it's at $2.198m.
Open Sun 1-4pm.


Sand Section

228 20th (pictured) is a 10-year-old, maxed-out (5br/5ba, 4150 sq. ft.) midtown walkstreet home with the expected big ocean views.

New homes just a stone's throw from here are fetching high-$4m to $5m or more; after a big cut this week, 228 20th is at $3.2m.

The listing began late last year – this was the first significant adjustment. Open Sun. 3-5pm.

216 7th (4br/5ba, 4800 sq. ft.) may see a little extra traffic with its downtown proximity.

Whether you're coming from or going to the beach this Sunday afternoon, this voluptuous, new, Tuscan-inspired home is worth a look.

Currently priced at $6.295m. Open Sun. 1-4pm.


Tree Section

636 30th (4br/3ba, 3550 sq. ft.) is an early-90s build that has been updated some. The home wields a desert-resort vibe, and boasts a nice mid-block location in a sleepy part of the Trees.

Priced at $500/PSF, it's got another thing going for it – for what you get, it's not far out of line coming off the blocks. But that start price of $1.775m is in a range that will get you newer and nicer homes, depending. One to watch.

Open Sun. 1-4pm.

1312 Ardmore (4br/3ba, 2450 sq. ft.) is one of the closest listings to downtown, begging for a little spillover foot traffic from the pierside events.

It's a mid-1980s build, with a recent remodel. The listing actually boasts of 7 parking spaces – wouldn't that make you popular on a weekend like this?

There's also a sunny little yard out back, a rarity so close to beach & town. Priced at $1.789m. Open Sun. 1-4pm.

Thursday is Wednesday, 'Permanently' – Got That?

It may be fair to say that confusion reigns in regard to some parts of the city's new water restrictions.

Starting at the city.

It's hard to believe, but the city takes the position that Thursday morning is actually Wednesday. And Sunday morning is actually Saturday.

Hunh?

In an ongoing process of "clarification," the city is now saying that the 2 permitted landscape watering periods begin at 6pm on a given evening (Weds. or Sat.) and continue for 15 hours henceforth.

So your Wednesday evening watering period rolls over till Thursday morning, and likewise with the Saturday watering period, which continues through Sunday.

You'll have to forgive residents who did not glean this schedule from the fliers sent to homes or the updates posted on the city website. They implied that no water was to run onto MB landscapes at all on any Thursday or Sunday – on pain of citations and misdemeanor charges.

Fliers sent to homes said:

STAGE 2 WATERING HOURS (IRRIGATION): WEDNESDAY & SATURDAY ONLY

WEDNESDAYS FOR 15 MINUTES MAX BETWEEN 6:00PM - 9:00AM

SATURDAYS FOR 15 MINUTES MAX BETWEEN 6:00PM - 9:00AM

OK, we got that – water only on Weds. or Sat. You're watering in the morning, it's Weds. or Sat. You're watering in the evening, also Weds. or Sat.

The city's website attempted to clarify matters by laying out a clear day-by-day schedule. (Image captured from city website Thursday, July 17; click to enlarge.) In relevant part, it said:

Wednesday: Watering allowed between 6:00PM - 9:00AM for ONLY 15 MINUTES

Thursday: Watering landscape NOT PERMITTED

And the same language went for Saturday and Sunday.

This appeared to clarify the fact that Wednesday and Saturday were the days you could run your landscape watering. Thursday? Sunday? No-no.

WRONG.

The actual policy of the city is, as we said above, that a 15-hour landscape watering period begins at 6pm Weds. and Sat., and continues till the next day. Indeed, the majority of those 15 hours (9 out of 15) occur on the next day.

It is legal to water Thursday and Sunday morning – in fact, it is required. Watering in the morning on Weds. or Sat. would be a violation.

Your blog author has to 'fess to total confusion on this. Upon receiving the initial notice in the mail, it seemed that the city was trying, inartfully, to say that the watering window opened Weds. night and continued through Thursday. We then set the landscaping timers to run Thurs. morn. and Sun. morn.

Later, the seemingly strong language about no watering on Thursday or Sunday had us change the timing to Weds. morn. and Sat. morn. Now we've had to go change them back.

These are the new "permanent behaviors." The confusion will dissipate and we'll all laugh when we look back, right?

Anything else you need to clarify? Call the Public Works Department at (310) 802-5304, and please post your questions and their answers here.

MB Market Update for 7/15/09

The new MB Market Update spreadsheets are available for download by clicking here, or at any time using the link in the upper-right corner of the front page.

Information in this update covers the first half of July 2009, reflecting new listings, price cuts and sales activity for SFRs west of Sepulveda. Data closed July 15.

We'll start out with a slightly technical note that may be of broader interest. (It might not be, hence the cute-kid pic.) We've made a change to the Tree Section spreadsheets such that one page covers listings priced up to $1.5m, and the second page covers $1.5m and above.

For MBC's first 2+ years, the dividing line for the Trees was $2m. However, most listings now are in the sub-$2m range, and there has been comparably little activity in the Trees' higher end.

On a related note, all Tree Section sales now go on a single sales page, like we've done with the Sand Section for some time.

The change in the Trees shortens the update by one page. But Hill Section inventory is close to forcing creation of a third page there, as well. Maybe we can stave it off.

Speaking of inventory, our count as of July 15 was 142 SFRs, breaking down this way:

Hill Section: 34
Sand Section: 61
Tree Section: 47

The other day, MLS data for SFRs citywide were showing inventory pretty level, year over year, from 2008-2009.

But that's not the case for SFRs west of Hwy. 1. In mid-July 2008, MBC recorded 108 SFRs on public offer in our subject region. By the end of July, that figure had crept up to 116.

With 34 more listings in our area year over year, we can only conclude that there is some significant shifting of MB's citywide inventory mix toward the region west of Sepulveda.

Consider these comparative inventory figures comparing our July 15 updates, 2008-2009:

Hill Section – 2008: 24 , 2009: 34 (+10)
Sand Section – 2008: 36, 2009: 61 (+25)
Tree Section – 2008: 48, 2009: 47 (-1)

Yep, blame the prestige areas – especially the beach.

Open Forum (7/16-)

It's long past time to open a little can of free discussion.

We've neglected the traditional "Open Forum" for some time during the adjustment to the new Disqus commenting system.

That has meant no place to post and discuss news clips, new DQN data, or even the new AVP Dancers.

So here we go. As always, please use this week's "Open Forum" thread for news clips, off-topic questions & discussions of (virtually) any nature. And keep it clean.

Unloading 35th?

One bright spot is the news that one of the great Tree Section offerings has a buyer.

700 35th, as MBC has said before:

is a lovely, large (5br/4ba, 3675 sq. ft.) home in a quiet location with a seriously large yard (for the Trees).

The listing can still be viewed while in "backup offer" status. But if you haven't seen the house (2003 build) in person, it's hard to get the whole picture.

MBC most recently lavished attention on this home in March with "Back Again on 35th," though the history goes farther back. We called a pricing poll 11 months ago, and reported the results 2 weeks later.

The capsule version of this listing's story: The sellers paid $2.5m in 2006, tried to get $2.7m in 2008, and realized in 2009 that they'd better try closer to $2.3m.

Last priced at $2.349m. We'll see where this ends up. Someone's getting a terrific house; we can debate whether it's a bargain.

Not so great news: 132 2nd, the Sand Section walkstreet home along Manhattan Ave., has fallen out of escrow. So our previous story, titled, "A 2nd Deal?" apparently was a question that has now been answered "no."

Complying, or All Wet?

We're 2 weeks into the new Stage 2 Water Shortage restrictions (see "The Browning of MB?").

Just 2 days a week to water your landscaping, no car washing and so on.

The goal of all of this is to cut water usage by 10%. That shouldn't be so hard if you dedicate yourself to it.

Question: How are you doing under the new restrictions?

Second question: How are your neighbors doing?

We've set up two quick reader polls in the left-hand margin to try to gauge MB residents' compliance with the new restrictions.

Please note: In rating your own behavior, you get to choose one option. In rating others' compliance, you have a range of options and can choose multiple responses. For instance, if you know 80% of your neighbors are with the program, but you've seen a couple folks running rampant, you can check both boxes.

Use the comments here to describe your experiences, and put forth any questions you may still have about the policies. The city has fielded dozens of calls already for clarifications and has updated some of its information.

The city also now offers an email address to report violations: waterwaster@citymb.info (click to begin an email). We're told that the first step is a letter from the city, a warning and explanation, not a citation.

The polls on the left margin will close Monday morning at 10am.

Some of the Biggest We've Seen

One of your blog author's quirky professors once used to repeat phrases like "25 percent of a very big number is still a pretty big number."

That's been our reaction to a few recent sales. Like with the prof, old habits die hard with some of the price cuts we've seen.

Check out 612 John, a 2000 build (6br/8ba, 7400 sq. ft.), really a quintessential Hill Section beauty (John! Ocean views!). It had been thoroughly remodeled recently, to boot. MBC recently called it a "true jewel." (See "Let's Hear It for the Hills.")

The owners knew they'd be selling. They poured bucks into updates. Then, they priced it at a giant markup from their acquisition:

• Dec. 2000: $3.3m (new)

• Sept. 2008: $7.3m (+$4m/+133%)

A great house, pre-bubble. A great house, post-bubble. What would the final markup be?

Last week, the market settled somewhere in the middle: $5.45m.

That's +$2.2m/+64% over 8 1/2 years.

Not a small profit, even after the costs of rehab.

From the start price, it's also -$1.85m/-25%. That's a discount of almost $2m.

Like we heard somewhere before, 25% of a very big number is still a pretty big number.

Also in the Hills, consider 218 N. Dianthus.

Here's another enormous house (4br/5ba, 6100 sq. ft.) with ocean views for which the sale just didn't work out quite as expected.

This home was a great, high-end speckie with horrific timing. The home was completed in March 2008, as the aftermath of the late-2007 financial crisis was freezing up the gears of the economy.

Priced too high to begin at $6.75m, it lingered until the late-2008 financial meltdown. By Sept. 30, 2008, it was down to $5.495m, but that wasn't nearly enough.

This week, at last, this home has a buyer. But that's after a cut to $4.249m, nearly another $1.25m.

Just based on the list price, that's a chop of $2.5m/-37%.

Can we spell that out? That's TWO.POINT.FIVE.MILLION.

Dollars, not pesos. We doubt we've seen cuts that big before, and that's before we get the closed price.

At this very high end of the market, there aren't many points of reference. But here are 2 that happen to come from the Sand Section:

• 221 34th (5br/4ba, 4200 sq. ft.), a spectacular, brand-new contemporary, began at $5.4m in April 2008 and wound up at $3.315m in January (-$2.085m/-39%). This one is quite near to the recent record for chops in general, on a percentage basis, in particular for new construction. It was also MBC's "Best Deal" of 2008.
  

• Nearby 3404 The Strand, the 2-building Spanish in need of a little rehab, began at $7.8m last November, but sold for $5.35m this May (-$2.45m/-31%). Oooh, just $50k shy of the apparent record at 218 Dianthus. (See "Strand Adjustments.")

We should not disqualify the Tree Section. Maybe the high end doesn't go quite so high in the 'burbs, but there are still big chops worth a mention.

On a relative scale, you have to start with 560 36th. Here is a big (4br/4ba, 3800 sq. ft.), brand-new contemporary speckie that flopped completely.

• Start price (March 2008): $2.999m

• Sold price (June 2009): $1.555m

That was nearly a 50% cut from the initial asking price (-$1.443m/-48%). (See "New for $1.5m.")

That chop of 48% appears to be the biggest we have seen percentagewise.

Not so very far behind, on a dollar scale, was the Fisher Queen – 1208 Fisher.

As we noted just last week (see "More Tree Closings"), this one was down $1.345m (-27%) from its start at $4.995m (see "The Fisher King (& Queen)" from last September) by the time it closed at $3.65m.

___________________________

UPDATE: Within hours of this story's posting online, another marvelous Hill Section listing took a big cut.

218 Anderson made its second cut of about $1.5m, putting this once-$10m listing a few dollars short of $7m.

Total cuts so far in the 6-month life of this listing: $2.989m. And that's before a buyer knocks.

When this listing was new, we heard plenty of people say something like "now that's what a $10m house should be like." Now it's a $7m house. And it's likely to set the record for dollar chops if they make a deal.

Short in the Sand

Each of the regions west of Sepulveda has a brewing issue or two with new construction.

In the Trees, spec construction is almost gone, but there's been discounting, losses and a couple of REOs on the slide down.

In the Hill Section, for the whole of this year, just one closed sale of new construction (930 John at $3.7m) and just a few pending escrows. This, despite 10 or more new homes sitting on the market.

In the Sand Section, we're starting to see some distress also among new homes.

A fairly good outcome appears to be on the way for 425 26th (5br/5ba, 4400 sq. ft.), a new contemporary with big views over Grandview Elementary that began in March 2008 at $3.75m.

They've got a buyer now, after the most recent cut to $2.475m (listing can be viewed while in "backup offer" status), official designation of the offering as a short sale, and the addition of this language to the listing:

Major price reduction again. If you can show me a better Ocean view SFR new construction value on a full lot at the beach please show me.

425 26th was "DOM Champ" for the Sand Section, by MBC's count, as of early June.

The lot was acquired at or around the market peak in April 2007 for $1.725m; the last public price for the completed home was just $750k higher. As the move to a short sale indicates, the home cost somewhat more than that to build.

Not officially short, but priced to deliver the builder a loss, is 502 24th (4br/4ba, 3875 sq. ft.), also near Grandview – right across from the parking lot – but lacking any views.

The location has been utterly punishing to this listing. The inspired (and "green") contemporary was apparently built on the premise that you could get $5m for this kind of house.

Then they dropped the price to $4m.

Now, after a long series of cuts, including a few last week and one Monday, it's at $3.195m. The listing says it's: "Now priced at least $750,000 under the cost of construction."

The home is very cool (MBC has also called it "fun"), but it's bad news that the larger view home on 26th went for something near $2.4m.

The lot at 24th appears to have been acquired for $1.375m in April 2005.

217 32nd Place (4br/4ba, 3050 sq. ft.) hit the market almost a year ago at $2.799m, which did seem excessive for a pretty straightforward build boasting an unusual alley/alley corner location. (Unusual in the "not so great" sense, that is.)

Nothing much happened with the first listing, but it began fresh with a new agent this March at $2.399m before chopping this week to $1.999m along with the official designation as a short sale. Specifically:

Less than full price offer will be a short sale/price & commission subject to lender approval.

Under $2m must be some kind of deal, because, as the listing notes, the home was: "Appraised at 3.2 mil end of 2008!!!"

The land here was acquired for $1.2m in July 2006.

Three listings, two with major location issues, won't define the market, but, as we have seen elsewhere, the weakest links do start pulling down prices no matter what their specific issues.

Weekend Opens (7/11-7/12)

Can you believe AVP is next weekend?

Now's the time to see some open houses before that vortex rolls into town.

Click here for the complete list of opens published in the Beach Reporter, or at any time use the link in the right-hand column under "Prop. Search Tools."

As always, click on any highlighted address for more pics & details via Redfin. We ask MBC readers who visit these homes – or any open houses – to also report back in the comments here. Tell us what you see, what you like and what you don't like.


Hill Section

808 Duncan Place (5br/5ba, 3525 sq. ft.) is a bit modest in size for the Hills, but gets you the ocean views you go there for.

This 10-year-old custom build looks to have stayed pretty current in design – partly because the same architect has put up lots of work around town since this one.

The home, which has zero interior pics at this writing, has drawn a few mentions at MBC during the week by readers who seemed to be positively enthused. Worth a look. Starts at $2.399m. Open Sun. 1-4pm.

913 Highview is offered for the same price. It's elegant, newer (2004 build) and really, really compact for the Hills (3br/4ba, 2350 sq. ft.) – 1200 sq. ft. less than 808 Duncan. The location on Highview is on a quiet little block near downtown – sweet.

This one was purchased for $1.910m in Feb. 2005. Today's price ($2.399m) is up $489k (+26%) from there.

The first time we mentioned Highview, readers came back with positive reviews. Worth a look and a comparison to Duncan. Open Sun. 1-4pm.


Sand Section

128 9th (4br/5ba, 4100 sq. ft.) is a brand-new home with modern style, and maybe you'd say Asian influences.

New construction. Walkstreet. West of Manhattan Ave. Downtown. These are good things.

Sidling up to a commercial building – see "downtown" above.

Starts at $6.499m.

Open Sun. 1-4pm.

216 7th (4br/5ba, 4800 sq. ft.) is a voluptuous, new, Tuscan-inspired home with a great corner location running along Bayview – more light and views. That's a top-tier lot.

We wrote the home up in a bit more detail in mid-June (see "Weekend Opens 6/13-6/14") and predicted there would be strong reactions to the style – as turned out to be the case.

The price is down $200k now, but still priced with the idea that this one is something above and beyond: $6.295m. Open Sun. 2-5pm.

4320 The Strand is one of those classic cases raising the question: Why do they hold open houses for teardowns?

What's offered here is about a half-lot (1550 sq. ft.) fronting The Strand. Price: $2.75m. It happens to have a ghastly, disintegrating duplex on it currently. So imagine this... The Strand, El Porto (er, El Norte), near the end of the block, views of the busiest surf area in town, the trademark oil tanker offshore. Do you really need to walk up and see it? If so, it's open Sun. 2-4pm.

Worth noting: Someone picked up this patch of Strand dirt in Aug. 2007 for $2.65m, perhaps full of big plans. That was then.


Tree Section

In the mid-1970s, they knew how to make simple, straightforward family homes for regular folks who just needed a place to live in MB.

2317 Walnut (3br/3ba, 1975 sq. ft.) is one example of that decade's wave of construction.

It remains, to this day, utterly simple and plain, a bit of a throwback. The location is decent if you don't think it too close to Marine, there's a cute little yard, and the home can be livable or a project, depending on the buyer.

Our initial take is that the price – $1.329m – is quite high for what it is, but just like there's a place for all the 50s cottages getting snapped up and retooled these days, there's a place, too, for the 70s builds in this market. Open Sun. 1-4pm.

1312 Ardmore (4br/3ba, 2450 sq. ft.) brings us to the mid-1980s, with a recent remodel to boot.

No question, it's nice to be so near downtown. Here, the listing actually boasts of 7 parking spaces – worth more than a few quarters if you'll be having guests at all.

There's also a sunny little yard out back, a rarity so close to beach & town.

This one begins at $1.789m.

The very recently gutted, rebuilt, modernized and comparably sized 512 12th (3br/3ba, 2300 sq. ft.), also along Ardmore, just closed for $1.605m.

1312 Ardmore is open Sun. 1-4pm.

Another week, another month, another year... 3309 Pacific (4br/5ba, 3500 sq. ft.) is now open again, introducing itself to a new generation of prospective MB buyers.

This everlasting offering, subject of MBC's "A Long, Strange Listing" earlier this year, began at $1.799m in Summer 2005, and began a very gradual descent to its current offering price of $1.249m.

Yes, the home has been for sale pretty much constantly for 4 years. Maybe 7/11 will be the lucky day. Oops, it's only open on the 12th, Sun. 1-4pm.

Fewer Dollars to Go Around

Fewer sales, lower prices... if you've been following our last couple of stories on sales volume from 2007-2009, you may have already drawn an obvious conclusion: there's a lot less money in the local RE market these days. (See "Pace Slower, Prices Lower" and "Sales Mix Changes, 2007-09.")

How much less?

Let's start by looking at the total dollar volume for SFR sales west of Sepulveda.

On the strength of 129 SFR sales in the first half of 2007, with a higher median value than today's, the total value of all SFRs sold west of Hwy. 1 was more than $275 million. (Click any graph in this story to enlarge.)

This year, with 41% fewer sales and a median price 22.4% lower, dollar volume dropped to $140 million – a total drop of 49%.

(Figures presented here are actual totals of all sales posted on the MLS in the periods covered.)

Sure, 2008 was a big dropoff: 33% from 2007. But 2009's dollar volume took a further dive of 24% off last year's figure.

Of course, all of these dollar figures remain quite substantial. It's worth a moment's reflection to note that, even in a real estate market that is slower than almost anyone can recall, $140 million was spent on homes in just the small pocket of land in MB west of Sepulveda. In just half a year. And that doesn't even count townhomes.

Before you ask – as Mrs. MBC already did – we don't have comparable dollar volume figures from years prior to 2007. A person would need fairly complete access to the MLS database to compile that information, and your blog author doesn't have that. (If someone wants to help gather comparable data, we'll chart it and publish it. We're also hopeful that we can update some DataQuick figures we have through early 2009.)

One question we'd be looking to answer is whether 2007, or perhaps some year just prior, was the peak year for dollar volume in the first half.

You might guess that the peak year would be one between 2005-2007. However, as this chart shows, the recent peak for sales volume – by a lot – was 2002. (Chart is from late 2008's "Turns Out '08 Got Worse" and uses DataQuick figures, not the more limited MLS data.) So even if prices were lower then, perhaps volume in 2002 drove up the total dollars transacted. We'll see.

Another reference worth a glance is at the South Bay Beaches Bubble site, which compiles month-by-month dollar volume for all real estate transacted by ZIP code from Melissadata.com. The link to MB data is here (current through March 2009), and the link to the tool for pulling up other ZIP codes is here.

If there's less money in the local RE market, that also means there's less money to support the industry that gets some people out of homes and puts others into them.

The business of real estate sales is based on sales commissions. In lots of markets, the standard commission is 6%, but plenty of MB sales are conducted at a lower rate.

To estimate the impact on the RE sales community from the lower dollar volume in sales, we used an across-the-board estimate of 5% commissions for sales in each of the 3 years from 2007-2009.

That nice little boomlet in Spring 2007 helped deliver about $13.8 million to local brokerages in the first half of that year.

This year: $7 million.

That's a lot less money to go around.

As fate would have it, some of the costs of doing business are up. SFR inventory west of Sepulveda is almost double the 83 homes for sale at the end of June 2007. (For a graph of inventory in 2007-08, see "Inventory Higher This Year" from Dec. 2008.) That means more marketing costs for listings that just sit.

And sit they will – average days on market for listings has been stuck above 100 for some time. In a mid-June post, Kaye Thomas noted that, even by MLS data – which are subject to manipulation by bogus re-lists – average DOM was at 103-115 for the 3 submarkets west of Sepulveda.

Anecdotally, you hear that the slowdown in sales has driven less-experienced or marginal agents out of the business. But it's not like every listing is being fronted by a rock star. There are plenty of folks scraping by and, occasionally, scoring – even in this market.

Sales Mix Changes, 2007-09

We noted in yesterday's story that prices are down over the past 2 full years. (See "Pace Slower, Prices Lower.") The median price for SFRs west of Sepulveda was down 22.4%, comparing the first half of 2007 with the first half of this year.

One reason for that drop is that individual home values are, clearly, down. You can get more for less in MB today than in 2007.

But the other factor is one we'll focus on now: changes in the sales mix.

Regardless of sales volume, we asked: In which price ranges are the sales happening, and which price ranges are stagnant?

As the following 3 separate charts make clear (click any chart to enlarge), the big changes in what's selling in 2009 are at the low end (under $1m) and at the higher end ($2m-$3m). The ultra-high-end markets (above $3m) seem fairly steady over time as a share of sales for 3 straight years.

About half of the Jan.-June sales in both 2007 and 2008 occurred below $2m. In 2009, fully 75% of sales were in that range. That's a significant change in the mix this year, which we'll address further below.

Keep in mind, MLS data – our source here – show only sales that were recorded in the database, excluding off-market sales. (Off-market transactions show up in the DataQuick figures that we are fond of in other analyses.) This is a pretty good picture, but not the whole story.

Looking at these figures, the number that really stands out is the share of sales priced below $1m. Accounting for only a sliver of all sales in 2007-08 (2-5%), low-end sales hit 21% of all sales in 2009.

The big loser: Sales between $2.5m-$3.0m, which all but vanished in 2009 (1%), after running at 12% and 15% in the prior years.

Just as noteworthy, the whole range of $2.0m-$3.0m shrank from 30-31% in 2007-08 to just 13% this year.

Before we get stuck on percentages alone, here are the absolute numbers of sales in the 2 categories with the greatest change:

Sales Priced At $1m or Below

2007: 6
2008: 2
2009: 16

Sales Priced Above $2.5m, up to $3.0m

2007: 15
2008: 13
2009: 1

(We will add a note that there were 2 more sales in 2009 precisely at $2.500m, but we categorized those as $2.0-$2.5m.)

Clearly there has been a burst of available listings priced below $1m that helped fuel that part of the change in the sales mix. Here are the basic details on the 16 homes that sold at the low end:

• 958 Rosecrans (2br/1ba, 975 sq. ft.) – $650,000
• 2111 Valley (3br/1ba, 950 sq. ft.) – $725,000
• 2500 Oak (3br/2ba, 1350 sq. ft.) – $738,000
• 772 Rosecrans (2br/1ba, 875 sq. ft.) – $744,000
• 1708 Oak (2br/1ba, 850 sq. ft.) – $795,000
• 1733 Elm (3br/2ba, 1325 sq. ft.) – $801,000
• 402 Larsson (3br/3ba, 1800 sq. ft.) – $816,000
• 505 Anderson (4br/2ba, 1850 sq. ft.) – $825,000
• 116 24th Pl (1br/1ba, 525 sq. ft.) – $925,000
• 422 21st Pl (3br/3ba, 1825 sq. ft.) – $930,000
• 2112 Ardmore (3br/1ba, 1125 sq. ft.) – $940,000
• 1828 Walnut (4br/2ba, 1400 sq. ft.) – $950,000
• 3404 Alma (3br/2ba, 1300 sq. ft.) – $950,000
• 4104 Highland (3br/4ba, 2550 sq. ft.) – $970,000
• 3600 Elm (3br/2ba, 1350 sq. ft.) – $975,000
• 1205 Walnut (4br/2ba, 1900 sq. ft.) – $985,075

That's a wild mix of properties. Some were sold for land value, some had sordid backstories, and plenty were simple, small, livable homes that just needed some work to become someone's new home, or investment property.

We're reserving comment here on the range of sales above $3m. That's rarefied air in any market, and it's special here in MB, too. For now we'll note simply that that share of the market hasn't changed a lot in 2009. We'll look into the details in a future post.