- This topic has 405 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 11 months ago by Rt.66.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 16, 2009 at 6:51 PM #470945October 16, 2009 at 8:02 PM #470160ArrayaParticipant
[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]
Sometimes you have to integrate common sense with analysis. The housing bubble fueled employment. It was not unpredictable that employment would plummet as the bubble did. The bubble was the economy.Pent up demand depends on job growth. Unless you count demand as somebody that wants to buy a house and can’t you have a problem. Sideline money is dwindling + job contraction=Lower demand
Lower demand + pent up inventory =
See how easy this is[/quote]
Since you’re talking about integrating common sense, are you assuming the current rate of job contraction is the new normal?[/quote]No it will stop eventually, but growth will not resume. Also, the rate will continue for years to come. With a significant upturn next quarter. Probably around 2011 it will subside and we will stabilize at around 30-40% real unemployment.
October 16, 2009 at 8:02 PM #470342ArrayaParticipant[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]
Sometimes you have to integrate common sense with analysis. The housing bubble fueled employment. It was not unpredictable that employment would plummet as the bubble did. The bubble was the economy.Pent up demand depends on job growth. Unless you count demand as somebody that wants to buy a house and can’t you have a problem. Sideline money is dwindling + job contraction=Lower demand
Lower demand + pent up inventory =
See how easy this is[/quote]
Since you’re talking about integrating common sense, are you assuming the current rate of job contraction is the new normal?[/quote]No it will stop eventually, but growth will not resume. Also, the rate will continue for years to come. With a significant upturn next quarter. Probably around 2011 it will subside and we will stabilize at around 30-40% real unemployment.
October 16, 2009 at 8:02 PM #470695ArrayaParticipant[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]
Sometimes you have to integrate common sense with analysis. The housing bubble fueled employment. It was not unpredictable that employment would plummet as the bubble did. The bubble was the economy.Pent up demand depends on job growth. Unless you count demand as somebody that wants to buy a house and can’t you have a problem. Sideline money is dwindling + job contraction=Lower demand
Lower demand + pent up inventory =
See how easy this is[/quote]
Since you’re talking about integrating common sense, are you assuming the current rate of job contraction is the new normal?[/quote]No it will stop eventually, but growth will not resume. Also, the rate will continue for years to come. With a significant upturn next quarter. Probably around 2011 it will subside and we will stabilize at around 30-40% real unemployment.
October 16, 2009 at 8:02 PM #470770ArrayaParticipant[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]
Sometimes you have to integrate common sense with analysis. The housing bubble fueled employment. It was not unpredictable that employment would plummet as the bubble did. The bubble was the economy.Pent up demand depends on job growth. Unless you count demand as somebody that wants to buy a house and can’t you have a problem. Sideline money is dwindling + job contraction=Lower demand
Lower demand + pent up inventory =
See how easy this is[/quote]
Since you’re talking about integrating common sense, are you assuming the current rate of job contraction is the new normal?[/quote]No it will stop eventually, but growth will not resume. Also, the rate will continue for years to come. With a significant upturn next quarter. Probably around 2011 it will subside and we will stabilize at around 30-40% real unemployment.
October 16, 2009 at 8:02 PM #470983ArrayaParticipant[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]
Sometimes you have to integrate common sense with analysis. The housing bubble fueled employment. It was not unpredictable that employment would plummet as the bubble did. The bubble was the economy.Pent up demand depends on job growth. Unless you count demand as somebody that wants to buy a house and can’t you have a problem. Sideline money is dwindling + job contraction=Lower demand
Lower demand + pent up inventory =
See how easy this is[/quote]
Since you’re talking about integrating common sense, are you assuming the current rate of job contraction is the new normal?[/quote]No it will stop eventually, but growth will not resume. Also, the rate will continue for years to come. With a significant upturn next quarter. Probably around 2011 it will subside and we will stabilize at around 30-40% real unemployment.
October 16, 2009 at 8:14 PM #470169ArrayaParticipant[quote=jpinpb]To be a stickler, the article is slightly deceiving. It states:
“Bottom line – there is
no “shadow” inventory of bank owned homes being intentionally withheld from the market.”Since there is an endless amount of NODs that the bank is not acting on, technically, they don’t own them yet. That’s not even address the NODs that banks aren’t even bothering to file on places that they haven’t received mortgage payments on for months.
Again, as I’ve said on other threads, the inventory is there, but in limbo. The question is how it will get absorbed or (sdr) disposed.[/quote]
That is the million dollar question. I think I figured out the reason for the hold up. Once the banks foreclose on it they have to take the loss. The reason they don’t foreclose is because of accounting rules. They do not have to count it that way and can let it sit forever without taking a loss. The problem is they are coming back too fast, so they are bottle necking. How long that can go on. Who knows.
October 16, 2009 at 8:14 PM #470351ArrayaParticipant[quote=jpinpb]To be a stickler, the article is slightly deceiving. It states:
“Bottom line – there is
no “shadow” inventory of bank owned homes being intentionally withheld from the market.”Since there is an endless amount of NODs that the bank is not acting on, technically, they don’t own them yet. That’s not even address the NODs that banks aren’t even bothering to file on places that they haven’t received mortgage payments on for months.
Again, as I’ve said on other threads, the inventory is there, but in limbo. The question is how it will get absorbed or (sdr) disposed.[/quote]
That is the million dollar question. I think I figured out the reason for the hold up. Once the banks foreclose on it they have to take the loss. The reason they don’t foreclose is because of accounting rules. They do not have to count it that way and can let it sit forever without taking a loss. The problem is they are coming back too fast, so they are bottle necking. How long that can go on. Who knows.
October 16, 2009 at 8:14 PM #470705ArrayaParticipant[quote=jpinpb]To be a stickler, the article is slightly deceiving. It states:
“Bottom line – there is
no “shadow” inventory of bank owned homes being intentionally withheld from the market.”Since there is an endless amount of NODs that the bank is not acting on, technically, they don’t own them yet. That’s not even address the NODs that banks aren’t even bothering to file on places that they haven’t received mortgage payments on for months.
Again, as I’ve said on other threads, the inventory is there, but in limbo. The question is how it will get absorbed or (sdr) disposed.[/quote]
That is the million dollar question. I think I figured out the reason for the hold up. Once the banks foreclose on it they have to take the loss. The reason they don’t foreclose is because of accounting rules. They do not have to count it that way and can let it sit forever without taking a loss. The problem is they are coming back too fast, so they are bottle necking. How long that can go on. Who knows.
October 16, 2009 at 8:14 PM #470780ArrayaParticipant[quote=jpinpb]To be a stickler, the article is slightly deceiving. It states:
“Bottom line – there is
no “shadow” inventory of bank owned homes being intentionally withheld from the market.”Since there is an endless amount of NODs that the bank is not acting on, technically, they don’t own them yet. That’s not even address the NODs that banks aren’t even bothering to file on places that they haven’t received mortgage payments on for months.
Again, as I’ve said on other threads, the inventory is there, but in limbo. The question is how it will get absorbed or (sdr) disposed.[/quote]
That is the million dollar question. I think I figured out the reason for the hold up. Once the banks foreclose on it they have to take the loss. The reason they don’t foreclose is because of accounting rules. They do not have to count it that way and can let it sit forever without taking a loss. The problem is they are coming back too fast, so they are bottle necking. How long that can go on. Who knows.
October 16, 2009 at 8:14 PM #470993ArrayaParticipant[quote=jpinpb]To be a stickler, the article is slightly deceiving. It states:
“Bottom line – there is
no “shadow” inventory of bank owned homes being intentionally withheld from the market.”Since there is an endless amount of NODs that the bank is not acting on, technically, they don’t own them yet. That’s not even address the NODs that banks aren’t even bothering to file on places that they haven’t received mortgage payments on for months.
Again, as I’ve said on other threads, the inventory is there, but in limbo. The question is how it will get absorbed or (sdr) disposed.[/quote]
That is the million dollar question. I think I figured out the reason for the hold up. Once the banks foreclose on it they have to take the loss. The reason they don’t foreclose is because of accounting rules. They do not have to count it that way and can let it sit forever without taking a loss. The problem is they are coming back too fast, so they are bottle necking. How long that can go on. Who knows.
October 17, 2009 at 10:26 AM #470294Rich ToscanoKeymaster[quote=analyst]
The mortgage is $600K. While the mortgage owner sits idle, due to the suspension of mark-to-market rules, the mortgage owner is allowed to maintain the fiction that an asset worth $600K is owned.
[/quote]Analyst, according to a longtime pigg who is very knowledgeable about the banking industry, that isn’t how it works… see this comment for his explanation:
http://piggington.com/shadow_inventory_the_flood_that_may_never_come#comment-117626
Rich
October 17, 2009 at 10:26 AM #470475Rich ToscanoKeymaster[quote=analyst]
The mortgage is $600K. While the mortgage owner sits idle, due to the suspension of mark-to-market rules, the mortgage owner is allowed to maintain the fiction that an asset worth $600K is owned.
[/quote]Analyst, according to a longtime pigg who is very knowledgeable about the banking industry, that isn’t how it works… see this comment for his explanation:
http://piggington.com/shadow_inventory_the_flood_that_may_never_come#comment-117626
Rich
October 17, 2009 at 10:26 AM #470831Rich ToscanoKeymaster[quote=analyst]
The mortgage is $600K. While the mortgage owner sits idle, due to the suspension of mark-to-market rules, the mortgage owner is allowed to maintain the fiction that an asset worth $600K is owned.
[/quote]Analyst, according to a longtime pigg who is very knowledgeable about the banking industry, that isn’t how it works… see this comment for his explanation:
http://piggington.com/shadow_inventory_the_flood_that_may_never_come#comment-117626
Rich
October 17, 2009 at 10:26 AM #470904Rich ToscanoKeymaster[quote=analyst]
The mortgage is $600K. While the mortgage owner sits idle, due to the suspension of mark-to-market rules, the mortgage owner is allowed to maintain the fiction that an asset worth $600K is owned.
[/quote]Analyst, according to a longtime pigg who is very knowledgeable about the banking industry, that isn’t how it works… see this comment for his explanation:
http://piggington.com/shadow_inventory_the_flood_that_may_never_come#comment-117626
Rich
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.