Homeowner equity is lowest since 1945

[DWCAP]

I think some of the point is the sheer number of people who are in trouble. Just like the median price can be horrible at telling people what is going on in the market, the average equity measure can be skewed and not very useful. However it can be interesting in predicting the number of people that will be able to sell if they need to and move, the number of people at risk of foreclosure, and the number of people who may just walk away.

Plus a large precentage of baby boomers are counting on their home equity to retire. How many times have you seen one of those CNN profiles that has someone as a millionare because they bought a house in 96 in the OC but have 50k in savings and are contributing 2% of pay to the 401k and want to retire by 55? They are millionares right! Millionares dont work to 65! If things go back to 2001 or earlier pricing, what are they gonna do?
This is the otherside of the RE motto “the house is the homes largest asset”, if it isnt what they want it to be, or rather NEED it to be, then they are all just like the people who lost their shirts in the tech bust.

But you are right FLU, it isnt the most insightful number.

[lendingbubblecontinues]

…but kitchens with bad-ass granite and tip-top appliances are at their highest since 1945!!!

Party on!

I feel a tremendous amount of pity for all of our retarded American brethren who have no idea how bad this thing is gonna get.

I count myself among the schadenfreude fanatics, but I am now beginning to realize that I don’t want my kids to have to grow up in Depression-era conditions. If wishes were horses, though…they probably will.

[lendingbubblecontinues]

…but kitchens with bad-ass granite and tip-top appliances are at their highest since 1945!!!

Party on!

I feel a tremendous amount of pity for all of our retarded American brethren who have no idea how bad this thing is gonna get.

I count myself among the schadenfreude fanatics, but I am now beginning to realize that I don’t want my kids to have to grow up in Depression-era conditions. If wishes were horses, though…they probably will.

[lendingbubblecontinues]

…but kitchens with bad-ass granite and tip-top appliances are at their highest since 1945!!!

Party on!

I feel a tremendous amount of pity for all of our retarded American brethren who have no idea how bad this thing is gonna get.

I count myself among the schadenfreude fanatics, but I am now beginning to realize that I don’t want my kids to have to grow up in Depression-era conditions. If wishes were horses, though…they probably will.

[lendingbubblecontinues]

…but kitchens with bad-ass granite and tip-top appliances are at their highest since 1945!!!

Party on!

I feel a tremendous amount of pity for all of our retarded American brethren who have no idea how bad this thing is gonna get.

I count myself among the schadenfreude fanatics, but I am now beginning to realize that I don’t want my kids to have to grow up in Depression-era conditions. If wishes were horses, though…they probably will.

[lendingbubblecontinues]

…but kitchens with bad-ass granite and tip-top appliances are at their highest since 1945!!!

Party on!

I feel a tremendous amount of pity for all of our retarded American brethren who have no idea how bad this thing is gonna get.

I count myself among the schadenfreude fanatics, but I am now beginning to realize that I don’t want my kids to have to grow up in Depression-era conditions. If wishes were horses, though…they probably will.

[Coronita]

I didn't know this was obvious.

It isn't just that people are underwater. That is less than 10%. It is that the average homeowner now has less than 50% equity. I hadn't heard this statistic before.

Perhaps if things are so obvious to you, you can tell us how this is all going to play out?

In any case, I think this helps mark a big psychological shift in homeownership thinking. The house-as-an-ATM mindset will gradually be a thing of the past as it never should have existed in the first place. That along with everyone thinking it is prudent to buy a home with 0% down.

MR, this wasn't meant as a swipe at you. My apologies that it came across that way.

Here's what I meant. Well, when you hear about average joe's taking out refinances and HELOCS left and right and home values are now declining, it seems pretty evident most people who fall in this category are going to be below 50%. And it's seemed pretty obvious that anyone that purchased within the past 5 years more than likely has less than 50% equity.

The article basically reads "more people who own homes have less than 50% equity", which I felt was like "no kidding, really?". What I found was missing was, what total percentage of home owners of the entire U.S. owners are less than 50% equity. That's what I was curious, but never found. I mean, if the change was from 20% of all u.s. home owners to say 21%, I wouldn't consider this significant. If however, this changed from 20% to say 60%, well yes that would be significant.

It is interesting that "10.3 percent of homes, will have zero or negative equity by the end of the month", though this was already reported earlier. San Diego will probably be a lot worse. Just look at my previous posting regarding CV attached homes. That's a bloodbath waiting to happen imho.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

I didn't know this was obvious.

It isn't just that people are underwater. That is less than 10%. It is that the average homeowner now has less than 50% equity. I hadn't heard this statistic before.

Perhaps if things are so obvious to you, you can tell us how this is all going to play out?

In any case, I think this helps mark a big psychological shift in homeownership thinking. The house-as-an-ATM mindset will gradually be a thing of the past as it never should have existed in the first place. That along with everyone thinking it is prudent to buy a home with 0% down.

MR, this wasn't meant as a swipe at you. My apologies that it came across that way.

Here's what I meant. Well, when you hear about average joe's taking out refinances and HELOCS left and right and home values are now declining, it seems pretty evident most people who fall in this category are going to be below 50%. And it's seemed pretty obvious that anyone that purchased within the past 5 years more than likely has less than 50% equity.

The article basically reads "more people who own homes have less than 50% equity", which I felt was like "no kidding, really?". What I found was missing was, what total percentage of home owners of the entire U.S. owners are less than 50% equity. That's what I was curious, but never found. I mean, if the change was from 20% of all u.s. home owners to say 21%, I wouldn't consider this significant. If however, this changed from 20% to say 60%, well yes that would be significant.

It is interesting that "10.3 percent of homes, will have zero or negative equity by the end of the month", though this was already reported earlier. San Diego will probably be a lot worse. Just look at my previous posting regarding CV attached homes. That's a bloodbath waiting to happen imho.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

I didn't know this was obvious.

It isn't just that people are underwater. That is less than 10%. It is that the average homeowner now has less than 50% equity. I hadn't heard this statistic before.

Perhaps if things are so obvious to you, you can tell us how this is all going to play out?

In any case, I think this helps mark a big psychological shift in homeownership thinking. The house-as-an-ATM mindset will gradually be a thing of the past as it never should have existed in the first place. That along with everyone thinking it is prudent to buy a home with 0% down.

MR, this wasn't meant as a swipe at you. My apologies that it came across that way.

Here's what I meant. Well, when you hear about average joe's taking out refinances and HELOCS left and right and home values are now declining, it seems pretty evident most people who fall in this category are going to be below 50%. And it's seemed pretty obvious that anyone that purchased within the past 5 years more than likely has less than 50% equity.

The article basically reads "more people who own homes have less than 50% equity", which I felt was like "no kidding, really?". What I found was missing was, what total percentage of home owners of the entire U.S. owners are less than 50% equity. That's what I was curious, but never found. I mean, if the change was from 20% of all u.s. home owners to say 21%, I wouldn't consider this significant. If however, this changed from 20% to say 60%, well yes that would be significant.

It is interesting that "10.3 percent of homes, will have zero or negative equity by the end of the month", though this was already reported earlier. San Diego will probably be a lot worse. Just look at my previous posting regarding CV attached homes. That's a bloodbath waiting to happen imho.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

I didn't know this was obvious.

It isn't just that people are underwater. That is less than 10%. It is that the average homeowner now has less than 50% equity. I hadn't heard this statistic before.

Perhaps if things are so obvious to you, you can tell us how this is all going to play out?

In any case, I think this helps mark a big psychological shift in homeownership thinking. The house-as-an-ATM mindset will gradually be a thing of the past as it never should have existed in the first place. That along with everyone thinking it is prudent to buy a home with 0% down.

MR, this wasn't meant as a swipe at you. My apologies that it came across that way.

Here's what I meant. Well, when you hear about average joe's taking out refinances and HELOCS left and right and home values are now declining, it seems pretty evident most people who fall in this category are going to be below 50%. And it's seemed pretty obvious that anyone that purchased within the past 5 years more than likely has less than 50% equity.

The article basically reads "more people who own homes have less than 50% equity", which I felt was like "no kidding, really?". What I found was missing was, what total percentage of home owners of the entire U.S. owners are less than 50% equity. That's what I was curious, but never found. I mean, if the change was from 20% of all u.s. home owners to say 21%, I wouldn't consider this significant. If however, this changed from 20% to say 60%, well yes that would be significant.

It is interesting that "10.3 percent of homes, will have zero or negative equity by the end of the month", though this was already reported earlier. San Diego will probably be a lot worse. Just look at my previous posting regarding CV attached homes. That's a bloodbath waiting to happen imho.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

I didn't know this was obvious.

It isn't just that people are underwater. That is less than 10%. It is that the average homeowner now has less than 50% equity. I hadn't heard this statistic before.

Perhaps if things are so obvious to you, you can tell us how this is all going to play out?

In any case, I think this helps mark a big psychological shift in homeownership thinking. The house-as-an-ATM mindset will gradually be a thing of the past as it never should have existed in the first place. That along with everyone thinking it is prudent to buy a home with 0% down.

MR, this wasn't meant as a swipe at you. My apologies that it came across that way.

Here's what I meant. Well, when you hear about average joe's taking out refinances and HELOCS left and right and home values are now declining, it seems pretty evident most people who fall in this category are going to be below 50%. And it's seemed pretty obvious that anyone that purchased within the past 5 years more than likely has less than 50% equity.

The article basically reads "more people who own homes have less than 50% equity", which I felt was like "no kidding, really?". What I found was missing was, what total percentage of home owners of the entire U.S. owners are less than 50% equity. That's what I was curious, but never found. I mean, if the change was from 20% of all u.s. home owners to say 21%, I wouldn't consider this significant. If however, this changed from 20% to say 60%, well yes that would be significant.

It is interesting that "10.3 percent of homes, will have zero or negative equity by the end of the month", though this was already reported earlier. San Diego will probably be a lot worse. Just look at my previous posting regarding CV attached homes. That's a bloodbath waiting to happen imho.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Mean Reversion]

Hey, no apologies needed. Thanks nonetheless.

The article basically reads “more people who own homes have less than 50% equity”, which I felt was like “no kidding, really?”. What I found was missing was, what total percentage of home owners of the entire U.S. owners are less than 50% equity. That’s what I was curious, but never found. I mean, if the change was from 20% of all u.s. home owners to say 21%, I wouldn’t consider this significant. If however, this changed from 20% to say 60%, well yes that would be significant.

I thought that was exactly what the article was saying. That of ALL US homeowners (not just buyers during this boom), if you take their % equity, then the average would be less than 50%.

[Mean Reversion]

Hey, no apologies needed. Thanks nonetheless.

The article basically reads “more people who own homes have less than 50% equity”, which I felt was like “no kidding, really?”. What I found was missing was, what total percentage of home owners of the entire U.S. owners are less than 50% equity. That’s what I was curious, but never found. I mean, if the change was from 20% of all u.s. home owners to say 21%, I wouldn’t consider this significant. If however, this changed from 20% to say 60%, well yes that would be significant.

I thought that was exactly what the article was saying. That of ALL US homeowners (not just buyers during this boom), if you take their % equity, then the average would be less than 50%.

[Mean Reversion]

Hey, no apologies needed. Thanks nonetheless.

The article basically reads “more people who own homes have less than 50% equity”, which I felt was like “no kidding, really?”. What I found was missing was, what total percentage of home owners of the entire U.S. owners are less than 50% equity. That’s what I was curious, but never found. I mean, if the change was from 20% of all u.s. home owners to say 21%, I wouldn’t consider this significant. If however, this changed from 20% to say 60%, well yes that would be significant.

I thought that was exactly what the article was saying. That of ALL US homeowners (not just buyers during this boom), if you take their % equity, then the average would be less than 50%.

[Mean Reversion]

Hey, no apologies needed. Thanks nonetheless.

The article basically reads “more people who own homes have less than 50% equity”, which I felt was like “no kidding, really?”. What I found was missing was, what total percentage of home owners of the entire U.S. owners are less than 50% equity. That’s what I was curious, but never found. I mean, if the change was from 20% of all u.s. home owners to say 21%, I wouldn’t consider this significant. If however, this changed from 20% to say 60%, well yes that would be significant.

I thought that was exactly what the article was saying. That of ALL US homeowners (not just buyers during this boom), if you take their % equity, then the average would be less than 50%.

[Author]

Posts