patrick.net

Wow, SactoQt - that was so good, maybe YOU should apply for the job (*not employment advice*). ;-)
G'nite all...

Wow, SactoQt - that was so good, maybe YOU should apply for the job (*not employment advice*).
G’nite all…

Oops. My post got messed up somehow.

I meant to say thanks........ I think.

Nite Harm.

Hymie

You mentioned that you wonder what happens to people who move out of state to afford a house after the market falls. I can give you my personal experience, and I bet it'll be fairly close to what happens to a lot of people.

My parents found themselves priced out of the Ca housing market back in late 70's early 80's. I don't know what the market in Ca was doing at that particular time, but it was my family's situation nonetheless. Anyway. We moved to Oregon and my parents were able to buy a really nice house in a nice area and all was well, for awhile. Turns out, Oregon wasn't really our cup of tea. Or maybe it was just the town. It was really small and everyone was in everyone else's business. My family lasted 5 years.

We moved back to Ca and were able to find a house. Housing must've fallen in the 5 years we were gone in order for my parent's to afford a house, and it definitely fell in Oregon because my parent's couldn't give the house away. They rented the house out for a few years, put it up for sale again and still couldn't get rid of it. My mom's friend worked at the bank and said that people were turning their keys in because no one was buying anything. That's what my parent's ended up doing.

..........zzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZ..........._IRQwakeup_ ....

Hi All,
I need some more therapy.
I can almost believe that RE can go up forever.

Ahhh, RE's little conundrums:-
1) Short term rates increasing, long term rates dropping.
(AG's problem, not mine)
2) Median house price increasing, house prices dropping.
(can happen, where different market segments are behaving differently)
3) House owners being equity rich, but being cash poor.
(SEP (Someone Elses Problem))
4) House prices going up, owners being able to redraw less on equity.
(Interest rates going up will limit loan ammounts that can be serviced)

(Not real life advice)

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...........

We should probably organize more get togethers should this Saturday works out.

1) Short term rates increasing, long term rates dropping.
(AG’s problem, not mine)
2) Median house price increasing, house prices dropping.
(can happen, where different market segments are behaving differently)
3) House owners being equity rich, but being cash poor.
(SEP (Someone Elses Problem))
4) House prices going up, owners being able to redraw less on equity.

Looks like we are in the decade of conundrum.

Remember that Star Trek TNG episode of the same name? We will eventually figure it out.

“It’s getting a little bit scary right now,” she said. “I’m not a person of means. I’m a retired nurse and a widow and I don’t have millions to call upon.”

Generas, 64, moved to a condo in Tierrasanta last spring and put a $1.1 million asking price on her 1,879-square-foot, three-bedroom home in Kensington. Since then, it’s been in and out of escrow three times and is listed at $950,000 to $975,000. Her son Tony is house-sitting and helping cover her two mortgage payments, which total $6,000 a month. But she’s not ready to accept lowball offers.

Sorry, but I need to comment.

Which bank in their right mind would lend a retired person this ammount of money. A quick reality check here please.
Did the lender ok the loan on the basis that a retired person has an income stream to make payments, or was this a bridging loan?

It would appear that she was allowed to be in a financially risky position.
Was this her choice, or her incompentant lawyer or banker?

The banks must be sweating for October 17.

GREED IS BAD.

Hi Peter P,
Howzit going.
Been busy watching the cricket. (awwwwwww)

How are the options going?

Which bank in their right mind would lend a retired person this ammount of money. A quick reality check here please.

The entire system is on crack. Too bad.

It would appear that she was allowed to be in a financially risky position.
Was this her choice, or her incompentant lawyer or banker?

It does not matter. A competant lawyer and banker is someone who gets the deal done. Caveat Emptor.

Too much greed. Watch out when that turns into fear.

Hi Peter P,
Howzit going.
Been busy watching the cricket. (awwwwwww)

I am doing fine. How are you doing?

How are the options going?

Only the FNM put is doing okay. Homebuilders are still bullish and I am not going to touch them for a while. Mortgage stocks appear to be weakening.

(Not investment advice)

his her choice, or her incompentant lawyer or banker?

It does not matter. A competant lawyer and banker is someone who gets the deal done. Caveat Emptor.

The point here is that a competant lawyer or banker would be telling the client the risks involved.
It would have then been her decision to take the risk.

The point here is that a competant lawyer or banker would be telling the client the risks involved.
It would have then been her decision to take the risk.

That would be a competent AND ethical lawyer or banker. ;)

Has anybody worked out:-

1) How many jobs are created by Unemployment.
2) How much wealth is created by bankruptcy.
3) How much debt has been created by real estate.
4) How many people that are in debt who think that they are wealthy.

That would be a competent AND ethical lawyer or banker.

Actually, imo lawyers are paid to be immoral.
Consider, in a courtroom, both sides of court have lawyers that are trying to argue counter arguments. Obviously, given the facts of a case, only one side can be morally correct. The other side is trying to argue legal argument why morals should be put aside.

Actually, imo lawyers are paid to be immoral.
Consider, in a courtroom, both sides of court have lawyers that are trying to argue counter arguments. Obviously, given the facts of a case, only one side can be morally correct. The other side is trying to argue legal argument why morals should be put aside.

Worse. Lawyers could be arguing for the sake of generating billable hours.

(Not an accusation)

1) How many jobs are created by Unemployment.
2) How much wealth is created by bankruptcy.
3) How much debt has been created by real estate.
4) How many people that are in debt who think that they are wealthy.

My head is spinning. Good nite. Talk to you tomorrow.

From Yahoo! "bond ticker:"

Mastering the Obvious: Treasury's Snow once stumping at a Home Depot in Atlanta. saying "We believe that economic growth will slow in the last quarter of this year as a result of Katrina, but are optimistic that rebuilding efforts will give GDP, jobs and our overall economy a lift by the first quarter of next year." (Bloomberg.com)

http://bonds.yahoo.com/bt.html

So, anticipation of no interest rate hike....

---3) How much debt has been created by real estate.---

Actually, insofar as mortgage debt, this is well known because of the complex debt tranching that goes on. Debt tranching also diversifies the risk across capital markets, which is why most people's "common sense" about how real-estate debt works is generally wrong. Of course, that doesn't mean there won't be a lot of defaults, but the effect will be less than the worst of the doomsayers hope for--at a macro level.

As to (4), it is quite possible to earn returns with debt. Being in debt doesn't automatically mean you're not wealthy. It all depends upon the relative costs of capital and exposure to risk.

...Jobs created by unemployment? If you're implicating sectoral restructuring, then it is undeniable that net jobs are created. It just sucks for those who are "restructured". (emperical evidence from Solow, et. al).

And again, so I don't get flamed: I am on the record as a BEAR on Bay Area & California general RE.

I know it was the last thread, but IMO the real thing to fear here is INFLATION. This will be the long-term, killer. It has the potential of _both_ helping pop the RE bubble and simultaneously preventing those on the sidelines from profiting from the correction (because of uneven inflation...stagnent incomes, rising energy prices, etc).

It has the potential of _both_ helping pop the RE bubble

Are we talking about general, across-the-board inflation here? If so, I'd like to know how this could prop up the RE bubble. In the absence of factors that propped the bubble sofar, rising inventory, etc, it seems that RE prices could easily drop--to what people are willing to pay, no?

What are your SOURCES for your inventory time Mr. Right? I don't buy that Bay Area inventory is exactly the same as one year ago because it's not - especially in the EAST BAY.

PS Even the DQ article in the Chronicle admitted that SF inventory is up between 10% and 15% from this time last year.

For "Mr. Right" Here's a RECENT article about Tracy. Tracy is about as close as you can get to Silicon Valley and not technically be in the Bay Area.

http://www.tracypress.com/local/2005-09-03-housing.php

BTW, this story of increasing inventory holds true for the Tri-Valley cities of Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore and San Ramon as well.

"That’s true. My numbers are rounded to the nearest 0.5%, so a change from 1.9 months to 2.2 months (a 15% increase) would both show as 2.0 months."

Yes, but you are claiming that 2.0 is the number for the entire Bay Area. ALameda and Contra Costa has gone up much more than 15. More like AT LEAST 30%, if not higher, from this time last year.

Inventory seems to be rising fast though. There were 800 listings in craigslist between 400K and 600K right after July 4. Now there are nearly 1700!

(Well, craigslist is more of a psychological barometer, not a measure of inventory level)

There are LOTS of cities in Alameda & Contra Costa with current inventory levels that are over 100 (pretty much ALL cities except for the small ones) - numbers unthinkable this time last year. Do a search and see for yourself.

Does anyone know the percentage of homes sold to “investor” (speculator) buyers in the Sacramento area over the past few years?

I've read articles that suggest between 1/5 to 1/4 sales are to "investors" in the Sacto area. Another article said that a lot of these "investors" have been getting spooked and are starting to dump their properties in the Natomas area.

I should say the speculators have been selling off, most notably, in the Natomas area. I've been watching craigslist too, and Elk Grove seems to have a lot of activity too. Sacramento rental listings are way up on craigslist too.

Mr. Right:

Try adding in Contra Costa, Solano, Napa & Sonoma to give a better picture. Santa Cruz arguably isn't the "Bay Area", but Contra Costa most definitely is.

Does anyone know the percentage of homes sold to “investor” (speculator) buyers in the Sacramento area over the past few years?

Cindy,
I don't have any reliable numbers for CA or Sacramento per se, but accordingly to a frequently cite NAR survey, 23% of buyers nationwide in 2004 were speculators + another 13% bought 2nd homes (some of which could also have been for "investment" purposes): tinyurl.com/akxhn. That gives you a range of nearly 1/4 to over 1/3rd of all buyers.

Oh sure Harm, go and get all accurate and stuff. ;)

An interesting thing about the Alameda / Contra Costa data is that they track withdrawn / canceled listings in that region, and those numbers are increasing quite a bit.

Yes, people are putting houses on the MLS like daytraders are putting limit orders on the Nasdaq book. Listings are routinely canceled, replaced, and modified.

BTW, I am very wary of someone who says that his house has gone up X after Y months. Real estate is very illiquid. One cannot know the value until the house is put on the market and sold. There is no streaming real-time quote and one certainly cannot "hit the bid" and sell a house immediately.

Not only that, but people tend to ignore the huge costs in selling their home and buying another - commissions, closing costs, etc.

Even more funny, they try to become realtors and mortgage brokers themselves.

LOL

“Given how closely that industry is aligned with home prices, economists wonder how the labor market will fare if the upward spiral in real estate ends."

It would be interesting to find out... let me guess, downward spiral in the labor market and housing prices?

It would be interesting to find out… let me guess, downward spiral in the labor market and housing prices?

These two sectors are going to feed off eachother in a negative way when things start on a downward trend. Can you imagine how many new homes have been purchased by those in the contruction/RE/mortgage industries in the last few years? Once those job markets start taking a hit and those people don't have any other immediate job opportunities, there are going to be that many more homes being put on the market.

Yes, If only you could place a stop order on your house and pay a $9.99 commission.

Perhaps a mental stop triggered by the "comps". ;)

Can you imagine how many new homes have been purchased by those in the contruction/RE/mortgage industries in the last few years?

Interesting...it could be easy to underestimate the scope of an RE crash's effect. Here's another "what if": if/when realtors' jobs go sour, how many "investment properties" do we think they'll offload?

Peter did you catch the action in the builder stocks today - a few of them undercut the August lows and the inder I use of builder stocks (TC2000) was down 2.5%.

I missed the action. However, the market has yet to discount the extend of the bubble bust. The bear market for these stocks will be long and drawn out IMO.