- This topic has 405 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 11 months ago by Rt.66.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 21, 2009 at 5:05 PM #472752October 21, 2009 at 5:24 PM #471926anParticipant
analyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?
October 21, 2009 at 5:24 PM #472106anParticipantanalyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?
October 21, 2009 at 5:24 PM #472463anParticipantanalyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?
October 21, 2009 at 5:24 PM #472541anParticipantanalyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?
October 21, 2009 at 5:24 PM #472762anParticipantanalyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?
October 21, 2009 at 8:16 PM #472001analystParticipant[quote=AN]analyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?[/quote]
The choice whether to sell fast or wait reflects the owner’s prediction about the direction of house prices in the future, and how far and how fast they will move. Different decision-makers predict different future values, and take different actions.
The important point is that the choice only exists because of federal government intervention. If mark-to-market were rigorously enforced, the asset and equity markdowns would be mandatory, and all the big players would be declared insolvent and liquidated, instead of being allowed to stick around and make market-distorting decisions.
October 21, 2009 at 8:16 PM #472182analystParticipant[quote=AN]analyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?[/quote]
The choice whether to sell fast or wait reflects the owner’s prediction about the direction of house prices in the future, and how far and how fast they will move. Different decision-makers predict different future values, and take different actions.
The important point is that the choice only exists because of federal government intervention. If mark-to-market were rigorously enforced, the asset and equity markdowns would be mandatory, and all the big players would be declared insolvent and liquidated, instead of being allowed to stick around and make market-distorting decisions.
October 21, 2009 at 8:16 PM #472540analystParticipant[quote=AN]analyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?[/quote]
The choice whether to sell fast or wait reflects the owner’s prediction about the direction of house prices in the future, and how far and how fast they will move. Different decision-makers predict different future values, and take different actions.
The important point is that the choice only exists because of federal government intervention. If mark-to-market were rigorously enforced, the asset and equity markdowns would be mandatory, and all the big players would be declared insolvent and liquidated, instead of being allowed to stick around and make market-distorting decisions.
October 21, 2009 at 8:16 PM #472615analystParticipant[quote=AN]analyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?[/quote]
The choice whether to sell fast or wait reflects the owner’s prediction about the direction of house prices in the future, and how far and how fast they will move. Different decision-makers predict different future values, and take different actions.
The important point is that the choice only exists because of federal government intervention. If mark-to-market were rigorously enforced, the asset and equity markdowns would be mandatory, and all the big players would be declared insolvent and liquidated, instead of being allowed to stick around and make market-distorting decisions.
October 21, 2009 at 8:16 PM #472836analystParticipant[quote=AN]analyst, if that is true, then why would any bank release any REO at all? Wouldn’t it make sense for them to keep them all in shadow?[/quote]
The choice whether to sell fast or wait reflects the owner’s prediction about the direction of house prices in the future, and how far and how fast they will move. Different decision-makers predict different future values, and take different actions.
The important point is that the choice only exists because of federal government intervention. If mark-to-market were rigorously enforced, the asset and equity markdowns would be mandatory, and all the big players would be declared insolvent and liquidated, instead of being allowed to stick around and make market-distorting decisions.
October 21, 2009 at 10:41 PM #472156anParticipantI’m not denying that the government can greatly manipulate the market. I’m just trying to understand the logic behind why banks are holding back inventory (especially when the market is showing that there are enough buyers out there right now to absorb more inventory). You’re saying decision-makers are the one that’s holding back supply. Are there many different decision-makers at a bank? If yes, then it make sense why some houses get hold back by BofA but other houses, BofA foreclosed on and put it on the market. If no, then I don’t understand why they would foreclose on some but not others.
October 21, 2009 at 10:41 PM #472335anParticipantI’m not denying that the government can greatly manipulate the market. I’m just trying to understand the logic behind why banks are holding back inventory (especially when the market is showing that there are enough buyers out there right now to absorb more inventory). You’re saying decision-makers are the one that’s holding back supply. Are there many different decision-makers at a bank? If yes, then it make sense why some houses get hold back by BofA but other houses, BofA foreclosed on and put it on the market. If no, then I don’t understand why they would foreclose on some but not others.
October 21, 2009 at 10:41 PM #472695anParticipantI’m not denying that the government can greatly manipulate the market. I’m just trying to understand the logic behind why banks are holding back inventory (especially when the market is showing that there are enough buyers out there right now to absorb more inventory). You’re saying decision-makers are the one that’s holding back supply. Are there many different decision-makers at a bank? If yes, then it make sense why some houses get hold back by BofA but other houses, BofA foreclosed on and put it on the market. If no, then I don’t understand why they would foreclose on some but not others.
October 21, 2009 at 10:41 PM #472770anParticipantI’m not denying that the government can greatly manipulate the market. I’m just trying to understand the logic behind why banks are holding back inventory (especially when the market is showing that there are enough buyers out there right now to absorb more inventory). You’re saying decision-makers are the one that’s holding back supply. Are there many different decision-makers at a bank? If yes, then it make sense why some houses get hold back by BofA but other houses, BofA foreclosed on and put it on the market. If no, then I don’t understand why they would foreclose on some but not others.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.