patrick.net

War says

Bigsby says

I see your auto-response machine is still functioning.

I see your lies are still flowing.

What lies would those be?

War says

Playing stupid merely makes you stupid.

Something you've mastered. Again, post some links to the things you think I've been lying about.

War says

Post some links to the the things you believe you've been truthful about.

Just read everything I post. Those are my opinions. Point to the ones where you think I'm lying. As we all know you'll just post some tautological comment or other, why not just explain what you think my views on housing are.

ptiemann says

Not to discredit the statement, but were you aware of these 2 articles' posting date? (2009 and 2010?)

Nothing, as far as how the bank view REOs, has changed since then. There are lots of programs to prevent (or delay) foreclosures, but once the bank owns them they want them off their books asap.

E-man says

It's been almost 3 years now, and we're still talking about the same issue. Interesting.

Because for three years (4 this fall) the conspiracy has only been speculated, never proven. Again, there is an enormous shadow inventory, but little of it is secret REOs.

War says

Playing stupid merely makes you stupid.

Call it Crazy says

gregpfielding says

Again, there is an enormous shadow inventory, but little of it is secret REOs.

That's because they are sitting in the Neverland between the filing of the NOD and Lis Pendens and the official court transfer back to the bank (specially in the judicial states). They sit empty, waiting to enter the official REO fleet!!!

Yes. I agree. That's been my point.

I'm just going to point out again that there are absolutely zero reasonably accurate statistics on mortgages that have not been paid on for one or more months, but have yet to receive a NOD.

Everyone wants stats proving or disproving shadow inventory, but those stats don't exist. If they did, there would be no threads arguing this subject.

At least in California, those homes are not empty. But many of them have 5 years of listing and delisting, accompanied by multiple listing price fluctuations that seemingly have no rhyme or reason........

The current arguments supporting the notion of a huge amount of shadow inventory very much carry the feel of those arguing we were in a bubble back in 2005.

gregpfielding says

E-man says

It's been almost 3 years now, and we're still talking about the same issue. Interesting.

Because for three years (4 this fall) the conspiracy has only been speculated, never proven. Again, there is an enormous shadow inventory, but little of it is secret REOs.

East Bay Real Estate Agent and Blogger

So Greg, where do you think we will go from here? Low inventory for years to come with home prices muddle along, or there will be a wave or waves of foreclosures hitting the market to drive prices lower, or foreclosures will be sold in bulk through the back door to institutional investors, or..........???

TIA for your response.

E-man says

o Greg, where do you think we will go from here?

Find a plot or a tear-down and build you a custom home. With costs what they are these days, you could build a fabalous house with a high dollar finish out.

HUD chief confirms there is no "shadow inventory":
http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-shaun-goes-west-20120822,0,2090315.story

But I suppose that won't convince the paranoid conspiracy theorists on here.

wave9x says

But I suppose that won't convince the paranoid conspiracy theorists on here.

Thank GOD we cleared that up.

I guess I could post a link to Michael Olenick's site and then say something like, BUT I guess it won't convince all the Tru-Believers on here...bunny quotes and all...but that would be lame.

wave9x says

HUD chief confirms there is no "shadow inventory":

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-shaun-goes-west-20120822,0,2090315.story

But I suppose that won't convince the paranoid conspiracy theorists on here.

When new build commences, then I'll believe the short supply/no shadow inventory theories.

Rising prices + no inventory = a market ripe for new product.

That hasn't happened and I'm not sure if its the HUD Chief is stupid or if the HUD Chief is corrupt, but its probably both.

dodgerfanjohn says

When new build commences, then I'll believe the short supply/no shadow inventory theories.

In Los Angeles there aren't many more empty areas to build that are within an hour's drive of major employment centers.

Well, there are places to build if we can increase the density, but zoning regulations and NIMBYs it's hard to get that started.

and the exurbs that were popular for new tract housing builds in the last couple decades have been decimated by high gas prices.

The paychecks, bonuses, and campaign contributions continue to flow. As long as banks can borrow at negative real interest rates why screw up easy money by recognizing the losses and go bankrupt? Why not just stall and/or hoard properties and wait for home buyers with clean credit, mortgage insurance, and stars in their eyes? If you're a tbtf bank even being a slum landlord works to show a cash flow, launder new money, and qualify as a business in the eyes of the fed. The squatters are happy, the execs are happy, the corporations and their puppets are happy and the old folks with pensions are still getting checks. This could go on for a long time.

zesta says

In Los Angeles there aren't many more empty areas to build that are within an hour's drive of major employment centers.

Said everybody in 2006, right before the crash.

E-man says

So Greg, where do you think we will go from here? Low inventory for years to come with home prices muddle along, or there will be a wave or waves of foreclosures hitting the market to drive prices lower, or foreclosures will be sold in bulk through the back door to institutional investors, or..........???

I'd love to see a wave of foreclosures come through so we can get all of this behind us, but the reality is that Uncle Sam and the big banks aren't going to let it happen. They can control the number of foreclosures and how many trickle onto the market at any given time. Some will be sold in bulk. But I believe the game plan for the next few years is the same as the last: slowly foreclose on the homes you have to, keep inventory low, and drag this mess out as long as it takes.

This is bad news for buyers, investors, everyone who works in the industry, and even for sellers.

It's depressing.

HEY YOU posted this link on a separate thread. Not sure what to call these folks (well, one word does come to mind), but 31% of mortgagors are underwater. Low interest rates and other extend and pretend measures keep these folks 'trapped forever' in a prison of their own making.
Greg, not sure about this being bad for investors -- if the bubble was about common folk losing their shirts, the downslope is about a massive wealth transfer to the rent seeking class.

All news is good news just before an election, remember the tradition of the Greeenspan put.

Wait until after the election, when the promises evaporate and the props fall out

zesta says

dodgerfanjohn says

When new build commences, then I'll believe the short supply/no shadow inventory theories.

In Los Angeles there aren't many more empty areas to build that are within an hour's drive of major employment centers.

Well, there are places to build if we can increase the density, but zoning regulations and NIMBYs it's hard to get that started.

and the exurbs that were popular for new tract housing builds in the last couple decades have been decimated by high gas prices.

That's not exactly true. When proper demand exists, the building WILL take place. Take for example NELA. Tons of building there transforming garbage homes into sanitized IKEA flips. What was once gang ridden wasteland is now being turned into a new bastion of upper middle classdom.

However, that's not happening in appreciably larger areas and it's because the demand doesn't exist. If it did, you'd see the same construction in Lincoln Heights, El Sereno, Boyle Heights, and Pico Union.

There's plenty of neighborhoods in LA ready to gentrify. And don't give me that nonsense about how no one wants to live in gang wasteland. People said the same thing about Silver Lake, Echo Park, Atwater Viliage, Altadena, and Highland Park.

dodgerfanjohn says

There's plenty of neighborhoods in LA ready to gentrify.

Isn't most of LA a gang wasteland?

EBGuy says

HEY YOU posted this link on a separate thread. Not sure what to call these folks (well, one word does come to mind), but 31% of mortgagors are underwater. Low interest rates and other extend and pretend measures keep these folks 'trapped forever' in a prison of their own making.

Greg, not sure about this being bad for investors -- if the bubble was about common folk losing their shirts, the downslope is about a massive wealth transfer to the rent seeking class.

If the government allows refinancing with no docs, it will bail out a lot of underwater homeowners. Basically, it would cut their monthly mortgage payment by 1/3 to 1/2. Loan modification was designed with this intention, but it hasn't worked very well due to the fact that you must provide financial docs.

If HARP 3.0 passes, expect the "shadow inventory" to be shrunk significantly.

dodgerfanjohn says

That's not exactly true. When proper demand exists, the building WILL take place. Take for example NELA. Tons of building there transforming garbage homes into sanitized IKEA flips. What was once gang ridden wasteland is now being turned into a new bastion of upper middle classdom.

However, that's not happening in appreciably larger areas and it's because the demand doesn't exist. If it did, you'd see the same construction in Lincoln Heights, El Sereno, Boyle Heights, and Pico Union.

or more noteable in limited lands of San Francisco .. buildings taken down or converted to livable towers and lofts. Its has happened alot over the last 10-12 yrs.

wave9x says

HUD chief confirms there is no "shadow inventory":

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-shaun-goes-west-20120822,0,2090315.story

But I suppose that won't convince the paranoid conspiracy theorists on here.

I've learned over the last several years that anything the federal government (and federal reserve) says, you can pretty much count on the exact opposite being closer to the truth.

taxee says

The paychecks, bonuses, and campaign contributions continue to flow. As long as banks can borrow at negative real interest rates why screw up easy money by recognizing the losses and go bankrupt? Why not just stall and/or hoard properties and wait for home buyers with clean credit, mortgage insurance, and stars in their eyes? If you're a tbtf bank even being a slum landlord works to show a cash flow, launder new money, and qualify as a business in the eyes of the fed. The squatters are happy, the execs are happy, the corporations and their puppets are happy and the old folks with pensions are still getting checks. This could go on for a long time.

As Keynes said, "markets can stay irrational longer than investors can stay solvent"- though it should be modified to say "markets can be rigged longer than economically sensible families looking to buy a house can hold out for sanity to return to the markets". I guess that doesn't flow as well- I'll have to work on that one.

Call it Crazy says

Sad isn't it that this is what it has come to..... we can't straight out believe the information the government tells us....

It is sad. Sad that you choose to believe what you want to be true and disregard all data that doesn't agree with you.

Call it Crazy says

tatupu70 says

It is sad. Sad that you choose to believe what you want to be true and disregard all data that doesn't agree with you.

Aaahhhh.... the Troll shows up on this nice Friday!!

lol--your definition of troll is someone who disagrees with you? Fits your profile pretty well.

Call it Crazy says

tatupu70 says

lol--your definition of troll is someone who disagrees with you? Fits your profile pretty well.

No just someone who disagrees but doesn't post any facts or data to support his claim..... just makes blind statements.... you're an expert at that!!

Pot, kettle...

Call it Crazy says

tatupu70 says

lol--your definition of troll is someone who disagrees with you? Fits your profile pretty well.

No just someone who disagrees but doesn't post any facts or data to support his claim..... just makes blind statements.... you're an expert at that!!

Nice try but I post links and data to back my claims. You always choose to counter that the data is suspect. So who's the real troll?

FamilyForce6 says

As Keynes said, "markets can stay irrational longer than investors can stay solvent"- though it should be modified to say "markets can be rigged longer than economically sensible families looking to buy a house can hold out for sanity to return to the markets". I guess that doesn't flow as well- I'll have to work on that one.

Try: "the government can play kick-the-can longer than you can stay alive".

Homeboy says

zesta says

In Los Angeles there aren't many more empty areas to build that are within an hour's drive of major employment centers.

Said everybody in 2006, right before the crash.

It's easy to talk about this. Do you SEE any areas where you can build?? I don't.

Done.

dodgerfanjohn says

That's not exactly true. When proper demand exists, the building WILL take place.

There's plenty of neighborhoods in LA ready to gentrify. And don't give me that nonsense about how no one wants to live in gang wasteland. People said the same thing about Silver Lake, Echo Park, Atwater Viliage, Altadena, and Highland Park.

You're right about the neighborhoods ready to gentrify. There are plenty.

There's a big difference in buying 1000 acres of land and putting cookie-cutter housing tracts and scraping individual lots and putting up SFHs or mixed-used projects. The margins aren't the same and the additional red tape makes it exceptionally time-consuming.

Playa Vista was the last major residential development in LA's westside and it took them almost 30 years to build ~3k units.

There's probably more room to build Orange County, but gas prices are killing the exurbs and major development in LA.

SubOink says

Homeboy says

zesta says

In Los Angeles there aren't many more empty areas to build that are within an hour's drive of major employment centers.

Said everybody in 2006, right before the crash.

It's easy to talk about this. Do you SEE any areas where you can build?? I don't.

Done.

Miss the point much? I thought this was obvious, but:

Many people in 2006 said that L.A. was "built out", that there was a housing shortage, and that therefore prices would continue to rise.

Did prices continue to rise? No.

What can we learn from this? That it is a bogus argument. It was bogus then, and it is bogus now. I am not questioning whether there are places to build; I am saying it is not relevant.

DONE.

Oh, and to answer your question - Is there any vacant land within an hour of major employment centers in L.A.? Yes.

Homeboy says

SubOink says

Homeboy says

zesta says

In Los Angeles there aren't many more empty areas to build that are within an hour's drive of major employment centers.

Said everybody in 2006, right before the crash.

It's easy to talk about this. Do you SEE any areas where you can build?? I don't.

Done.

Miss the point much? I thought this was obvious, but:

Many people in 2006 said that L.A. was "built out", that there was a housing shortage, and that therefore prices would continue to rise.

Did prices continue to rise? No.

What can we learn from this? That it is a bogus argument. It was bogus then, and it is bogus now. I am not questioning whether there are places to build; I am saying it is not relevant.

DONE.

Gas prices during the boom years were about $2-$3/gallon.

In 2007/2008 gas prices spiked to above $4 and people realized that high gas prices were a strong possibility. There's been a change in where people are willing to live, and you can see it in the fall of housing prices in the exurbs. Santa Clarita, Riverside were places that you could build housing tracts. If nobody wants to live there anymore, where else will you build?

zesta says

Gas prices during the boom years were about $2-$3/gallon.

In 2007/2008 gas prices spiked to above $4 and people realized that high gas prices were a strong possibility. There's been a change in where people are willing to live, and you can see it in the fall of housing prices in the exurbs. Santa Clarita, Riverside were places that you could build housing tracts. If nobody wants to live there anymore, where else will you build?

Well, no - prices fell because they were unsustainable. We had a bubble, and then it burst. Gas prices had nothing to do with it.

If you don't believe people commute anymore, try getting on ANY freeway during commute hours.

zesta says

There's been a change in where people are willing to live, and you can see it in the fall of housing prices in the exurbs. Santa Clarita, Riverside were places that you could build housing tracts. If nobody wants to live there anymore, where else will you build?

Have you seen the 405, 91, 55, 57, 10, and 110 during rush hour? There are still a lot of people willing to commute from Santa Clarita, Corona, etc to get to job centers.

How far have housing prices fallen in the Central Valley compared to SF?

How far have housing prices fallen in the Inland Empire compared to LA?

Using traffic as a metric is ridiculous. Can I use that same metric and conclude that since there's a lot of traffic during rush hour unemployment is low?

zesta says

How far have housing prices fallen in the Central Valley compared to SF?

How far have housing prices fallen in the Inland Empire compared to LA?

That will tell you nothing. You need to know how far prices ROSE during the bubble. Outlying areas are always more volatile. Prices rise AND fall more in outlying areas.

Using traffic as a metric is ridiculous. Can I use that same metric and conclude that since there's a lot of traffic during rush hour unemployment is low?

No, your analogy is ridiculous. The difference in unemployment statistics between good and bad times is going to be 5% or less. Are you telling me you think you can spot a 5% difference one way or another in traffic congestion just by looking? No, that is going to be a miniscule difference. But if people stopped commuting from outlying areas, the difference would not be miniscule.

zesta says

Using traffic as a metric is ridiculous. Can I use that same metric and conclude that since there's a lot of traffic during rush hour unemployment is low?

http://www.redfin.com/city/17676/CA/Santa-Clarita

Homes sales in Santa Clarita are up 16% YOY. Who is being ridiculous now?