• 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.
Study: ‘Bubble’ Likely to Deflate, Not Pop

Study: ‘Bubble’ Likely to Deflate, Not Pop


Glenn Roberts Jr., Inman News


House prices surged faster than household income and inflation, the national home-ownership rate fell for the first time in over a decade, housing inventories shot up with slowing sales, and the volume of sub-prime loans has soared.

But despite these findings, released today by Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing, the outlook for the housing market is generally good.

“The greatest threat to housing markets is a precipitous drop in house prices. Large house-price declines appear unlikely for now. But if the economy falters, both job growth and housing prices will come under renewed pressure. This would spark higher default rates, especially among sub-prime borrowers, and turn housing from an engine of economic growth to a drag,” according to the report, The State of the Nation’s Housing 2006.

By 2005, house prices were rising at the fastest pace since 1978, the report states, and “media reports of a housing bubble reached a fever pitch. But, when and if house prices do fall, the so-called bubble is more likely to deflate slowly rather than burst suddenly.”

Typically, job losses, overbuilding and population outflows are factors in home-price declines, the report states. “While dips of a few percentage points are common, nominal house prices rarely drop by 10 percent or more.” Though about half of the nation’s 75 largest metro areas have seen nominal house prices drop by 5 percent or more at least once in the past 30 years.

Over the past several years, real estate economists have said that the strength in the housing market has served to buoy the nation’s economy. Now, the performance of the general economy will help to determine how well the housing market weathers this slowdown. “Housing’s contribution to economic growth is already diminishing and will begin to turn negative if home sales, starts, and home equity borrowing continue to decline.”

Nicolas Retsinas, director of the Joint Center for Housing Studies, said, “We’ve turned the corner, certainly, from a seller's market to a buyer's market. The days of double-digit (price) appreciation are certainly behind us. The question before us, in this period of price correction, is, 'Will it be a flattening for the market or a more severe drop?'”

He added, “Overall, the market is probably fairly solid, but in the short term there will be some rough patches. The wild card ... is the economy.”

While price appreciation is slowing, Retsinas said that prices likely will not moderate enough to eliminate affordability problems. Rising energy costs have also affected housing affordability. From 2001-04, the number of households paying half of their incomes for housing increased by 1.9 million -- an estimated 15.6 million low- and middle-income households are classified as having “severe cost burdens” for housing, according to the report. And about 49 percent of poor working families with children had severe cost burdens in 2004, while 75 percent had at least moderate burdens.

Affordable rental housing for those earning $16,000 or less each year shrank by about 13 percent from 1993 to 2003, according to the report, and “a significant portion of the remaining affordable stock is in financial stress.”

Household growth is expected to grow from about 12.6 million over the past 10 years to 14.6 million in the next 10 years, the report states, while “widespread affordability problems will also intensify.”

An increase in foreclosures is likely as the market transitions, Retsinas said, given that it may not be as easy for some distressed homeowners to sell their properties and avoid a foreclosure process. “If I had a problem making my mortgage payment a year ago I could put my house on the market. If I had a problem this year it might not be quite as easy. I might not have that 'escape hatch.'”

Meanwhile, the overall home-ownership rate dipped from 69 percent in 2004 to 68.9 percent in 2005, the first drop after 12 consecutive years of gain, according to the report, as the rental market began to rebound.

New single-family home sales increased 6.7 percent from 2004-05, while existing single-family home sales increased 3.4 percent and existing condo and co-op sales grew 9.3 percent. Median new single-family home prices grew 4.4 percent from 2004-05, existing single-family prices gained 9.4 percent, and existing condo and co-op prices rose 13.4 percent.

“Although 2005 surpassed 2004 on many measures, housing markets were clearly moderating. Indeed, the year-over-year change in sales of existing homes turned negative late in 2005,” the report states, noting that a rise in interest rates is the likely culprit.

Slowing sales boosted the inventory of new and existing homes to a supply of about 5.3 months to 5.5 months in March 2006. The months' supply is used to gauge how long it would take to exhaust the for-sale inventory of homes given the current sales rate. A supply of six months is considered to be roughly equilibrium between a buyer's market and a seller's market, with a shorter supply indicating a seller's market and a longer supply indicating a buyer's market.

The inventory of condos reached a “near-term oversupply,” the report also concludes, with the supply climbing from 3.9 months to 6.9 months.

Investor demand for real estate is expected to cool, according to the report. “In the hottest markets, the overhang of investor properties may be absorbed rapidly if housing production continues to fall. The recent sharp increase in vacant single-family homes for rent suggests, however, that this process will not be smooth.”

Investors bought 4 percent of single-family homes built and 13 percent of condos sold, according to a June 2005 survey by the National Association of Home Builders, while investors bought an average 11 percent of new single-family homes and 15 percent of condos in the 30 large markets that posted the fastest price appreciation.

“Among the housing markets with the highest investor loan shares are several Florida and inland California metros, as well as Boise, Phoenix and Las Vegas. In most markets, the investor share more than doubled from 2000 to 2005,” the Harvard report states.

“I think we've reached a point where housing is no longer seen as a purchase for investment. It's something to live in,” Retsinas said.

The volume of sub-prime loans has jumped “dramatically,” the report notes, from $210 billion in 2001 to $625 billion in 2005, with last year's sub-prime lending total representing 20 percent of the dollar value of loan originations and about 7 percent of mortgage debt outstanding. The share of sub-prime loans that were at least 60 days delinquent or in some stage of foreclosure was seven times higher than that of prime loans in fourth-quarter 2005.

Interest-only loans, which defer principal payments for a specified number of years, “went from relative obscurity to an estimated 20 percent of the dollar value of all loans and 37 percent of adjustable-rate loans originated in 2005,” according to the center's report. “Payment-option loans, which let borrowers make minimum payments that are even lower than the interest due on the loan and roll the balance into the amount owed, accounted for nearly 10 percent of last year's loan originations.”

Meanwhile, adjustable-rate mortgages, which doubled their share of the market to 35 percent in 2004, dropped slightly to 31 percent in 2005.

The construction of new rental properties has slowed from 275,000 units in 2002 to 203,000 units in 2005, which—along with the conversion of some rental units to condo units—has assisted in lowering the vacancy rate from 10.2 percent in 2004 to 9.6 percent at the end of 2005.
 
Watch out where the huskies go, and don't you eat that yellow snow.
 
But despite these findings, released today by Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing, the outlook for the housing market is generally good.
Randolph, you must have missed where someone else posted this article and George did some research that uncovered who the Joint Center for Housing is. It's a group of people with deep ties to the housing industry.....maybe just a teenie weenie bit biased against admitting there's a problem since their income kinda depends on keeping up the image that everything is just okie-dokie with the housing market.
 
Dee Dee said:
Randolph, you must have missed where someone else posted this article and George did some research that uncovered who the Joint Center for Housing is. It's a group of people with deep ties to the housing industry.....maybe just a teenie weenie bit biased against admitting there's a problem since their income kinda depends on keeping up the image that everything is just okie-dokie with the housing market.
Thanks for the heads up Dee Dee. I missed that.

Gee, I am shattered to learn that people with high standing and academic credentials would use the printed word for the purpose of deception. However, I thought posting this article will demonstrate the "pro" and "con" on the housing bubble opinions. There are some (a minority) who believe the opinions, data, articles, etc., posted here are all one-sided, a narrow view.

I did note in the article where "they" alluded to any declining house prices will be the result of a declining economy.

Do you suppose the FED raising interest rates and the increase inflation will cause the economy to decline?
 
Gee, I am shattered to learn that people with high standing and academic credentials would use the printed word for the purpose of deception. However, I thought posting this article will demonstrate the "pro" and "con" on the housing bubble opinions.

If the 'experts' are finally admitting to a problem, then you can just about bet that it's worse than what they're admitting to...at least that's been the pattern so far. To hear the anti-bubble people talk, you would think that those who recognize and point out the problems are the ones who have ulterior motives for gain. I think that some here believe that what appraisers don't know won't hurt them, but I disagree. What appraisers on this forum wish to do in their private life is one thing, but when it comes to their job they had better be tuned in to changes in their market and not rely on anyones research but their own.

I did note in the article where "they" alluded to any declining house prices will be the result of a declining economy.

Do you suppose the FED raising interest rates and the increase inflation will cause the economy to decline?

The NAR and other housing 'experts' are already gearing up a campaign to blame the Fed for a decline in housing prices. Forget the fact that interest rates are still hovering around historical lows....there are far too many people who have entered the housing market over the past couple of years who never could have qualified to if it weren't for creative financing and loose lending practices.

http://realtytimes.com/rtapages/20060609_ratesrisebernanke.htm

I thought this one was kinda funny too:

http://realtytimes.com/rtcpages/20060616_perspective.htm
 
The numbers are the numbers and I doubt the JCHS is playing with those numbers, but I disagree with some of the reasoning they're using to reach their conclusions.

For instance:

Investors bought 4 percent of single-family homes built and 13 percent of condos sold, according to a June 2005 survey by the National Association of Home Builders, while investors bought an average 11 percent of new single-family homes and 15 percent of condos in the 30 large markets that posted the fastest price appreciation.

“Among the housing markets with the highest investor loan shares are several Florida and inland California metros, as well as Boise, Phoenix and Las Vegas. In most markets, the investor share more than doubled from 2000 to 2005,” the Harvard report states.
I don't have any reason to doubt these numbers, but I do take note that the numbers refer only to sales data reported to and provided by the building industry in reference to the new construction inventory, not the entire inventory. The builder's numbers assume that investors will generally identify themselves as such when they're buying, which is something I think a lot of appraisers would disagree

NARs pet economist says investor activity is a lot higher than 11%. Even among the 2nd home purchases and to a lesser extent the 1st home purchases, I think it's a huge mistake to think that assume that just because the property is occupied by it's buyer precludes the possibility of investment motives being a significant influence on the price they're willing to pay. I think that only some of these purchases are being made simply of the basis of "you have to live somewhere". Now I got nothing against a homeowner making a buck, but I would point out that a buyer who is weighted toward investment rather than utility has less reason to stick with that particular investment in a declining market than does someone who is more emotionally involved with their home.

Here's another:
Over the past several years, real estate economists have said that the strength in the housing market has served to buoy the nation’s economy. Now, the performance of the general economy will help to determine how well the housing market weathers this slowdown. “Housing’s contribution to economic growth is already diminishing and will begin to turn negative if home sales, starts, and home equity borrowing continue to decline.”
I agree that RE has been a major factor in our general economy, but I disagree that a given market will suffer a decline only if there are problems with the jobs and population. The difference in jobs and population hasn't significantly changed in my market in the last 2 years but pricing is on it's way down and there are some sellers who are already booking losses in the 5-figures as well as a few that are approaching losses of 6-figures. Where's the link between our general economy here and these losses? I don't think there is any because the gains that are currently being "lost" - whether they're booked as a result of a sale or not - never had anything to do with the general economy.

Here's a question: if gains and losses are so closely tied to the general economy, why aren't all - or even most - of the markets in the nation in some level of sync? Why did some markets boom years before the PNW and parts of Texas, and why are many of those markets currently in decline while the PNW and Texas are on their upside? I think a reasonable conclusion is that while the general economy is a factor in these upsides it is not the primary factor and there are other reasons that have had more effect.

The main problem I have with the JCHS analysis is that they basically assume that the reasons for the run-up in pricing in this cycle are the same as in past cycles. They don't address those factors that are "different this time" and so they're not seriously looking at the possible downsides of those factors.

----------------

BTW, the composition of their board and the fact that a building supplies company funded this particular study isn't a secret and I didn't "uncover" it, I just looked and it was there. If you think about it, it would be unusual to have an academic economic think tank for RE that wasn't sponsored by the RE industry.
 
Dee Dee said:
The NAR and other housing 'experts' are already gearing up a campaign to blame the Fed for a decline in housing prices. Forget the fact that interest rates are still hovering around historical lows....there are far too many people who have entered the housing market over the past couple of years who never could have qualified to if it weren't for creative financing and loose lending practices.

http://realtytimes.com/rtapages/20060609_ratesrisebernanke.htm

I thought this one was kinda funny too:

http://realtytimes.com/rtcpages/20060616_perspective.htm

It is interesting to hear the pundits talk about how low interest rates are relative to history. However, historical interest rates are not useful because the economy is running on today's interest rates. For people who have debt tied to floating interest rates (they change with the FED interest rate changes), telling them whatever rate is historically low does not help them pay the increase as interest rates go up.

I like the sage advice given:
Keep in mind, the market is the market. When it’s time to buy, buy. When it’s time to move, then sell. Work with the market you’re in, not in the market you wish it would be.
 
To add to Dee Dee's comments...."the trapper said, "I can't see, the doggy wee wee has blinded me"

What worries me so much about this talk of a soft landing, which was parroted by our local papers via the pres. of the state Realtors, is I recall all those pundits and CEO's like Ken Lay saying that this was a temporary "thing" and would kick back into high gear after a minor shake out.

You know all those "buy" and "hold" signals that came out for dot coms the very day or week they collapsed?

The big factor for pricing Real Estate has always liquidity in the marketplace. This boom is fueled by interest only loans, cheap rates, high LTVs and lending to any Tom, Dick or Harry coming thru the door. And that money has funded conspicuous consumption...consumption stops and the economy grinds to a halt because our economy is built upon consumerism. China and Korea are building our "stuff" now. Agriculture is on the ropes. The Arabs own the oil. So what do we do but shuffle paper, sell goods, and flip hamburgers? If the economy slows, tons of mortgages cannot be paid back, the banks get entrenched and refuse further loans. THAT is when a bubble pops. The rest is just strain on the system. The soft landing means avoiding the banks stopping making loans. Japan did it and put their economy into a 10+ years of doldrums from which they have never really recovered. Don't let Realtorspeak blind you.
 
Dee Dee: Randolph, you must have missed where someone else posted this article and George did some research that uncovered who the Joint Center for Housing is. It's a group of people with deep ties to the housing industry.....maybe just a teenie weenie bit biased against admitting there's a problem since their income kinda depends on keeping up the image that everything is just okie-dokie with the housing market.

Here's another theory put forth so often by those way out on a bubble tree limb;

IT'S A CONSPIRACY...IT'S A COVER-UP! WE KNOW WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENING!

Don't know how to break this to you but, Appraisers (even Crusader/Appraisers) "have deep ties to the housing industry."

Moreover, the "group of people" you're referring to...their incomes don't "kinda depend on keeping up an image." Their incomes depend upon their ability to read the markets correctly & market their services accordingly.

You see...it doesn't matter one iota to them whether the housing prices are rising or falling. They simply change their marketing strategy (as any good prognosticator would).

People are going to have to buy & sell no matter what housing prices are doing. This was the case in the earlier '80's' when interest rates were @ 18% w/3 points!!!

If you think falling prices will affect their incomes...think again. While prices are still rising in my region there's been a lack of product for a couple years now. Consequently, it's tough to find listings, and you're often in a multiple offer situation when working with buyers. In this so called boom time...I know many (most in fact) Agents struggling mightily.

If, and when (I say when because markets always CHANGE) my region begins to see more listings coming to market...it'll be easier to get listings, and I'll have a much higher likelihood for success when writing contracts for buyers.

Even if home prices dip...I'll be able to make just as much...maybe more because, there's suddenly more opportunity. Of course I'd stave off investing when prices begin to fall...I've an aversion to grasping @ falling knives (but then again...I don't have roots, and as Cramer says, "there's always a Bull Market somewhere!").

-Mike

Though it's a political website...I think the following link regarding pessimism is apropos to the discussion

http://www.watchblog.com/republicans/archives/002121.html
 
Last edited:
85 million per day - no more

Was listening to Boone Pickens talk about oil production yesterday on Kudlow and Company, with special guest John Stossel. He says world production capacity for oil has peaked at 85 million barrels per day. Regardless of reserves in the ground, the world has met its limit in its ability to pull it out of the ground any faster. His assertions further claim that by the end of the year the world will need about 85.5 to 86 million barrels per day; he further asserted that the only way to keep the price of a barrel of oil down was to kill men to keep demand at 85 million barrels.

Pretty interesting guy to listen to on TV; it nice to hear people speak plainly about reality; I think he was merely insinuating that either war will break out over oil as countries move to nationalize energy capacity in the face of rising demand over fixed production or people will have to endure a much higher price per gallon at the pump.

He said he agrees with Jimmy Carter that we are running out oil; Boone says Carter’s prediction 20 years ago was a little early, but that now that threshold is upon us.
 
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