- This topic has 20 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 4 months ago by
lonestar2000.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 5, 2007 at 6:19 PM #9456July 5, 2007 at 6:50 PM #64161
Duck
ParticipantWhy is that scary? You want prices to go down 50% don’t you? I’m looking for big reductions so I can get a place at the beach for $500k but somehow homeowners are not cooperating yet.
I’ve got the $500k just waiting at 5% in my Vanguard MMF, but I feel like a fool doing it.
July 5, 2007 at 6:50 PM #64218ParticipantWhy is that scary? You want prices to go down 50% don’t you? I’m looking for big reductions so I can get a place at the beach for $500k but somehow homeowners are not cooperating yet.
I’ve got the $500k just waiting at 5% in my Vanguard MMF, but I feel like a fool doing it.
July 5, 2007 at 7:45 PM #64222PD
ParticipantWe all know people who are exposed in RE. I don’t want them to suffer, even though I see it coming. When you are in a roller coaster at the top of the big drop, you know you are perfectly safe but you are scared all the same. I’m really good at keeping my hands up. 🙂
July 5, 2007 at 7:45 PM #64165ParticipantWe all know people who are exposed in RE. I don’t want them to suffer, even though I see it coming. When you are in a roller coaster at the top of the big drop, you know you are perfectly safe but you are scared all the same. I’m really good at keeping my hands up. 🙂
July 5, 2007 at 8:20 PM #64226CAwireman
ParticipantI appreciate the monthly updates.
Please keep them coming our way.
It would stand to reason that the corresponding drop
would mirror the meteoric rise. But its good to see
evidence of where we’re at.HiggyBaby
July 5, 2007 at 8:20 PM #64169ParticipantI appreciate the monthly updates.
Please keep them coming our way.
It would stand to reason that the corresponding drop
would mirror the meteoric rise. But its good to see
evidence of where we’re at.HiggyBaby
July 5, 2007 at 8:55 PM #64177PerryChase
ParticipantIt would be worse if those numbers were adjusted for population and housing unit growth.
Can’t wait ’til Christmas to see how the year will close at.
July 5, 2007 at 8:55 PM #64234ParticipantIt would be worse if those numbers were adjusted for population and housing unit growth.
Can’t wait ’til Christmas to see how the year will close at.
July 5, 2007 at 9:04 PM #64183no_such_reality
ParticipantHow much of the sales volume slack are new homes picking up?
My big question, since I don’t remember is when in the last cycle did the banks finally capitulate on the REOs and start slashing prices? When did they decide they had to move inventory?
Looking at the Innovest’s handy statistics, looks like ’91 they hovered around 150 a month, then hopped to 300/month in December and stayed there all of ’92, then moved to mid-400s in ’93 and stayed there for the next three years ratching up to low-500s, rapidly moved back to mid-300s in ’97. Then 200s, then 100s in ’98-’99.
In 2006, we started out with 62 foreclosures in Jan after about four years of foreclosures being in the 30-60/month range. In 2006, ran from 62 to 300. Pretty much just a straight line acceleration. In the first six month of 2007, we’ve doubled to 600+. This month, we’re looking at an additional 30% month over month gain.
When are the bank REO offices going to get in gear? If REOs hop to 800+ and keep climbing, if they don’t start to liquidate, how are they ever going to clear the pile when they need to move a third the MLS resales volume just to tread water?
July 5, 2007 at 9:04 PM #64240ParticipantHow much of the sales volume slack are new homes picking up?
My big question, since I don’t remember is when in the last cycle did the banks finally capitulate on the REOs and start slashing prices? When did they decide they had to move inventory?
Looking at the Innovest’s handy statistics, looks like ’91 they hovered around 150 a month, then hopped to 300/month in December and stayed there all of ’92, then moved to mid-400s in ’93 and stayed there for the next three years ratching up to low-500s, rapidly moved back to mid-300s in ’97. Then 200s, then 100s in ’98-’99.
In 2006, we started out with 62 foreclosures in Jan after about four years of foreclosures being in the 30-60/month range. In 2006, ran from 62 to 300. Pretty much just a straight line acceleration. In the first six month of 2007, we’ve doubled to 600+. This month, we’re looking at an additional 30% month over month gain.
When are the bank REO offices going to get in gear? If REOs hop to 800+ and keep climbing, if they don’t start to liquidate, how are they ever going to clear the pile when they need to move a third the MLS resales volume just to tread water?
July 5, 2007 at 9:07 PM #64187Anonymous
GuestNice comparison with history, nsr. Thanks.
July 5, 2007 at 9:07 PM #64244GuestNice comparison with history, nsr. Thanks.
July 5, 2007 at 9:11 PM #64189Bugs
ParticipantFirst, a comment about my position: As an appraiser I’m not “hoping” for a specific percentage of correction. I’m hoping for an orderly and somewhat rational market. That is, a market where there is a direct relationship between the pricing and the income necessary to support that pricing over the long term. If the market decides that this region is so special that people should be willing to pay half their gross income for their housing from now on then so be it.
As has been mentioned by other posters, although I think the -50% over several years could easily happen I also think that type of decline will cause a lot of unintended consequences for a lot of residents in this region. A lot of collateral damage, and I’m not talking about the people who are holding overpriced properties right now. That’s why I wouldn’t mind being wrong about the 50%.
As for the lenders, I really do think it’s a matter of being overwhelmed. While they can play a little dodgeball with their quarterly earnings, sooner or later they have to state their annual earnings. I think that’s when everything is going to come to a head – at year’s end.
July 5, 2007 at 9:11 PM #64246ParticipantFirst, a comment about my position: As an appraiser I’m not “hoping” for a specific percentage of correction. I’m hoping for an orderly and somewhat rational market. That is, a market where there is a direct relationship between the pricing and the income necessary to support that pricing over the long term. If the market decides that this region is so special that people should be willing to pay half their gross income for their housing from now on then so be it.
As has been mentioned by other posters, although I think the -50% over several years could easily happen I also think that type of decline will cause a lot of unintended consequences for a lot of residents in this region. A lot of collateral damage, and I’m not talking about the people who are holding overpriced properties right now. That’s why I wouldn’t mind being wrong about the 50%.
As for the lenders, I really do think it’s a matter of being overwhelmed. While they can play a little dodgeball with their quarterly earnings, sooner or later they have to state their annual earnings. I think that’s when everything is going to come to a head – at year’s end.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.