<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Verdugo Woodlands Real Estate Review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kendylsopenhouse.com/verdugo-woodlands/verdugo-woodlands-real-estate-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kendylsopenhouse.com/verdugo-woodlands/verdugo-woodlands-real-estate-review/</link>
	<description>Everything Glendale, Ca and "Above the 134"</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:25:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Greg</title>
		<link>http://www.kendylsopenhouse.com/verdugo-woodlands/verdugo-woodlands-real-estate-review/comment-page-1/#comment-826</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 19:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kendylsopenhouse.com/?p=813#comment-826</guid>
		<description>There may be a couple of explanations for the difference in the percentage:

1)  Were medians used to compute the average sales price and the prices above or below 15%?  Was there a combination of the mean average and the median average?  If there was a combination of methods, then that would be problematic
2)  The other reason may be the distribution of prices around the average (google histogram, and you&#039;ll see what I mean).  What was the number of houses sold above and below 1500 square feet?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There may be a couple of explanations for the difference in the percentage:</p>
<p>1)  Were medians used to compute the average sales price and the prices above or below 15%?  Was there a combination of the mean average and the median average?  If there was a combination of methods, then that would be problematic<br />
2)  The other reason may be the distribution of prices around the average (google histogram, and you&#8217;ll see what I mean).  What was the number of houses sold above and below 1500 square feet?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kendyl</title>
		<link>http://www.kendylsopenhouse.com/verdugo-woodlands/verdugo-woodlands-real-estate-review/comment-page-1/#comment-823</link>
		<dc:creator>Kendyl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:15:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kendylsopenhouse.com/?p=813#comment-823</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Jack!  So glad to see you&#039;re still reading!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Jack!  So glad to see you&#8217;re still reading!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://www.kendylsopenhouse.com/verdugo-woodlands/verdugo-woodlands-real-estate-review/comment-page-1/#comment-821</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 05:05:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kendylsopenhouse.com/?p=813#comment-821</guid>
		<description>Data shows homes above 1500SF on average were still more expensive to buy in 2008 than homes below 1500SF were in 2007 despite an average price drop of 17%.   One must conclude than that the overall price drop of only 13% must be due to a shift in the numbers sold towards larger homes in 2008 compared to 2007.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Data shows homes above 1500SF on average were still more expensive to buy in 2008 than homes below 1500SF were in 2007 despite an average price drop of 17%.   One must conclude than that the overall price drop of only 13% must be due to a shift in the numbers sold towards larger homes in 2008 compared to 2007.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
