Its official folks . . . SD RE YOY inventory is now shrinking.

[schizo2buyORnot]

(Sarcasm on) Na na na na na naaaah . . . I made more money than you Ex-SD and then I bought gold and oil futures 24 months back and quadupled that. So shut your pie hole. (Sarcasm off).

You sound like such an infantile ignoramous to come on to an Internet blog with an alias and proudly proclaim what an investment genius you are. Bring facts not braggadocio BS. For all we know you are a street sweeper who collects cans from trash bins and uses the change for a token at the local Internet cafe to post here from time to time. So hilarious to see you continue to tout what an investment genius you are.

OK everyone go get one or your gold stars from you Kindergarten scrapbook so we can collectively pin it on Ex-SD’s forhead so he can feel validated as the great investment genius he claims to be.

In search of a crystal ball . . . .

[bearnanke]

Agree with the wait statement. (MLS) Inventory alone is not a good indicator. You’ll want to take into account months of inventory, as well as what could be skewing the MLS inventory downward, the “shadow” inventory. Not to be tin-foil hat, but my daily tracking of foreclosures listed on foreclosure.com shows that ~7,000 foreclosures in SD, or roughly 30% of the MLS inventory.

With 63% (source: some article on Piggington.com) of sales last month being short-sales or REO… yeah, talk to us in October.

Bearnanke.

[bearnanke]

Agree with the wait statement. (MLS) Inventory alone is not a good indicator. You’ll want to take into account months of inventory, as well as what could be skewing the MLS inventory downward, the “shadow” inventory. Not to be tin-foil hat, but my daily tracking of foreclosures listed on foreclosure.com shows that ~7,000 foreclosures in SD, or roughly 30% of the MLS inventory.

With 63% (source: some article on Piggington.com) of sales last month being short-sales or REO… yeah, talk to us in October.

Bearnanke.

[bearnanke]

Agree with the wait statement. (MLS) Inventory alone is not a good indicator. You’ll want to take into account months of inventory, as well as what could be skewing the MLS inventory downward, the “shadow” inventory. Not to be tin-foil hat, but my daily tracking of foreclosures listed on foreclosure.com shows that ~7,000 foreclosures in SD, or roughly 30% of the MLS inventory.

With 63% (source: some article on Piggington.com) of sales last month being short-sales or REO… yeah, talk to us in October.

Bearnanke.

[bearnanke]

Agree with the wait statement. (MLS) Inventory alone is not a good indicator. You’ll want to take into account months of inventory, as well as what could be skewing the MLS inventory downward, the “shadow” inventory. Not to be tin-foil hat, but my daily tracking of foreclosures listed on foreclosure.com shows that ~7,000 foreclosures in SD, or roughly 30% of the MLS inventory.

With 63% (source: some article on Piggington.com) of sales last month being short-sales or REO… yeah, talk to us in October.

Bearnanke.

[bearnanke]

Agree with the wait statement. (MLS) Inventory alone is not a good indicator. You’ll want to take into account months of inventory, as well as what could be skewing the MLS inventory downward, the “shadow” inventory. Not to be tin-foil hat, but my daily tracking of foreclosures listed on foreclosure.com shows that ~7,000 foreclosures in SD, or roughly 30% of the MLS inventory.

With 63% (source: some article on Piggington.com) of sales last month being short-sales or REO… yeah, talk to us in October.

Bearnanke.

[Anonymous]

The inventory decline observation is a valid point: it could (obviously) be construed as bullish. What’s the counterargument? Some above have alluded to it.

Inventory is declining because the MIX of inventory changed over the past six months. That is, normal sellers withdrew homes from the market and were replaced with REO’s. These REO’s are, almost by definition, high-velocity sellers. So the impacts should be 1) a decline in market times; 2) falling inventory; and 3) an acceleration in price declines.

The question is, what happens when inventory falls? Do prices stabilize? I would argue no for two reasons. First, falling prices beget more foreclosures, which beget more inventory. We have not seen this because the banks are just now trying to move through the accumulated backlog of NTS of the past three to six months. Until they do so, they will be reluctant to place the newer REO’s on the market.

Second, its likely that a good percentage of REO sales become resale inventory in a few months — because they are sold to REO investors. What’s caused market time to decrease for REO’s is a change in bank policy towards giving REO investors a good deal, i.e. a return based on a flip to current market prices. So we’ll see the inventory come back on, and the potential effect on prices is obvious.

All this is based on logic and some anecdotal evidence. If anyone has evidence to the contrary (i.e. real FTB’s are the ones buying up the vast majority of REO’s), I’d love to hear from you.

[Anonymous]

The inventory decline observation is a valid point: it could (obviously) be construed as bullish. What’s the counterargument? Some above have alluded to it.

Inventory is declining because the MIX of inventory changed over the past six months. That is, normal sellers withdrew homes from the market and were replaced with REO’s. These REO’s are, almost by definition, high-velocity sellers. So the impacts should be 1) a decline in market times; 2) falling inventory; and 3) an acceleration in price declines.

The question is, what happens when inventory falls? Do prices stabilize? I would argue no for two reasons. First, falling prices beget more foreclosures, which beget more inventory. We have not seen this because the banks are just now trying to move through the accumulated backlog of NTS of the past three to six months. Until they do so, they will be reluctant to place the newer REO’s on the market.

Second, its likely that a good percentage of REO sales become resale inventory in a few months — because they are sold to REO investors. What’s caused market time to decrease for REO’s is a change in bank policy towards giving REO investors a good deal, i.e. a return based on a flip to current market prices. So we’ll see the inventory come back on, and the potential effect on prices is obvious.

All this is based on logic and some anecdotal evidence. If anyone has evidence to the contrary (i.e. real FTB’s are the ones buying up the vast majority of REO’s), I’d love to hear from you.

[Anonymous]

The inventory decline observation is a valid point: it could (obviously) be construed as bullish. What’s the counterargument? Some above have alluded to it.

Inventory is declining because the MIX of inventory changed over the past six months. That is, normal sellers withdrew homes from the market and were replaced with REO’s. These REO’s are, almost by definition, high-velocity sellers. So the impacts should be 1) a decline in market times; 2) falling inventory; and 3) an acceleration in price declines.

The question is, what happens when inventory falls? Do prices stabilize? I would argue no for two reasons. First, falling prices beget more foreclosures, which beget more inventory. We have not seen this because the banks are just now trying to move through the accumulated backlog of NTS of the past three to six months. Until they do so, they will be reluctant to place the newer REO’s on the market.

Second, its likely that a good percentage of REO sales become resale inventory in a few months — because they are sold to REO investors. What’s caused market time to decrease for REO’s is a change in bank policy towards giving REO investors a good deal, i.e. a return based on a flip to current market prices. So we’ll see the inventory come back on, and the potential effect on prices is obvious.

All this is based on logic and some anecdotal evidence. If anyone has evidence to the contrary (i.e. real FTB’s are the ones buying up the vast majority of REO’s), I’d love to hear from you.

[Anonymous]

The inventory decline observation is a valid point: it could (obviously) be construed as bullish. What’s the counterargument? Some above have alluded to it.

Inventory is declining because the MIX of inventory changed over the past six months. That is, normal sellers withdrew homes from the market and were replaced with REO’s. These REO’s are, almost by definition, high-velocity sellers. So the impacts should be 1) a decline in market times; 2) falling inventory; and 3) an acceleration in price declines.

The question is, what happens when inventory falls? Do prices stabilize? I would argue no for two reasons. First, falling prices beget more foreclosures, which beget more inventory. We have not seen this because the banks are just now trying to move through the accumulated backlog of NTS of the past three to six months. Until they do so, they will be reluctant to place the newer REO’s on the market.

Second, its likely that a good percentage of REO sales become resale inventory in a few months — because they are sold to REO investors. What’s caused market time to decrease for REO’s is a change in bank policy towards giving REO investors a good deal, i.e. a return based on a flip to current market prices. So we’ll see the inventory come back on, and the potential effect on prices is obvious.

All this is based on logic and some anecdotal evidence. If anyone has evidence to the contrary (i.e. real FTB’s are the ones buying up the vast majority of REO’s), I’d love to hear from you.

[Anonymous]

The inventory decline observation is a valid point: it could (obviously) be construed as bullish. What’s the counterargument? Some above have alluded to it.

Inventory is declining because the MIX of inventory changed over the past six months. That is, normal sellers withdrew homes from the market and were replaced with REO’s. These REO’s are, almost by definition, high-velocity sellers. So the impacts should be 1) a decline in market times; 2) falling inventory; and 3) an acceleration in price declines.

The question is, what happens when inventory falls? Do prices stabilize? I would argue no for two reasons. First, falling prices beget more foreclosures, which beget more inventory. We have not seen this because the banks are just now trying to move through the accumulated backlog of NTS of the past three to six months. Until they do so, they will be reluctant to place the newer REO’s on the market.

Second, its likely that a good percentage of REO sales become resale inventory in a few months — because they are sold to REO investors. What’s caused market time to decrease for REO’s is a change in bank policy towards giving REO investors a good deal, i.e. a return based on a flip to current market prices. So we’ll see the inventory come back on, and the potential effect on prices is obvious.

All this is based on logic and some anecdotal evidence. If anyone has evidence to the contrary (i.e. real FTB’s are the ones buying up the vast majority of REO’s), I’d love to hear from you.

[Ex-SD]

schizo2buyORno: Your post is very revealing. I think you just Outed yourself. Now we understand.

[Ex-SD]

schizo2buyORno: Your post is very revealing. I think you just Outed yourself. Now we understand.

[Ex-SD]

schizo2buyORno: Your post is very revealing. I think you just Outed yourself. Now we understand.

[Ex-SD]

schizo2buyORno: Your post is very revealing. I think you just Outed yourself. Now we understand.

[Author]

Posts