- This topic has 905 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 12 months ago by
CricketOnTheHearth.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 5, 2009 at 9:32 AM #464616October 5, 2009 at 9:43 AM #463808
Rt.66
ParticipantSpeculation derived from actual data:
DataQuick reports 9,866 NODs fro San Diego in 2Q 2009 and 3518 Trustees Deeds Recorded (signal homes were lost to foreclosure) for San Diego 2Q 2009 for a total of 13384.
Forclosures are continuing at a rapid pace and many are not being sold but rather are being added to the backlog. So for this 3 month period we have 13384; we add in the large shadow inventory of REOs left over from previous quarters still sitting on bank books, plus we can add 3rd quarter 2009 foreclosures and NODs so far.
Then we need to subtract the portion of REOs that actually get sold and short sales that actually go through. Even assuming the inventory did not GROW (which I bet it did) can we assume from this DATA that RT and RealQuests current numbers of 13267 and 10297 respectively are not by any description, outrageous.
October 5, 2009 at 9:43 AM #464000ParticipantSpeculation derived from actual data:
DataQuick reports 9,866 NODs fro San Diego in 2Q 2009 and 3518 Trustees Deeds Recorded (signal homes were lost to foreclosure) for San Diego 2Q 2009 for a total of 13384.
Forclosures are continuing at a rapid pace and many are not being sold but rather are being added to the backlog. So for this 3 month period we have 13384; we add in the large shadow inventory of REOs left over from previous quarters still sitting on bank books, plus we can add 3rd quarter 2009 foreclosures and NODs so far.
Then we need to subtract the portion of REOs that actually get sold and short sales that actually go through. Even assuming the inventory did not GROW (which I bet it did) can we assume from this DATA that RT and RealQuests current numbers of 13267 and 10297 respectively are not by any description, outrageous.
October 5, 2009 at 9:43 AM #464348ParticipantSpeculation derived from actual data:
DataQuick reports 9,866 NODs fro San Diego in 2Q 2009 and 3518 Trustees Deeds Recorded (signal homes were lost to foreclosure) for San Diego 2Q 2009 for a total of 13384.
Forclosures are continuing at a rapid pace and many are not being sold but rather are being added to the backlog. So for this 3 month period we have 13384; we add in the large shadow inventory of REOs left over from previous quarters still sitting on bank books, plus we can add 3rd quarter 2009 foreclosures and NODs so far.
Then we need to subtract the portion of REOs that actually get sold and short sales that actually go through. Even assuming the inventory did not GROW (which I bet it did) can we assume from this DATA that RT and RealQuests current numbers of 13267 and 10297 respectively are not by any description, outrageous.
October 5, 2009 at 9:43 AM #464419ParticipantSpeculation derived from actual data:
DataQuick reports 9,866 NODs fro San Diego in 2Q 2009 and 3518 Trustees Deeds Recorded (signal homes were lost to foreclosure) for San Diego 2Q 2009 for a total of 13384.
Forclosures are continuing at a rapid pace and many are not being sold but rather are being added to the backlog. So for this 3 month period we have 13384; we add in the large shadow inventory of REOs left over from previous quarters still sitting on bank books, plus we can add 3rd quarter 2009 foreclosures and NODs so far.
Then we need to subtract the portion of REOs that actually get sold and short sales that actually go through. Even assuming the inventory did not GROW (which I bet it did) can we assume from this DATA that RT and RealQuests current numbers of 13267 and 10297 respectively are not by any description, outrageous.
October 5, 2009 at 9:43 AM #464626ParticipantSpeculation derived from actual data:
DataQuick reports 9,866 NODs fro San Diego in 2Q 2009 and 3518 Trustees Deeds Recorded (signal homes were lost to foreclosure) for San Diego 2Q 2009 for a total of 13384.
Forclosures are continuing at a rapid pace and many are not being sold but rather are being added to the backlog. So for this 3 month period we have 13384; we add in the large shadow inventory of REOs left over from previous quarters still sitting on bank books, plus we can add 3rd quarter 2009 foreclosures and NODs so far.
Then we need to subtract the portion of REOs that actually get sold and short sales that actually go through. Even assuming the inventory did not GROW (which I bet it did) can we assume from this DATA that RT and RealQuests current numbers of 13267 and 10297 respectively are not by any description, outrageous.
October 5, 2009 at 9:47 AM #463813jpinpb
ParticipantOK. FWIW, my friend (married couple) bought at peak (in Linda Vista). They decided to do a short sale and get out from under their depreciating overpriced condo. The short sale was successful after five months and sold for way less than peak (45% off and below 2001 price). Note: They did not make a payment for about 8 to 10 months. They did not get a NOD during that time.
Was this considered shadow/stealth inventory?
Are we deeming shadow/stealth inventory only properties w/NODs? I’ve seen places listed as short sales w/NODs and some short sales that didn’t have NODs yet. I’ve seen places w/NODs and foreclosure dates that still have not listed and some that eventually get bank owned and list.
Seems we don’t have a real definition for stealth/shadow inventory. To me, if it’s distressed and ends up eventually somehow to market, the end result has been a lower comp from peak for the most part. In the end, that ultimately reflects the outcome of this bubble.
October 5, 2009 at 9:47 AM #464005ParticipantOK. FWIW, my friend (married couple) bought at peak (in Linda Vista). They decided to do a short sale and get out from under their depreciating overpriced condo. The short sale was successful after five months and sold for way less than peak (45% off and below 2001 price). Note: They did not make a payment for about 8 to 10 months. They did not get a NOD during that time.
Was this considered shadow/stealth inventory?
Are we deeming shadow/stealth inventory only properties w/NODs? I’ve seen places listed as short sales w/NODs and some short sales that didn’t have NODs yet. I’ve seen places w/NODs and foreclosure dates that still have not listed and some that eventually get bank owned and list.
Seems we don’t have a real definition for stealth/shadow inventory. To me, if it’s distressed and ends up eventually somehow to market, the end result has been a lower comp from peak for the most part. In the end, that ultimately reflects the outcome of this bubble.
October 5, 2009 at 9:47 AM #464353ParticipantOK. FWIW, my friend (married couple) bought at peak (in Linda Vista). They decided to do a short sale and get out from under their depreciating overpriced condo. The short sale was successful after five months and sold for way less than peak (45% off and below 2001 price). Note: They did not make a payment for about 8 to 10 months. They did not get a NOD during that time.
Was this considered shadow/stealth inventory?
Are we deeming shadow/stealth inventory only properties w/NODs? I’ve seen places listed as short sales w/NODs and some short sales that didn’t have NODs yet. I’ve seen places w/NODs and foreclosure dates that still have not listed and some that eventually get bank owned and list.
Seems we don’t have a real definition for stealth/shadow inventory. To me, if it’s distressed and ends up eventually somehow to market, the end result has been a lower comp from peak for the most part. In the end, that ultimately reflects the outcome of this bubble.
October 5, 2009 at 9:47 AM #464424ParticipantOK. FWIW, my friend (married couple) bought at peak (in Linda Vista). They decided to do a short sale and get out from under their depreciating overpriced condo. The short sale was successful after five months and sold for way less than peak (45% off and below 2001 price). Note: They did not make a payment for about 8 to 10 months. They did not get a NOD during that time.
Was this considered shadow/stealth inventory?
Are we deeming shadow/stealth inventory only properties w/NODs? I’ve seen places listed as short sales w/NODs and some short sales that didn’t have NODs yet. I’ve seen places w/NODs and foreclosure dates that still have not listed and some that eventually get bank owned and list.
Seems we don’t have a real definition for stealth/shadow inventory. To me, if it’s distressed and ends up eventually somehow to market, the end result has been a lower comp from peak for the most part. In the end, that ultimately reflects the outcome of this bubble.
October 5, 2009 at 9:47 AM #464631ParticipantOK. FWIW, my friend (married couple) bought at peak (in Linda Vista). They decided to do a short sale and get out from under their depreciating overpriced condo. The short sale was successful after five months and sold for way less than peak (45% off and below 2001 price). Note: They did not make a payment for about 8 to 10 months. They did not get a NOD during that time.
Was this considered shadow/stealth inventory?
Are we deeming shadow/stealth inventory only properties w/NODs? I’ve seen places listed as short sales w/NODs and some short sales that didn’t have NODs yet. I’ve seen places w/NODs and foreclosure dates that still have not listed and some that eventually get bank owned and list.
Seems we don’t have a real definition for stealth/shadow inventory. To me, if it’s distressed and ends up eventually somehow to market, the end result has been a lower comp from peak for the most part. In the end, that ultimately reflects the outcome of this bubble.
October 5, 2009 at 9:54 AM #463823sdrealtor
ParticipantCut and paste….cut and paste. Cant debate someone who wont listen. There isnt a single regular realtor on this board who has ever predicted the market was recovering (although one year ago I did accurately predict the Spring Rally and increasing prices -albeit temporary one-in selected markets). You can go back over 3+ years of my posts and will see my predictions have never deviated, never changed not one iota. ABout 30% down from the peak for prime NCC neighborhoods is what I called for and I still stand by it. We are about 2/3rd’s of the way there already.
October 5, 2009 at 9:54 AM #464015ParticipantCut and paste….cut and paste. Cant debate someone who wont listen. There isnt a single regular realtor on this board who has ever predicted the market was recovering (although one year ago I did accurately predict the Spring Rally and increasing prices -albeit temporary one-in selected markets). You can go back over 3+ years of my posts and will see my predictions have never deviated, never changed not one iota. ABout 30% down from the peak for prime NCC neighborhoods is what I called for and I still stand by it. We are about 2/3rd’s of the way there already.
October 5, 2009 at 9:54 AM #464363ParticipantCut and paste….cut and paste. Cant debate someone who wont listen. There isnt a single regular realtor on this board who has ever predicted the market was recovering (although one year ago I did accurately predict the Spring Rally and increasing prices -albeit temporary one-in selected markets). You can go back over 3+ years of my posts and will see my predictions have never deviated, never changed not one iota. ABout 30% down from the peak for prime NCC neighborhoods is what I called for and I still stand by it. We are about 2/3rd’s of the way there already.
October 5, 2009 at 9:54 AM #464434ParticipantCut and paste….cut and paste. Cant debate someone who wont listen. There isnt a single regular realtor on this board who has ever predicted the market was recovering (although one year ago I did accurately predict the Spring Rally and increasing prices -albeit temporary one-in selected markets). You can go back over 3+ years of my posts and will see my predictions have never deviated, never changed not one iota. ABout 30% down from the peak for prime NCC neighborhoods is what I called for and I still stand by it. We are about 2/3rd’s of the way there already.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.