• 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.
what is the big deal about the housing sales increase last month? Homeowners are frustrated and giving away their homes. A house that was sold for $635,000 8 months ago in Garden Grove, Orange County, was listed last month for $569,000 last month and it is still sitting there. The homeowner is taking $100,000 loss on this home and still cannot sell it. Sure, if he drops another $50,000, Mike Neff will buy it.
 
One million homes at risk

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/lemming-loans-drive-us-economy/story.aspx?guid=%7B1F050B96%2D5BA3%2D494D%2D9D92%2DFB882963206C%7D

Will 'lemming loans' drive economy off the cliff?


In mortgage market's next big blowup, many Americans face losing their home
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- For the first time in the nation's history, a significant number of Americans are being threatened with the loss of their home even though they still have a steady, good-paying job.


It's not just an issue for people with poor credit, those with subprime loans. It also affects people with good enough credit to qualify for a prime loan. Known as Alt-A mortgages, these loans were written for 1 in 5 U.S. mortgages and could have a big impact on the economy and on credit markets -- bigger, perhaps, than the effects of the recent shock waves buffeting the subprime-lender market, economists say.

In coming months and years, the credit crunch that's now squeezing mainly the poor is likely to hit millions of middle-class homeowners who took out risky loans during the great housing boom earlier in the decade. More than 1 million families will lose their homes in the next few years, by one estimate. Another study predicts 2.2 million foreclosures.

This threat is new in American history. Its impact on the economy, and upon the American Dream, is uncertain.

In the past, homeowners have generally lost their home to foreclosure only when they suffered a major life-changing event, such as loss of their job, a major illness or death of a family member. A big jump in foreclosures was unheard of outside a recession that brought high unemployment.

But now, because of the recent popularity of loans geared to let people buy a more expensive home than they can truly afford, all it will take is the passage of time to trigger a default. At some point, all these loans are adjusted to switch from a low, subsidized monthly payment to the full amount required to pay off the loan.

In the not-too-distant future, millions of Americans may receive a letter advising them of their mortgage "reset" or "recast" with the same dread they now feel for a pink slip or for bad news from their oncologist. The only difference: They know (or should know, if they noticed what they were signing) exactly what's coming: An average monthly increase of $1,512 in their monthly mortgage payment.

Researchers are studying three major channels through which a mortgage meltdown's shock waves could rattle the economy.

The most direct way would be through falling home prices.

Demand will continue to fall. Tougher mortgage underwriting standards will eliminate about 20% of the potential buyers, including 50% of the subprime buyers and 25% of the Alt-A buyers, according to estimates by Credit Suisse.

The supply of homes would also grow.

If prices fall 5%, the percentage with no equity would grow to 23%, according to Christopher Cagan, director of research for First American CoreLogic, a mortgage research firm in Sacramento. And if prices fall 10%, it would jump to 35%.

The third transmission channel is financial.

The deeper question is what will happen to investor sentiment. "This has the potential to undermine global investor confidence," said Zandi of Economy.com. The result could be a general drying up of credit, even to the most qualified and untainted borrowers.

Investors who eagerly bought these risky mortgages on the secondary market are having second thoughts, not just about subprime mortgages, but also all the other bits of paper in their portfolio that they didn't pay much attention to. They are finding out that there's not as much collateral in the collateralized debt obligations, known as CDOs, as they were led to believe.
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070323/ap_on_bi_st_ma_re/wall_street

"Stocks closed mostly higher Friday, sending the Dow Jones industrials' to their best week in four years after a surprise jump in home sales eased concern that frailty in the housing market will hurt economic growth. Existing home sales rose by the biggest amount in nearly three years in February amid a sharp increase in sales in the Northeast, the National Association of Realtors said. The 3.9 percent increase was the largest since a similar jump in March 2004; analysts had been expecting a decrease.

Still, the report did have some downbeat aspects — the median price of a home fell year-over-year for the seventh straight month and inventories rose.

The Federal Reserve this week said an "adjustment" in the housing sector was continuing, offering some relief for investors left unnerved by the woes among so-called subprime mortgage lenders. Wall Street had grown concerned that an implosion among subprime lenders, which make loans to people with poor credit, could spill over into other parts of the economy and derail already slowing economic growth.

"People are realizing the housing market is bottoming and is not going to cause a recession in 2007," said Noman Ali, U.S. equities portfolio manager at MFC Global Investment Management. "The consumer is really the main driving force of the economy and the consumer remains strong."

Uh, calling a bottom may be premature.

These sales were pending BEFORE the Sub-prime market meltdown.

With sub-prime lenders disappearing, how many future sales will there be? How many new buyers will not qualify today that had no problem qualifying even a month ago?

That's the question that really needs to be answered.

I expect more Wall Street jitters coming out from the housing market.
 
Last edited:
How many subprime, alt-a and neg am loans?

One thing alt-a loans have in common with subprime loans; both have neg am loans.
 
Last edited:
If I already have hundreds of reports of sales, some hundreds of thousands above what they were listed for and didn't sell for months for that lesser amount, how many more of those fraudulently priced cash back deals are included in those stats????? I'm starting to wonder if NAR advocates this.
 
All Subprime, All the Time

http://www.safehaven.com/article-7211.htm

On Friday, we learned that existing home sales rose in February well above consensus expectations. Good news? Yes. The headlines in the financial press proclaimed (for the umpteenth time) that the worst of the housing slump is behind us. Home prices are down a mere 1.3% from a year ago, although the number of homes for sale rose slightly to a supply of 6.7 months, meaning homes are staying on the market longer, as sellers are still reluctant to sell at lower prices.

But the problems for new and existing home sales are in the future. Last year there were 400,000 foreclosures. Economy.com (Moody's) estimates that that number will double in 2007. That means that there will be an additional 800,000 homes added to the supply of existing homes this year, which is at a seasonally adjusted 6.69 million homes.

Doing the back-of-the-napkin math, that suggests there are about 3.6 million homes for sale on the market today. We could see that number grow by as much as 15-20% due to foreclosures alone over the coming months, as more homes go through foreclosure. Remember, the record foreclosures we are seeing today started as problems six months ago (or more in some states). As delinquency rates are rising sharply, the number of foreclosures six months from now is going to be even higher. It will take several years for this problem to work itself out.

800,000 Foreclosures in 2007
So, what do 800,000 foreclosures mean? It is like the old joke: when your neighbor loses his job it is a recession. When you lose yours, it is a depression. What it means depends on your position.
Let's make the math easy. Assume an average mortgage of $200,000. That would be $160 billion worth of foreclosures. But of course not all that $160 billion would be lost. The homes do have some value. Let's assume that the homes are only worth 80% of the foreclosed mortgages, an admittedly possibly bearish assumption.
That would mean lenders are going to have to lose $32 billion. Ouch. But even if it is $32 billion, in an $8 trillion dollar mortgage market and an almost $13 trillion US economy that is a rounding error, as long as you are not the lender.
Who loses? Obviously, a lot of mortgage banks. On March 2 www.lenderimplode.com listed 28 subprime mortgage firms that were shut down or taken over. One week later it was at 34. The count is now 44. Nine of the top 25 subprime lenders are either bankrupt or no longer operating independently. Many have given earnings warnings, and have massively increased estimates for loan losses. The shareholders, whether public or private, of these companies lose..
This is me: Lenders are going to have to lose $32 billion. How much lenders saved by using AVM instead of real appraisals? how much they saved by using AMCs instead of honest appraisers who deserved a decent fee for their works and were not willing to work for AMC for half price of their fees? I don’t say all of lenders loss are due to bad appraisals but some of them are and they deserve it.
 
Last edited:
If I already have hundreds of reports of sales, some hundreds of thousands above what they were listed for and didn't sell for months for that lesser amount, how many more of those fraudulently priced cash back deals are included in those stats????? I'm starting to wonder if NAR advocates this.
Pam, I am now of the opinion that NAR data is bogus. I can see by tracking their spread sheet data releases that they go back and rewrite history. It would be easy to accept the revised data if they had some increases and some decreases. But, all of the revisions minimize a declining trend and overstate the sales volume.

Just remember to laugh every time you hear David Lereah say any thing about improving trends; he should know, the books are being "cooked".
 

Tawfik, I am aware of David Lereah's track record and articles that have been published showing his lack of truthfulness or to prevaricate.

What I am complaining about is the data itself; it is changed a year after the fact and no mention is made that the change was made or for what reason was it necessary to alter data published a year ago. This is very troubling when that data is used today for a comparison and the comparison when published, is widely accepted without any acknowledgment of the altered data.
 
And as far as I know, Randolph, you're the only one who has brought up this very important and disturbing fact.

You would do a real service to expose it in detail.

Thanks.
 
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