How effective will today's foreclosure bailout be in propping up RE prices???

User Forum Topic
Submitted by murf2222 on November 11, 2008 - 7:17pm

All of the *fingers-in-the-dyke* attempts at stabilizing prices have had little affect so far.

A lot of us were hoping that the option-arm reset loans were going to help continue this downhill roller coaster ride of price declines.

Does anyone have an educated guess percentage-wise how many option-arm loans are going to benefit from this latest bailout?

I mean, the reality is that if today's bailout program is only going to affect a small percentage of those loans then I would think that we can continue to see aggressive price declines.......Right???

However, if it is going to keep a large percentage from going into foreclosure.....say 40-60 percent, then maybe the government will have succeeded in flat-lining prices......Right?????

Murf2222

‹ James Lockhart (FHFA Director) & analysts outline new loan modification plan foreclosure solution if they listen ›
My educated guess is
Submitted by Eugene on November 11, 2008 - 7:27pm.

My educated guess is zero.

Today's bailout only affects loans made by Fannie and Freddie. Option arms were made by private lenders such as WaMu and Wachovia. They will not be modified.

Remember that F&F's market share was down to 25% by 2006. In San Diego, it may have been even lower. This bailout is good for Ohio and Detroit, but it will not have significant impact in our part of the country.

I may be wrong.

Esmith, I have read similar
Submitted by Stu949 on November 11, 2008 - 8:20pm.

Esmith, I have read similar info.

I don't think this new effort will have much affect; especially in so Cal.

What about Citi's similar
Submitted by Fletch on November 11, 2008 - 8:28pm.

What about Citi's similar plan? How much presence do they have in So Cal? Isn't it reasonable to expect that other private lenders will follow Citi's, Fannie's and Freddie's lead?

If so, the next question is how quickly do they act.

Well, someone has to take the
Submitted by MicroGravity on November 12, 2008 - 1:44am.

Well, someone has to take the loss, and unless the Fed buys out enough banks so that they can foist the majority of losses onto the taxpayer (aka Mr. >$150k), banks will continue to eat the losses.
According to a "national-banking-relative" California is considered lost--which actually gives me some hope that the banks have a clue.