Don't force me to post that chart again showing where your meager numbers stand relative to housing history.
Looking at Briefing.com today. December Existing homes. 4.38M, Months of supply 6.4. Where did you see the revision? c
Someone should invent a software tool that indexes information from many websites, which a user could then use to locate it.
Decemberâs sales were downwardly revised to a 4.38 million rate from a previously reported 4.61 million, making the final month of 2011 a 0.5% decline instead of a 5% gain http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sales-of-existing-homes-up-43-in-january-2012-02-22
If at first you don't succeed, spin, spin and spin some more. Although, RCG is definitely "all in" on the hopium boat. It's been proven time and time again that the NAR puts out "headlines numbers" that it revises materially in a footnote months later. Then again, that is the modus operandi of just about all statistics nowadays. I have absolutely NO IDEA why anybody hangs their hats on these headline numbers knowing full well how badly "massaged" the data has become.
What spin? My first reply on this thread was the RE/MAX report for 2011, which acknowledges the unexpected drop for December.
Ah, so new homes can rocket but existing homes go into the tank, But the economy will improve based on that. I got it!
Hopium for sure, they made all sorts of noise about the 8.3 unemployment rate and a week later it's looking like it will be revised to over 9%, not to mention that it's really more like twice any of those numbers and when the unemployment insurance is running out people are getting on disability..