PDA

View Full Version : 2009 Real Estate Forecast: Troubles Spread


Moby
12-30-2008, 10:52 AM
Even if 8,000,000 homes are at risk of foreclosure, and the average mortgage is $200,000 than can't we buy all these mortgages for $1.6 trillion? Isn't that almost the amount of the money that's been thrown (away) at the problem already?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20081224/bs_bw/dec2008bw20081223927689
By Prashant Gopal Prashant Gopal – Wed Dec 24, 8:08 am ET

2008 was the year that subprime borrowers and speculators got hurt by the real estate crisis. 2009 could be when everyone else gets hit.

Until now, the nation's most serious home price declines have been in low-cost markets that were dominated by subprime mortgages, and in overbuilt markets such as Florida, California, and Las Vegas, where residential values are sliding fast toward pre-housing boom levels.

The Commerce Dept. reported Dec. 23 that November new-home sales in the U.S. fell to their lowest level in 17 years, down 35.3% compared with November 2007. And the outlook is even bleaker. The same day, Credit Suisse (NYSE:CS - News) forecast that more than 8 million homes will go into foreclosure over the next four years, or approximately 16% of all U.S. households with mortgages.

That's because the big story in 2009 could be that, with the deepening recession and mounting job losses, serious housing troubles could infect wealthier communities and markets that were just beginning to stabilize this summer before the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers on Sept. 15 sparked the most serious financial turmoil in decades. In fact, according to online real estate research firm HousingPredictor.com, based in Destin, Fla., housing prices nationwide will fall 12.5% next year, compared with an estimated 11.1% this year.

Housing and mortgage problems pushed the nation into a recession that could now amplify, draw out, and expand the reach of the housing declines.

Manhattan Hit, Too

Take Manhattan, for example, where condo and co-op prices soared years after housing bubbles in most other major cities popped. New York City's real estate market was bolstered by residents who were still earning sky-high Wall Street bonuses and by a weak dollar that attracted overseas bargain hunters.

Now that the dollar has strengthened, the economic woes have spread to potential New York home buyers across the globe, and thousands of New York financial professionals are collecting severance. Manhattan apartment prices, as a result, have dropped as much as 20% since the summer, said Jonathan Miller, president and chief executive officer of real estate appraisal firm Miller Samuel. Miller's analysis is based on contracts signed in recent months, rather than actual closings.

"Mid-september was a milestone," Miller said. "That's where you saw a pronounced slowdown in transaction volume."

HousingPredictor.com is projecting a 19.4% decline in Manhattan home prices in 2009. And Moody's Economy.com is predicting that condo prices in New York City, Northern New Jersey, and Westchester County will fall 29% by the fourth quarter of next year.

"Nationally, we think this recession is going to be worse than anything we've seen in 40 years," said Marisa DiNatale, senior economist for Moody's Economy.com. "If the economy gets that bad, then you will start to see foreclosures in Manhattan as well."

Smaller Declines

On the other hand, the speculative Las Vegas, Arizona, California, and Florida markets, which have already seen annual home-price declines of up to 30%, could see slightly smaller declines simply because values have already fallen so much, according to Mike Colpitts, editor of HousingPredictor.com.

Some Florida markets, including Naples, Orlando, and Tampa, are already seeing declines moderate a bit, but problems in other Florida markets, such as Miami, continue to get worse, Colpitts said.

Few areas across the country will likely escape the recession and the corresponding impact on the real estate market, housing experts say. Another wave of foreclosures could be triggered next year as a flood of Alt-A and option adjustable-rate mortgages, which were given to people with decent credit, begin to recast. Most of the option ARMs, which allow borrowers to make minimum payments that don't even cover the accrued interest, are concentrated in already battered California, Florida, and Las Vegas.

Option ARMs originating in 2006 make up about $140 billion of the $350 billion of outstanding option ARMs, and 45% to 50% of them are expected to default, according to an analysis this past summer by Lehman Brothers. The 2007 option ARMs, which were originated just as home prices began falling, were expected to perform similarly badly.

Lost Jobs

Problems in other states could have less to do with risky mortgages and more to do with job losses. The impact of unemployment on the real estate market and the larger economy are already on display in hard-hit manufacturing cities such as Gary, Ind., and Detroit. Alabama, Arkansas, Atlanta, Michigan, and Ohio could see problems next year, Colpitts said.

"We're in the middle of the game here," said Joseph Seneca, professor of economics at Rutgers University in New Jersey. "There's significant further unwinding to come . We're in a downward spiral with job losses that is reinforcing the weakness in the consumer markets, particularly in the largest investment the consumer makes, in his home."

Seneca said the government's aggressive policies to stabilize housing by injecting liquidity in banks, lowering interest rates, tax stimulus packages, and other efforts will help. But the downward cycle will end only when prices fall far enough that they attract large numbers of buyers.

The nation's energy-producing states, such as North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Alaska, and Montana, could be economic bright spots next year. Despite falling oil and natural gas prices, those industries remain robust.

Texas Troubles

The economy in Texas, however, is beginning to get hit as unemployment rises and consumer spending drops, Colpitts said. He added that the Houston market, which has been remarkably stable, could drop about 8.5% next year. Five of the six supermajor energy companies maintain large operating bases in Houston, including ConocoPhillips (NYSE:COP - News), ExxonMobil (NYSE:XOM - News), Royal Dutch Shell (CDNX:RDS.V - News), and BP (NYSE:BP - News). The overbuilt San Antonio market could see a 10.2% drop. Austin, which is a high-tech center, could also be hurt as the technology sector gets damaged by weak consumer spending, he said.

And Charlotte, N.C., a major banking center that had been one of the nation's strongest real estate markets, could have its own housing troubles. Charlotte-based Bank of America (NYSE:BAC - News) just this month announced that it would cut up to 35,000 jobs over the next few years.

But a few places are poised for a potential recovery.

The housing market in and around Washington, D.C., which suffered greatly in the wake of the housing bust, could begin to recover, largely because the nation's capital has so many recession-proof government and defense contracting jobs, said DiNatale of Moody's Economy.com.

Other areas, such as the Boston area, San Diego, and Orange County, Calif., are getting close to affordability levels seen before the housing boom and could begin to level off, said DiNatale.

She added: "A lot of this depends on the economy over the next few months, help from the federal government, and whether buyers come back to the market."

Click here to see the markets that were hurt the most by the real estate downturn in 2008.

disrupter
12-31-2008, 09:49 AM
Correction:
The Treasury-Fed has loaned out 5 Trillion according to Dodd who presides on the Senate banking committee.

Obviously this is a much much bigger problem than can be explained by a simple realestate bubble & its collapse.

My understanding is that in 2003 the real estate market in the US was saturated. [PBS's Now]
That is when the glut of global capital, combined with Wall Street lies & stupidity started doing sub-prime lending to support their nutty CDOs as an investment scheme.

This is what blew the real estate bubble into an ever expanding, self-rationalizing monstrous bubble. Prices were rising so fast people both speculated as well as buying in terror of never ever being able to afford anything in the future.

Credit Default swaps were created as an insurance policy because despite the ridiculous alchemical ratings transformation of triple A from originally triple B junk-bond quality crap, these CDO things stunk to high heaven.

CDS primer: If the original bondpackage goes down by 20% the seller pays the buyer of the CDS 20% of the original [face] value of them. Completely unregulated, unrecorded, crude 'insurance'.

How Credit Default swaps amplified this disaster all out of proportion is by selling these, not just to the original bond holder, but to anyone who wanted them. 5, 10 or 20 additional people.
So when the 'bonds' went down 20%, instead of paying 20% out, it cost the seller 100, 200 or 400% of the ENTIRE original face value of the bond/CDO.
That is what collapsed all the investment banks that were selling this crap.
Foolishly AIG provided Goldman Sach's with insurance for its Credit Default Swaps, which means the taxpayer is on the hook for Goldman Sach's [Hank Paulson former CEO] garbage foolish betting.

It is like a whole neighborhood of people being able to buy a life insurance policy on one guy. The sicker it looked like he would get, the more people who jumped to cash in on a very likely payout.

It is however, NOT the responsibility of US taxpayers to underwrite the irresponsible insanity & gambling of Wall Street.

Moby
12-31-2008, 09:57 AM
Credit Default swaps were created as an insurance policy because despite the ridiculous alchemical ratings transformation of triple A from originally triple B junk-bond quality crap, these CDO things stunk to high heaven.

CDS primer: If the original bondpackage goes down by 20% the seller pays the buyer of the CDS 20% of the original [face] value of them. Completely unregulated, unrecorded, crude 'insurance'.

How Credit Default swaps amplified this disaster all out of proportion is by selling these, not just to the original bond holder, but to anyone who wanted them. 5, 10 or 20 additional people.
So when the 'bonds' went down 20%, instead of paying 20% out, it cost the seller 100, 200 or 400% of the ENTIRE original face value of the bond/CDO.
That is what collapsed all the investment banks that were selling this crap.
Foolishly AIG provided Goldman Sach's with insurance for its Credit Default Swaps, which means the taxpayer is on the hook for Goldman Sach's [Hank Paulson former CEO] garbage foolish betting.

It is like a whole neighborhood of people being able to buy a life insurance policy on one guy. The sicker it looked like he would get, the more people who jumped to cash in on a very likely payout.
People don't understand the credit default swaps. They want to blame the entire crisis on the subprime market even though we could buy out that market with Bush's current budget deficit. It's easier to listen to Rush Limbaugh and blame Obama or listen to Fox News and blame Nancy Pelosi.

No point in understanding that more money is in the default swaps market then actually exists in the known universe.

disrupter
12-31-2008, 10:48 AM
No, but people can understand amplifiers.
Take a little, inaudible sound & amp it up to blow one's eardrums out.

CDSs [& most derivatives] act as amplifiers. DANGEROUS amplifiers.

basically they took the shit of CDOs & amplified them humongously with CDSs.

a house of cards built on a swamp.

a house of cards towering so high when it collapses the bottom cards are shredded & some even catch on fire.

Money is subjective. An attempt to equate merchandise to a singular, reductive gradient/scale.
Life is terminal. death is the price of being born.
Trying to reduce it to a single line deflates life. It loses its tension relationship to other things & thereby its integrity & structure.
If money is the only thing that matters then it has become a mental illness.
You were born with life, the biggest treasure of all. Without which money is absolutely meaningless.
Money should be kept in perspective. At some intellectual arm's length. You should question it. Why one has it, or in more cases, doesn't.

One should respect money for it as a representation of potential in an unknown future, but not misinterpret it as patching spackle for a wounded ego, or childhood trauma.
One should also keep in mind money is only as sound as the government that issues it & treats it with respect.

Genuine Capitalists treat money with respect,
while speculators gamble.
Genuine capitalists understand & value many things other than just money.
Access to breathable air is an essential asset.
Clean water as well.
A global packet of knowledge is nearly priceless. It tends to amplify/leverage everything we can access. We can see meaning [potential] where other's limited imagination & capacity can not.
Evolution stumbled on that with our remembering brains.
Brains remember, Money dismembers. Brains can dissect, money just slaughters.
When you bet everything on money alone, it has mastered you. It owns you & not the other way around. It has completely captured your imagination.
And since it is completely subjective that is a very risky bet, especially in light of the unsettled nature of human history.

disrupter
12-31-2008, 10:50 AM
If money is one's only objective,
one has a lazy &/or crippled mind.

Binky
12-31-2008, 01:09 PM
If money is one's only objective, how sad for them.

Hog Trash
12-31-2008, 01:40 PM
If money is one's only objective,
one has a lazy &/or crippled mind.If money is one's only objective, how sad for them.I remember when I believed only people with too much money said things like this!...LOL!

Being young is being foolish....Our perception of priorities certainly does improve with age.

{I'd still like to hit that damn lottery for a few million though}

Cat slave
01-01-2009, 09:05 PM
Wouldnt that be great? They say money doesnt buy happiness but Id be
real happy!

Mr, gone
01-01-2009, 11:59 PM
It seems like all the wrong people are getting this corporate welfare. Or is it that power corrupts and money is the catalyst?

Independent Harry
01-02-2009, 01:59 AM
Even if 8,000,000 homes are at risk of foreclosure, and the average mortgage is $200,000 than can't we buy all these mortgages for $1.6 trillion? Isn't that almost the amount of the money that's been thrown (away) at the problem already?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20081224/bs_bw/dec2008bw20081223927689

not really, the problem isn't lying with the actual homes being foreclosed upon. A lot of these banks used the credit swaps as collateral for loans. So on top of the credit swaps going bad, the collateral goes away, for every 1$ in credit swaps, I think banks were averaging 7$ in leveraged money. The collateral goes bad, the loan comes due, and then the banks have to sell off good assetts to offset the bad. That causes a downward spiral. Because they are lowering there income to pay off bad debt, which in turn puts them in a worse cash flow situatino.

disrupter
01-02-2009, 07:45 AM
It is our penchant for oversimplification taken to a sick extreme.
money, religion, love & ideologies all treated as 'panaceas' fit this bill.

Our brains are designed to ignore reality's complexities & try to extract abstract cartoon diagrams, but which are too often [pleasingly] completely self-delusional.

When things work counter to our expectations we often just nail more bullshit onto our original abstractions, or worse, warp & overload them beyond their capacity.
I think sometimes we need to completely disassemble [overhaul] our abstractions & attempt to more closely conform their arrangement to our deep, subtle, wordless perceptions.

Governments & Religions both tend to warp all expectations beyond any human scale & very often become inhumane monstrosities.
This IMO can be greatly reduced if they see themselves as vehicles for a variety of & even ambiguous intents & not as promoters of some [single] [religious] ideology.

Government should be an open-ended facility/facilitator & not an end in itself.
A broad benefiter for people sounds like a workable paradigm.
Honest civil service to that end should be seen as an honorable, respected, dignified profession.
A job & not a pathology or panacea. pathologies & panaceas should only be done on your own private time.

When you reject ambiguity, you reject living reality.

Moby
01-02-2009, 10:52 AM
not really, the problem isn't lying with the actual homes being foreclosed upon. A lot of these banks used the credit swaps as collateral for loans. So on top of the credit swaps going bad, the collateral goes away, for every 1$ in credit swaps, I think banks were averaging 7$ in leveraged money. The collateral goes bad, the loan comes due, and then the banks have to sell off good assetts to offset the bad. That causes a downward spiral. Because they are lowering there income to pay off bad debt, which in turn puts them in a worse cash flow situatino.
Actually that's my point. People are screaming about the bad mortgages and sub prime issue as if it was the cause of the financial crisis. Sure, Fannie and Freddie fucked up and cost Americans a boat load of money but if those loans had collateral to back them up our economy would still be fine.

The default swap market is estimated at $40 Trillion to $65 Trillion and that's more money then actually exists in the world. It was also what made sub prime lending profitable.

Independent Harry
01-02-2009, 11:47 AM
Actually that's my point. People are screaming about the bad mortgages and sub prime issue as if it was the cause of the financial crisis. Sure, Fannie and Freddie fucked up and cost Americans a boat load of money but if those loans had collateral to back them up our economy would still be fine.

The default swap market is estimated at $40 Trillion to $65 Trillion and that's more money then actually exists in the world. It was also what made sub prime lending profitable.

What I'm talking about isn't even pertaining to the swap insurance market. Not only did they insure these derivitives, but they borrowed money against them as assetts. Kinda like you borrowing equity out of your home. But through some accounting loophole (this was one of the very first things I read about, before people even started catching on to the insurance scame) is that banks were somehow able to leverage themselves (borrow money) against these derivitives up to 7$ of borrowed money against every 1$ of derivitives they held. That's the reason these big investment banks went belly up. They were super leveraged against the derivitives and then when insurance didn't come through to pay for them. They had to have a firesale to cover all their losses.

I forget exactly how it was accomplished, I'll have to look for the article again sometime.

Hog Trash
01-02-2009, 02:06 PM
It seems like all the wrong people are getting this corporate welfare. Or is it that power corrupts and money is the catalyst?It's pretty much always been that way ain't it?......Here's an interesting theory, everybodies probably already heard.

Somebody once said that, if all the money in the world was divided up evenly between all the people, the same people would eventually end up with all of it again.

Mr, gone
01-02-2009, 10:15 PM
Hog, To help maintain this equal distibution of wealth. Take anyone who starts hoarding it again, and give them a public lynching.:D

disrupter
01-06-2009, 11:53 AM
Real banks would not even lend to subprimes.

Only Wall Street Wackos would do & did that.

This is a wall street bubble, PERIOD.