Bank Repossession of Homes Sets New Record in August

[scaredyclassic]

What if there were some way to get potential buyers organized to extinguish demand for one week. It might have no more effect than a one week gasoline strike, but it would be an interesting consciousness raiser. all buyers would have no loayalty to each other and would of course pounce on the first good deal while the competition was oon strike, but imagine the press. it could be kinda neat.

[investor]

[quote=walterwhite]What if there were some way to get potential buyers organized to extinguish demand for one week. It might have no more effect than a one week gasoline strike, but it would be an interesting consciousness raiser. all buyers would have no loayalty to each other and would of course pounce on the first good deal while the competition was oon strike, but imagine the press. it could be kinda neat.[/quote]
Bearishgirl, I feel your frustration. The elimination of mark to market in 2009 http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marktomarket.asp allows banks to have those depreciated assets on their books and not realize the loss until they sell. This is why there is so much shadow inventory. Banks don’t want to sell since they only realize the loss if they do sell. Granted, mark to market was rapidly lowering the housing market before 2009 http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/29/mark-to-market-oped-cx_ng_0929gingrich.html but this is an example of the government potentially making things worse as investors don’t know what the real value of homes are with so much shadow inventory out there.

[investor]

[quote=walterwhite]What if there were some way to get potential buyers organized to extinguish demand for one week. It might have no more effect than a one week gasoline strike, but it would be an interesting consciousness raiser. all buyers would have no loayalty to each other and would of course pounce on the first good deal while the competition was oon strike, but imagine the press. it could be kinda neat.[/quote]
Bearishgirl, I feel your frustration. The elimination of mark to market in 2009 http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marktomarket.asp allows banks to have those depreciated assets on their books and not realize the loss until they sell. This is why there is so much shadow inventory. Banks don’t want to sell since they only realize the loss if they do sell. Granted, mark to market was rapidly lowering the housing market before 2009 http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/29/mark-to-market-oped-cx_ng_0929gingrich.html but this is an example of the government potentially making things worse as investors don’t know what the real value of homes are with so much shadow inventory out there.

[investor]

[quote=walterwhite]What if there were some way to get potential buyers organized to extinguish demand for one week. It might have no more effect than a one week gasoline strike, but it would be an interesting consciousness raiser. all buyers would have no loayalty to each other and would of course pounce on the first good deal while the competition was oon strike, but imagine the press. it could be kinda neat.[/quote]
Bearishgirl, I feel your frustration. The elimination of mark to market in 2009 http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marktomarket.asp allows banks to have those depreciated assets on their books and not realize the loss until they sell. This is why there is so much shadow inventory. Banks don’t want to sell since they only realize the loss if they do sell. Granted, mark to market was rapidly lowering the housing market before 2009 http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/29/mark-to-market-oped-cx_ng_0929gingrich.html but this is an example of the government potentially making things worse as investors don’t know what the real value of homes are with so much shadow inventory out there.

[investor]

[quote=walterwhite]What if there were some way to get potential buyers organized to extinguish demand for one week. It might have no more effect than a one week gasoline strike, but it would be an interesting consciousness raiser. all buyers would have no loayalty to each other and would of course pounce on the first good deal while the competition was oon strike, but imagine the press. it could be kinda neat.[/quote]
Bearishgirl, I feel your frustration. The elimination of mark to market in 2009 http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marktomarket.asp allows banks to have those depreciated assets on their books and not realize the loss until they sell. This is why there is so much shadow inventory. Banks don’t want to sell since they only realize the loss if they do sell. Granted, mark to market was rapidly lowering the housing market before 2009 http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/29/mark-to-market-oped-cx_ng_0929gingrich.html but this is an example of the government potentially making things worse as investors don’t know what the real value of homes are with so much shadow inventory out there.

[investor]

[quote=walterwhite]What if there were some way to get potential buyers organized to extinguish demand for one week. It might have no more effect than a one week gasoline strike, but it would be an interesting consciousness raiser. all buyers would have no loayalty to each other and would of course pounce on the first good deal while the competition was oon strike, but imagine the press. it could be kinda neat.[/quote]
Bearishgirl, I feel your frustration. The elimination of mark to market in 2009 http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marktomarket.asp allows banks to have those depreciated assets on their books and not realize the loss until they sell. This is why there is so much shadow inventory. Banks don’t want to sell since they only realize the loss if they do sell. Granted, mark to market was rapidly lowering the housing market before 2009 http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/29/mark-to-market-oped-cx_ng_0929gingrich.html but this is an example of the government potentially making things worse as investors don’t know what the real value of homes are with so much shadow inventory out there.

[Huckleberry]

Has anybody heard what the current situation is with the reinstatement of mark-to-market? A few months ago I had either read or heard the GAO was getting ready to re-activate M-to-M…

[Huckleberry]

Has anybody heard what the current situation is with the reinstatement of mark-to-market? A few months ago I had either read or heard the GAO was getting ready to re-activate M-to-M…

[Huckleberry]

Has anybody heard what the current situation is with the reinstatement of mark-to-market? A few months ago I had either read or heard the GAO was getting ready to re-activate M-to-M…

[Huckleberry]

Has anybody heard what the current situation is with the reinstatement of mark-to-market? A few months ago I had either read or heard the GAO was getting ready to re-activate M-to-M…

[Huckleberry]

Has anybody heard what the current situation is with the reinstatement of mark-to-market? A few months ago I had either read or heard the GAO was getting ready to re-activate M-to-M…

[CA renter]

[quote=Huckleberry]Has anybody heard what the current situation is with the reinstatement of mark-to-market? A few months ago I had either read or heard the GAO was getting ready to re-activate M-to-M…[/quote]

Good catch. I hadn’t realized they were seeking comments about it.

Here’s the story:

“No surprise, bankers are almost uniformly opposed to a proposal to expand the use of fair-value accounting. But the plan was never meant to appeal to bankers.

It was on investors’ behalf that the Financial Accounting Standards Board floated a rule that would make banks mark to market nearly all assets and liabilities.

Advertisement
Certainly there are investors who like the idea. The only way to know whether banks threaten the financial system “is to reinstate mark-to-market and force them to deal with these underwater assets that they are being allowed to price at whatever they choose to make their books look good,” Jerome Ruffin, a self-described “consumer and investor” from Fayetteville, N.C., wrote in a comment letter.

But for every Jerome Ruffin, there has been at least one comment letter from an investor, or a firm representing billions of dollars in investor assets, taking the opposing view.”

http://www.insurancenetworking.com/news/insurance_banks_accounting_FASB_mark_to_market_regulation-25743-1.html

————————
For those of us who’ve been complaining about “mark-to-fantasy” accounting, here’s our chance to be heard. Time to start writing letters!

[CA renter]

[quote=Huckleberry]Has anybody heard what the current situation is with the reinstatement of mark-to-market? A few months ago I had either read or heard the GAO was getting ready to re-activate M-to-M…[/quote]

Good catch. I hadn’t realized they were seeking comments about it.

Here’s the story:

“No surprise, bankers are almost uniformly opposed to a proposal to expand the use of fair-value accounting. But the plan was never meant to appeal to bankers.

It was on investors’ behalf that the Financial Accounting Standards Board floated a rule that would make banks mark to market nearly all assets and liabilities.

Advertisement
Certainly there are investors who like the idea. The only way to know whether banks threaten the financial system “is to reinstate mark-to-market and force them to deal with these underwater assets that they are being allowed to price at whatever they choose to make their books look good,” Jerome Ruffin, a self-described “consumer and investor” from Fayetteville, N.C., wrote in a comment letter.

But for every Jerome Ruffin, there has been at least one comment letter from an investor, or a firm representing billions of dollars in investor assets, taking the opposing view.”

http://www.insurancenetworking.com/news/insurance_banks_accounting_FASB_mark_to_market_regulation-25743-1.html

————————
For those of us who’ve been complaining about “mark-to-fantasy” accounting, here’s our chance to be heard. Time to start writing letters!

[CA renter]

[quote=Huckleberry]Has anybody heard what the current situation is with the reinstatement of mark-to-market? A few months ago I had either read or heard the GAO was getting ready to re-activate M-to-M…[/quote]

Good catch. I hadn’t realized they were seeking comments about it.

Here’s the story:

“No surprise, bankers are almost uniformly opposed to a proposal to expand the use of fair-value accounting. But the plan was never meant to appeal to bankers.

It was on investors’ behalf that the Financial Accounting Standards Board floated a rule that would make banks mark to market nearly all assets and liabilities.

Advertisement
Certainly there are investors who like the idea. The only way to know whether banks threaten the financial system “is to reinstate mark-to-market and force them to deal with these underwater assets that they are being allowed to price at whatever they choose to make their books look good,” Jerome Ruffin, a self-described “consumer and investor” from Fayetteville, N.C., wrote in a comment letter.

But for every Jerome Ruffin, there has been at least one comment letter from an investor, or a firm representing billions of dollars in investor assets, taking the opposing view.”

http://www.insurancenetworking.com/news/insurance_banks_accounting_FASB_mark_to_market_regulation-25743-1.html

————————
For those of us who’ve been complaining about “mark-to-fantasy” accounting, here’s our chance to be heard. Time to start writing letters!

[CA renter]

[quote=Huckleberry]Has anybody heard what the current situation is with the reinstatement of mark-to-market? A few months ago I had either read or heard the GAO was getting ready to re-activate M-to-M…[/quote]

Good catch. I hadn’t realized they were seeking comments about it.

Here’s the story:

“No surprise, bankers are almost uniformly opposed to a proposal to expand the use of fair-value accounting. But the plan was never meant to appeal to bankers.

It was on investors’ behalf that the Financial Accounting Standards Board floated a rule that would make banks mark to market nearly all assets and liabilities.

Advertisement
Certainly there are investors who like the idea. The only way to know whether banks threaten the financial system “is to reinstate mark-to-market and force them to deal with these underwater assets that they are being allowed to price at whatever they choose to make their books look good,” Jerome Ruffin, a self-described “consumer and investor” from Fayetteville, N.C., wrote in a comment letter.

But for every Jerome Ruffin, there has been at least one comment letter from an investor, or a firm representing billions of dollars in investor assets, taking the opposing view.”

http://www.insurancenetworking.com/news/insurance_banks_accounting_FASB_mark_to_market_regulation-25743-1.html

————————
For those of us who’ve been complaining about “mark-to-fantasy” accounting, here’s our chance to be heard. Time to start writing letters!

[Author]

Posts