• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Housing Bubble Bursting?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Roger,
Are you a mortgage broker or a mortgage originator?

I work for a large, well respected broker in MN. Management is quite aware of the sub prime problems of some investors.

This is out of my area of expertise, but I will give you my best guess and observations:)

Brokers with as much volume, resources and reputation for quality originations as my employer can negotiate better terms, get wholesale accounts rather than correspondent accounts, and thereby generally minimize repurchase risk.

However, if a repurchase is necessary, this broker can handle the hits. No, it wouldn't be easy right now to resell a sub prime loan, especially if it was not performing as agreed:( If it is a performing loan, the broker benefits from the spread in rate between the note rate and the rate for extended credit line or the rate that safe rate funds would earn.
 
Roger,
I hope you know that I was not talking about you but I wanted to pick up your mind because you are in the business and you might know a broker who has done sub primes only. When that broker hears that Merry Lynch is dumping all his past two years loans back to his originator, what would be the situation and liability of that broker? Can that broker escape? I am not talking about doing sub prime now, I am talking about those sub primes that were done in the past and are coming back home to roost now.
 
Can that broker escape? I am not talking about doing sub prime now, I am talking about those sub primes that were done in the past and are coming back home to roost now.

I'd say the typical broker has no chance of escape if so dumped upon:shrug:

Right or wrong, the legal fees of mounting a proper defense against an attack by a larger, well capitalized entity would eventually Ch 11 the broker.

It is my understanding that brokers can limit their investor selection to the few opportunities devoid of effective buyback remedy except for situations including gross misrepresenting of facts...you know, like where the processor or LO forges signatures, makes up documentation, etc.

It is a jungle out there and there are MB eating tigers on the prowl. I can see the severed limbs and entrails here and there.
 
I read the article. BS detector still on full alert. Why do I know this? Well, I know of several specific properties bought from 1965+, and I know their current value.

So I know the math is way off per my specific knowledge of Mpls suburban SFR values. And I also know that MSP isn't much off the mean for the USA as a whole. Non-inflation adjusted SFRE prices increased at least 10x over that period.

What does Fidelity sell again?:rof:
Roger, you are quick to note that the report is generated by some entity that has a bias, specifically towards securities.

However, how long have you lived in your present home? Home much equity do you have?

The point, I believe, is about equity. So even if home prices never went down or stay flat for a period of time, after inflation, interest, taxes, insurance and maintenance, how much do you really have left netting out those expenses over time?

Most people do not stay in the same home they first bought until retirement. I don't know the exact statistic but people move around every 5 to 7 years. That means they buy and they sell. That means they have the cost of the transaction to net out.

Some people use their equity in their home and spend it over time.

Bottom line, how much equity do you have to retire on from your house? Remember, this is your retirement savings.
 
David Lereah: 4th Quarter Marks 'Bottom of Housing Cycle'

“This information confirms 2006 was the year of contraction,” says NAR Chief Economist David Lereah. “Hopefully the fourth quarter was the bottom of this current business cycle.”
 
Roger, you are quick to note that the report is generated by some entity that has a bias, specifically towards securities.

However, how long have you lived in your present home? Home much equity do you have?

The point, I believe, is about equity. So even if home prices never went down or stay flat for a period of time, after inflation, interest, taxes, insurance and maintenance, how much do you really have left netting out those expenses over time?

Most people do not stay in the same home they first bought until retirement. I don't know the exact statistic but people move around every 5 to 7 years. That means they buy and they sell. That means they have the cost of the transaction to net out.

Some people use their equity in their home and spend it over time.

Bottom line, how much equity do you have to retire on from your house? Remember, this is your retirement savings.


I'm not calling you out, Randolph, I am calling out the silly math in that article. It is sufficiently contrary to my observed data points that it nearly shorted out my BS detector. That's all:shrug:
 
I'm not calling you out, Randolph, I am calling out the silly math in that article. It is sufficiently contrary to my observed data points that it nearly shorted out my BS detector. That's all:shrug:
Roger, let me agree with you. When I first read the article, my BS detector went off also. However, although not stated specifically, I surmised that what was compared must have been taking into account the expenses for owning home. Owning stocks do not have expenses for holding them expect for taxes on dividends and you can reinvest them to add to the compounding gain. As the saying goes, owning and living in residential houses "eats" money. You have to feed them to keep them. It is really not a fair comparison. You have to live some where and that cost money.
 
Austin,

I have no clue as to what position you think George and I are in. I am not aware of any such position. I have no motivations heree except to analyze the market.

Just like Randolph sees his BS signals, so do I.

I have said the national housing market was not in a bubble and have never wavered. I have, from day 1, said that there were over-heated markets that would probably come down and so that has happened.

I have never said that the market would not change; in fact I anticipated it like most everyone else. So, I have no idea where you want to go with this.

Moh,

It is not just Lereah and NAR saying the bottom was hit. Greenspan, Bernanke, and Doug Duncan (chief economist of MBA) have said so as well.

What I see here are 3 distinct areas from which the prognostications are coming:

1. NAR/MBA/general and banking economists- all saying the bottom was hit. If you want to ascribe motivations to that, fine. Certainly they would have some. The question is now as it has always been- are they telling the truth or coloring their comments? Time will tell.

2. Wall St.- saying that sub-prime and adjustables will kill this market- essentially the opposite of what the brokers and bankers are saying. Do they have motivations too? You bet. Just look at what they are doing on buying the mortgage paper- forcing down the prices based upon their gloomy forecasts. OK- they have their ax to grind as well. Are they right? Again time will tell.

3. The Press- saying that all these anecdotal stories arre clear signs of a bust. Are they right? In this case I have never known them to be collectively right when dealing with any sort of sensational issue. Their job is to sell papers and increase viwership- and America's housing is near and dear to all of us so any perceived problem is ripe for exploitation.

THAT is why I have always looked at the data itself- I do not trust any of these groups in aggregate (although I'll admit that I DO listen to Greenspan and to Doug Duncan since they have been right far more often than the otehrs- Bernanke's rating still out as he is too new).

Now if someone is cooking the books as many of you have assumed that NAR is doing and as Randolph suspects Dataquick may be doing (and I still fail to see where they really benefit from doing that- Dataquick), then OK. But I have not seen that ahappen. Perhaps that is what Austin is suggesting but I do not know.

What I DO know- IF the reported data is correct, unlike what the LA Times published on SD County and that Randolph was quick to point out was not correct (or perhaps I just misread it) is that some markets have declined and others have increased.

If the national data by NAR using projected sales is correct than we had a zero change in median prices year over year from 05 to 06. I do not know if they have yet confirmed that info but if it is accurate, then there is no national bubble. There is a change in the market from a sellers market to a buyers market in many areas that has done away with increases.

Is it over? I have already said I do not think so. I am simply not alarmed. I still continue to believe we are not and were not in a bubble- by my definition and I think I may be the only one who offered such a definition. So, you guys still have that test to measure my projections and, so far, I am correct overall.

When it is all over we will see. We will also see who among these interested groups got it right- if anyone.

Brad
 
Brad-

It is my opinion that the level of risk at the sub-prime level is significant. This is based on what I read in the paper/trades and what I experience working first hand with clients in this market. The concern of my clients has been heightened, and we are now spending some time reviewing a large section of portfolio holdings (which you were very helpful in suggesting some outside vendors to assist us- Thanks!).

I'm not a Cassandra, and I don't predict a nationwide collapse of anything, but I would like your opinion on this question if you have one:

Consider the markets where there have been massive large-scale development by the big players such as KB, Toll Bros, Etc., and these new homes were purchased 2004-2005. In these markets, I am seeing many indications of homes being drastically reduced from their purchase price of less than a year ago. In one specific case, in Brentwood (NorCal, not where OJ use to live), a home sold for $580k in Sept-06, and is now listed as a short sale for $510k. Same market, a Realtor purchased her home at the end of '05, has had it listed for $600k+/- for about 4-months, and now is in the position that she has to negotiate with the lender to sell it for a short-sale. I spoke to her about her house, and she said in her opinion, to get any buyer interest, she would have to lower the price by $100k.

Assuming that the activity I describe is not atypical, and assuming (as I see it) that many of these homes were purchased using exotic or near-exotic loan programs, and that to refi so not to get hit on the adjusted rate change one must have the equity to do so, and finally that the equity needed to refi isn't there when one judges market value by what is listed in these markets, here are the questions:

1. Do you believe the scenario, as I have described, is accurate for a number of areas- especially in California, and
2. Do you believe this dynamic, to whatever level you think it exists, is being given adequate consideration by those whose jobs it is to make regional/national real estate market forecasts?

For the record, I don't. But, I have nothing to base that on except anecdotal conversations with such forecasters.
 
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aQQD478kkqhU&refer=home

U.S. January Housing Starts Plunge to Lowest Level Since 1997

By Joe Richter

Feb. 16 (Bloomberg) -- Builders in the U.S. started work last month on the fewest number of new homes since August 1997 as a glut of unsold houses and the onset of colder weather discouraged new projects.

Housing starts slumped 14.3 percent to an annual pace of 1.408 million, less than forecast and down from December's 1.643 million rate, the Commerce Department said today in Washington. Building permits declined 2.8 percent to a 1.568 million pace.

The figures show that even as sales have rebounded, residential construction will remain a drag on the economy until the inventory of unsold homes declines. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke told lawmakers this week that the process may extend through much of the year.

``Housing inventories are still beyond bloated, and starts aren't going to recover in any meaningful way until those inventories come down,'' Chris Low, chief economist at FTN Financial, said before the report. ``I would be cautious about calling an end to the housing slump just yet.''

Economists surveyed by Bloomberg News had forecast starts to fall to a 1.60 million unit pace from an originally reported 1.642 million pace the prior month, according to the median of 75 estimates. Forecasts of starts ranged from 1.50 million to 1.72 million. Permits were expected to drop to 1.59 million, according to the median estimate.

Construction of single-family homes dropped 11.2 percent last month to a 1.108 million rate, also the weakest since August 1997, today's report showed. Work on multifamily homes, such as townhouses and apartment buildings, declined 24.1 percent to an annual rate of 300,000.

Construction in the West fell 28.5 percent to an annual rate of 301,000 last month, the slowest since December 1996. The decline in the West from December was the biggest since January 1979.

By Region

Starts also dropped 15.2 percent in the Midwest to a 195,000 pace, the weakest since January 1991, and decreased 11.8 percent in the South to 716,000. Beginning construction in the Northeast rose 8.9 percent.

The number of homes under construction fell 2.4 percent in January to a 1.218 million pace, today's report showed. Housing completions declined 1.2 percent to an annual rate of 1.88 million.

The number of housing units authorized, but not yet started, increased 2.9 percent to 194,400.

Home construction fell at an annual rate of 19.2 percent last quarter, the most since 1991, after contracting at an 18.7 percent pace in the previous three months, according to a government report Jan. 31. The decline subtracted 1.2 percentage points from fourth-quarter growth.

Biggest Drop Since October

Last month's decrease in housing starts, the biggest since October, followed a 5 percent increase in December that economists including Michael Moran of Daiwa Securities America Inc. may have been caused in part by builders taking advantage unusually warm weather.

The final month of last year was the warmest December since 1957, according to the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, North Carolina.

Higher mortgage costs and surging prices the past few years put buying a home out of reach for many Americans. The 30-year fixed mortgage rate averaged 6.40 percent during the second half of last year, up from 5.87 percent for all of 2005, according to Freddie Mac, the No. 2 purchaser of home loans.

Slower sales and cancellations of existing orders have caused the number of unsold homes to pile up. The supply of homes at last year's sales rate averaged 6.4 months' worth, up from 4.4 months' worth in 2005 and 4 months in 2004.

Fourth Quarter 2007

Sales of new houses in the U.S. will slow until the fourth quarter of 2007, the National Association of Realtors forecast on Feb. 7.

Horsham, Pennsylvania-based Toll Brothers Inc., the largest U.S. luxury home builder, reported a 33 percent plunge in orders during the quarter ended Jan. 31.

Bernanke said in congressional testimony this week that ``weakness in residential investment is likely to continue to weigh on economic growth over the next few quarters.''

Still, mortgage rates this year have eased and homebuilders have offered discounts and other incentives, helping lure some buyers back into the market.

The ``pace of cancellations is starting to abate,'' Toll Brothers Chief Executive Officer Robert Toll said in a statement Feb. 8. ``However, we are still well above the company's historical average.''

Builder Confidence

Confidence among U.S. homebuilders unexpectedly rose this month to the highest since June, according to a survey yesterday from National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo.

The improved outlook is reflected in the performance of homebuilding stocks, which have regained some ground after plunging last year. The Standard and Poor's Supercomposite Homebuilding Index, made up of 16 homebuilder stocks, has risen more than 4 percent since early January, surpassing the gain in the broader S&P 500.

``The U.S. economy seems likely to expand at a moderate pace this year and next, with growth strengthening somewhat as the drag from housing diminishes,'' Bernanke said during congressional testimony Feb. 14.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top