It’s statistically insignificant why? Considering that the graphs show the ONLY statistical data available and the same data everyone else is using I think you’re mis-reading.

The cart at the top shows the number of houses and condos sold in a given month, sorted by area. Looking at this chart:
http://www.redfin.com/zipcode/94610
We can see that in July08 (for example), about 30 houses were sold and 60 condos sold. The sqft value of those properties averaged at about $400 per for the houses and about $385 for the condos.

The charts of sq ft pricing, while not on the same scale vertically, do show a decline in condo value by that measure.

If you look at the summary data at the bottom (which is averaged over the entire time period graphed) you’ll see that condos stay on the market twice as long as houses, go on the market at $383 per sq ft (houses are $385) and sell for a median of $322 (houses are $351).

The neighborhoods I liked to have a high percentage of condos, so I think it’s a more accurate comparison than all of Oakland – makes more sense than comparing condo at Broadway/Grand to houses down by the coliseum. You may disagree. Since there are more condos sold, outliers should have less effect on the average price, as should the relatively uniform date of construction. And the price goes down still sharply.

Now: tell me why you think this data should be dismissed and the Altos data shouldn’t.

I remember you recently mentioning that small scale development is particularly difficult to do in our city. I’d love to see a plan to fix that.

Here is data analysis for 2 neighborhoods in Oakland that give a per sqft price. These are sales medians* that disagree completely with the article posted:
http://www.redfin.com/neighborhood/1130/CA/Oakland/Grand-Lake
http://www.redfin.com/neighborhood/14/CA/Oakland/Adams-Point

In the Grand Lake neighborhood, the house price per sqft price has gone down $50 since Oct 06, the condo price has gone down $200.
In Adams Point, the house price per sqft price has gone up $100 since Oct 06, the condo price has gone down $150.

Here’s all of 94610:
http://www.redfin.com/zipcode/94610
The house price per sqft price has gone down $50 since Oct 06, the condo price has gone down $230ish.

Looking at the chart above the sqft charts (# of condos vs houses for sale) you’ll see why the median isn’t necessarily giving you the data you think you’re getting here.

A sqft comparison is better than a per unit measure as far as I’m concerned. You could argue the opposite quite easily. We would both be right*. My point is it’s more complicated than you’re making it.

The numbers do not pass the smell test, and I would suggest that the modeling is a big part of why. I’ll even go so far as to suggest they might not be based on actual sales data but rather projected sales data.

Art – Thanks for the info, though it seems a little off to me (it doesn’t take into account recent condo construction, of course). The condo market is smaller than the house market, but it’s not so much smaller that it’s not statistically significant. Remember, many houses are rented or illegally occupied as multifamily, so not all the houses are part of the active market. None of this disproves the fact that condos are holding their value better than houses even though the supply of houses is limited and the supply of condos is growing. Therefore, there is more a house glut than condo glut, which is the point I was making at the beginning.

is it economical to build single family homes in Oakland anywhere? I mean other than McMansions or real mansions up in more suburban style neighborhoods?