Who’s getting the really good prices?

[moneymaker]

I remember feeling something similar when 5 years ago I went to the court house steps and saw condos being snapped up in the low 200’s. Well guess what, unless they flipped them pretty quickly, those were poor investments. How low can you go!

[kicksavedave]

I agree with SD R on this one. This might not be fair to individual buyers, or people like many of us Piggs who are saving to buy some day and hoping prices continue to fall. Not good news for us, no doubt. This is definitely creating a false bottom, or at least changing the curve on this decline.

But the reality is that until the banks get these toxic assets off their books, then the banks will just be frozen. Frozen banks means frozen economy. Frozen economy means most of us are at some risk of hardship, either layoffs, losing a business, or simply losing your quality of life in some way. Very few individuals benefit from a huge recession/depression. I know I’m nervous. Aren’t you? Some of us are stocking up on guns and canned food.

In the big picture, this is the best way for the banks to get past this mortgage mess. Sell em in bulk and move on, even if their loss margin is a few points higher overall – the carrying costs are killing them as much as the depreciation is. One-at-a-timing these houses will take a (lost) decade, and it’s pretty clear the banks aren’t equipped to process these foreclosures like that. This was almost predictable, inevitable even.

I think it creates a new bottom, or softens the rate of decline artificially. But that is in the banks best interest, and the best interest of many current homeowners as well. Its just not in the best interest of many of us Piggs.

Such is life.

[quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]

The bottom line is this. Nobody will EVER be able to get as good a deal as these investors do who buy in bulk. They buy in bulk and that is why they get such steep discounts. This is the BEST THING IN THE WORLD for distressed banks. Unloading the inventory and unwinding these non performing securities is the first of many steps. Once the property belongs to these investment groups they can spin em, flip em, rent em, or do whatever the hell they want. It is how we get to a more stable base like it or not.
[/quote]

Gotta disagree with this being the “best thing” for banks. If banks (that are backed by taxpayers, BTW) can get $200K for a property instead of $100K, then it’s best for the banks (and taxpayers!) if the sales are made on the open market.

Since WE own or back the mortgage market and all the “toxic assets” these days, then we need to get the highest possible return on our “investments.”

What we NEED is a federal auction website for all REOs and short-sales in the country. Bidders have to be qualified through Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, and all bid/ask information must be FULLY TRANSPARENT. It should be mandated that properties be listed immediately upon trustee sale, and that the listing remain for a set period of time (like 30 days). All during that time, the house is available for inspections via govt lockbox, and bids are placed like on e-bay — fully transparent as to the amount and the bidder. Each bidder (can be individual or entity) can get only one user ID, so their bids and purchases can be tracked.

After the 30-day period, the property sells to the highest bidder. If any fraud or problems come up with a particular bidder, they are banned from bidding in any future auction.

Why would we not do this (except that it would make it less profitable for the fraudsters who brought us into this mess)?[/quote]

[kicksavedave]

I agree with SD R on this one. This might not be fair to individual buyers, or people like many of us Piggs who are saving to buy some day and hoping prices continue to fall. Not good news for us, no doubt. This is definitely creating a false bottom, or at least changing the curve on this decline.

But the reality is that until the banks get these toxic assets off their books, then the banks will just be frozen. Frozen banks means frozen economy. Frozen economy means most of us are at some risk of hardship, either layoffs, losing a business, or simply losing your quality of life in some way. Very few individuals benefit from a huge recession/depression. I know I’m nervous. Aren’t you? Some of us are stocking up on guns and canned food.

In the big picture, this is the best way for the banks to get past this mortgage mess. Sell em in bulk and move on, even if their loss margin is a few points higher overall – the carrying costs are killing them as much as the depreciation is. One-at-a-timing these houses will take a (lost) decade, and it’s pretty clear the banks aren’t equipped to process these foreclosures like that. This was almost predictable, inevitable even.

I think it creates a new bottom, or softens the rate of decline artificially. But that is in the banks best interest, and the best interest of many current homeowners as well. Its just not in the best interest of many of us Piggs.

Such is life.

[quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]

The bottom line is this. Nobody will EVER be able to get as good a deal as these investors do who buy in bulk. They buy in bulk and that is why they get such steep discounts. This is the BEST THING IN THE WORLD for distressed banks. Unloading the inventory and unwinding these non performing securities is the first of many steps. Once the property belongs to these investment groups they can spin em, flip em, rent em, or do whatever the hell they want. It is how we get to a more stable base like it or not.
[/quote]

Gotta disagree with this being the “best thing” for banks. If banks (that are backed by taxpayers, BTW) can get $200K for a property instead of $100K, then it’s best for the banks (and taxpayers!) if the sales are made on the open market.

Since WE own or back the mortgage market and all the “toxic assets” these days, then we need to get the highest possible return on our “investments.”

What we NEED is a federal auction website for all REOs and short-sales in the country. Bidders have to be qualified through Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, and all bid/ask information must be FULLY TRANSPARENT. It should be mandated that properties be listed immediately upon trustee sale, and that the listing remain for a set period of time (like 30 days). All during that time, the house is available for inspections via govt lockbox, and bids are placed like on e-bay — fully transparent as to the amount and the bidder. Each bidder (can be individual or entity) can get only one user ID, so their bids and purchases can be tracked.

After the 30-day period, the property sells to the highest bidder. If any fraud or problems come up with a particular bidder, they are banned from bidding in any future auction.

Why would we not do this (except that it would make it less profitable for the fraudsters who brought us into this mess)?[/quote]

[kicksavedave]

I agree with SD R on this one. This might not be fair to individual buyers, or people like many of us Piggs who are saving to buy some day and hoping prices continue to fall. Not good news for us, no doubt. This is definitely creating a false bottom, or at least changing the curve on this decline.

But the reality is that until the banks get these toxic assets off their books, then the banks will just be frozen. Frozen banks means frozen economy. Frozen economy means most of us are at some risk of hardship, either layoffs, losing a business, or simply losing your quality of life in some way. Very few individuals benefit from a huge recession/depression. I know I’m nervous. Aren’t you? Some of us are stocking up on guns and canned food.

In the big picture, this is the best way for the banks to get past this mortgage mess. Sell em in bulk and move on, even if their loss margin is a few points higher overall – the carrying costs are killing them as much as the depreciation is. One-at-a-timing these houses will take a (lost) decade, and it’s pretty clear the banks aren’t equipped to process these foreclosures like that. This was almost predictable, inevitable even.

I think it creates a new bottom, or softens the rate of decline artificially. But that is in the banks best interest, and the best interest of many current homeowners as well. Its just not in the best interest of many of us Piggs.

Such is life.

[quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]

The bottom line is this. Nobody will EVER be able to get as good a deal as these investors do who buy in bulk. They buy in bulk and that is why they get such steep discounts. This is the BEST THING IN THE WORLD for distressed banks. Unloading the inventory and unwinding these non performing securities is the first of many steps. Once the property belongs to these investment groups they can spin em, flip em, rent em, or do whatever the hell they want. It is how we get to a more stable base like it or not.
[/quote]

Gotta disagree with this being the “best thing” for banks. If banks (that are backed by taxpayers, BTW) can get $200K for a property instead of $100K, then it’s best for the banks (and taxpayers!) if the sales are made on the open market.

Since WE own or back the mortgage market and all the “toxic assets” these days, then we need to get the highest possible return on our “investments.”

What we NEED is a federal auction website for all REOs and short-sales in the country. Bidders have to be qualified through Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, and all bid/ask information must be FULLY TRANSPARENT. It should be mandated that properties be listed immediately upon trustee sale, and that the listing remain for a set period of time (like 30 days). All during that time, the house is available for inspections via govt lockbox, and bids are placed like on e-bay — fully transparent as to the amount and the bidder. Each bidder (can be individual or entity) can get only one user ID, so their bids and purchases can be tracked.

After the 30-day period, the property sells to the highest bidder. If any fraud or problems come up with a particular bidder, they are banned from bidding in any future auction.

Why would we not do this (except that it would make it less profitable for the fraudsters who brought us into this mess)?[/quote]

[kicksavedave]

I agree with SD R on this one. This might not be fair to individual buyers, or people like many of us Piggs who are saving to buy some day and hoping prices continue to fall. Not good news for us, no doubt. This is definitely creating a false bottom, or at least changing the curve on this decline.

But the reality is that until the banks get these toxic assets off their books, then the banks will just be frozen. Frozen banks means frozen economy. Frozen economy means most of us are at some risk of hardship, either layoffs, losing a business, or simply losing your quality of life in some way. Very few individuals benefit from a huge recession/depression. I know I’m nervous. Aren’t you? Some of us are stocking up on guns and canned food.

In the big picture, this is the best way for the banks to get past this mortgage mess. Sell em in bulk and move on, even if their loss margin is a few points higher overall – the carrying costs are killing them as much as the depreciation is. One-at-a-timing these houses will take a (lost) decade, and it’s pretty clear the banks aren’t equipped to process these foreclosures like that. This was almost predictable, inevitable even.

I think it creates a new bottom, or softens the rate of decline artificially. But that is in the banks best interest, and the best interest of many current homeowners as well. Its just not in the best interest of many of us Piggs.

Such is life.

[quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]

The bottom line is this. Nobody will EVER be able to get as good a deal as these investors do who buy in bulk. They buy in bulk and that is why they get such steep discounts. This is the BEST THING IN THE WORLD for distressed banks. Unloading the inventory and unwinding these non performing securities is the first of many steps. Once the property belongs to these investment groups they can spin em, flip em, rent em, or do whatever the hell they want. It is how we get to a more stable base like it or not.
[/quote]

Gotta disagree with this being the “best thing” for banks. If banks (that are backed by taxpayers, BTW) can get $200K for a property instead of $100K, then it’s best for the banks (and taxpayers!) if the sales are made on the open market.

Since WE own or back the mortgage market and all the “toxic assets” these days, then we need to get the highest possible return on our “investments.”

What we NEED is a federal auction website for all REOs and short-sales in the country. Bidders have to be qualified through Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, and all bid/ask information must be FULLY TRANSPARENT. It should be mandated that properties be listed immediately upon trustee sale, and that the listing remain for a set period of time (like 30 days). All during that time, the house is available for inspections via govt lockbox, and bids are placed like on e-bay — fully transparent as to the amount and the bidder. Each bidder (can be individual or entity) can get only one user ID, so their bids and purchases can be tracked.

After the 30-day period, the property sells to the highest bidder. If any fraud or problems come up with a particular bidder, they are banned from bidding in any future auction.

Why would we not do this (except that it would make it less profitable for the fraudsters who brought us into this mess)?[/quote]

[kicksavedave]

I agree with SD R on this one. This might not be fair to individual buyers, or people like many of us Piggs who are saving to buy some day and hoping prices continue to fall. Not good news for us, no doubt. This is definitely creating a false bottom, or at least changing the curve on this decline.

But the reality is that until the banks get these toxic assets off their books, then the banks will just be frozen. Frozen banks means frozen economy. Frozen economy means most of us are at some risk of hardship, either layoffs, losing a business, or simply losing your quality of life in some way. Very few individuals benefit from a huge recession/depression. I know I’m nervous. Aren’t you? Some of us are stocking up on guns and canned food.

In the big picture, this is the best way for the banks to get past this mortgage mess. Sell em in bulk and move on, even if their loss margin is a few points higher overall – the carrying costs are killing them as much as the depreciation is. One-at-a-timing these houses will take a (lost) decade, and it’s pretty clear the banks aren’t equipped to process these foreclosures like that. This was almost predictable, inevitable even.

I think it creates a new bottom, or softens the rate of decline artificially. But that is in the banks best interest, and the best interest of many current homeowners as well. Its just not in the best interest of many of us Piggs.

Such is life.

[quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]

The bottom line is this. Nobody will EVER be able to get as good a deal as these investors do who buy in bulk. They buy in bulk and that is why they get such steep discounts. This is the BEST THING IN THE WORLD for distressed banks. Unloading the inventory and unwinding these non performing securities is the first of many steps. Once the property belongs to these investment groups they can spin em, flip em, rent em, or do whatever the hell they want. It is how we get to a more stable base like it or not.
[/quote]

Gotta disagree with this being the “best thing” for banks. If banks (that are backed by taxpayers, BTW) can get $200K for a property instead of $100K, then it’s best for the banks (and taxpayers!) if the sales are made on the open market.

Since WE own or back the mortgage market and all the “toxic assets” these days, then we need to get the highest possible return on our “investments.”

What we NEED is a federal auction website for all REOs and short-sales in the country. Bidders have to be qualified through Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, and all bid/ask information must be FULLY TRANSPARENT. It should be mandated that properties be listed immediately upon trustee sale, and that the listing remain for a set period of time (like 30 days). All during that time, the house is available for inspections via govt lockbox, and bids are placed like on e-bay — fully transparent as to the amount and the bidder. Each bidder (can be individual or entity) can get only one user ID, so their bids and purchases can be tracked.

After the 30-day period, the property sells to the highest bidder. If any fraud or problems come up with a particular bidder, they are banned from bidding in any future auction.

Why would we not do this (except that it would make it less profitable for the fraudsters who brought us into this mess)?[/quote]

[SD Realtor]

CAR you are a smart cookie. I think though that in some cases you have make a better assessment of the time value of money. Remember that there are costs associated with the bank holding the properties, possibile legal issues, brokerage fees to sell it etc… Also in this particular situation you are totally ignoring the liquidity needs of the lending entity. Finally I believe we have already seen that it is not possible to dump all the properties on the open market as it may crash it.

Now in theory YES I agree with you 100 percent. I even agree with the proposal that you put forth. However it makes to much sense. It also levels the playing field. Look it if “could” happen, that is, if the government really wanted to look out for all people rather then just looking out for Wall St, then yes this is the right way to do it.

However, in the world we live in, I think the next best thing is to let more rich Wall St guys get alot richer. Let the banks liquidate to investors, then bail the banks out, then the investors make more money over time on the properties they bought in bulk.

Sad but…I guess it how it will go.

[SD Realtor]

CAR you are a smart cookie. I think though that in some cases you have make a better assessment of the time value of money. Remember that there are costs associated with the bank holding the properties, possibile legal issues, brokerage fees to sell it etc… Also in this particular situation you are totally ignoring the liquidity needs of the lending entity. Finally I believe we have already seen that it is not possible to dump all the properties on the open market as it may crash it.

Now in theory YES I agree with you 100 percent. I even agree with the proposal that you put forth. However it makes to much sense. It also levels the playing field. Look it if “could” happen, that is, if the government really wanted to look out for all people rather then just looking out for Wall St, then yes this is the right way to do it.

However, in the world we live in, I think the next best thing is to let more rich Wall St guys get alot richer. Let the banks liquidate to investors, then bail the banks out, then the investors make more money over time on the properties they bought in bulk.

Sad but…I guess it how it will go.

[SD Realtor]

CAR you are a smart cookie. I think though that in some cases you have make a better assessment of the time value of money. Remember that there are costs associated with the bank holding the properties, possibile legal issues, brokerage fees to sell it etc… Also in this particular situation you are totally ignoring the liquidity needs of the lending entity. Finally I believe we have already seen that it is not possible to dump all the properties on the open market as it may crash it.

Now in theory YES I agree with you 100 percent. I even agree with the proposal that you put forth. However it makes to much sense. It also levels the playing field. Look it if “could” happen, that is, if the government really wanted to look out for all people rather then just looking out for Wall St, then yes this is the right way to do it.

However, in the world we live in, I think the next best thing is to let more rich Wall St guys get alot richer. Let the banks liquidate to investors, then bail the banks out, then the investors make more money over time on the properties they bought in bulk.

Sad but…I guess it how it will go.

[SD Realtor]

CAR you are a smart cookie. I think though that in some cases you have make a better assessment of the time value of money. Remember that there are costs associated with the bank holding the properties, possibile legal issues, brokerage fees to sell it etc… Also in this particular situation you are totally ignoring the liquidity needs of the lending entity. Finally I believe we have already seen that it is not possible to dump all the properties on the open market as it may crash it.

Now in theory YES I agree with you 100 percent. I even agree with the proposal that you put forth. However it makes to much sense. It also levels the playing field. Look it if “could” happen, that is, if the government really wanted to look out for all people rather then just looking out for Wall St, then yes this is the right way to do it.

However, in the world we live in, I think the next best thing is to let more rich Wall St guys get alot richer. Let the banks liquidate to investors, then bail the banks out, then the investors make more money over time on the properties they bought in bulk.

Sad but…I guess it how it will go.

[SD Realtor]

CAR you are a smart cookie. I think though that in some cases you have make a better assessment of the time value of money. Remember that there are costs associated with the bank holding the properties, possibile legal issues, brokerage fees to sell it etc… Also in this particular situation you are totally ignoring the liquidity needs of the lending entity. Finally I believe we have already seen that it is not possible to dump all the properties on the open market as it may crash it.

Now in theory YES I agree with you 100 percent. I even agree with the proposal that you put forth. However it makes to much sense. It also levels the playing field. Look it if “could” happen, that is, if the government really wanted to look out for all people rather then just looking out for Wall St, then yes this is the right way to do it.

However, in the world we live in, I think the next best thing is to let more rich Wall St guys get alot richer. Let the banks liquidate to investors, then bail the banks out, then the investors make more money over time on the properties they bought in bulk.

Sad but…I guess it how it will go.

[aldante]

[quote=SD Realtor]CAR you are a smart cookie. I think though that in some cases you have make a better assessment of the time value of money. Remember that there are costs associated with the bank holding the properties, possibile legal issues, brokerage fees to sell it etc… Also in this particular situation you are totally ignoring the liquidity needs of the lending entity. Finally I believe we have already seen that it is not possible to dump all the properties on the open market as it may crash it.

Now in theory YES I agree with you 100 percent. I even agree with the proposal that you put forth. However it makes to much sense. It also levels the playing field. Look it if “could” happen, that is, if the government really wanted to look out for all people rather then just looking out for Wall St, then yes this is the right way to do it.

However, in the world we live in, I think the next best thing is to let more rich Wall St guys get alot richer. Let the banks liquidate to investors, then bail the banks out, then the investors make more money over time on the properties they bought in bulk.

Sad but…I guess it how it will go. [/quote]

That thinking is the problem “crash the market” is more important then ripping mom and pop off. I am so tired of people saying how unimportant “moral hazard” is. I know that cash is king bulk gets better prices………but show the transaction!!!!!

[aldante]

[quote=SD Realtor]CAR you are a smart cookie. I think though that in some cases you have make a better assessment of the time value of money. Remember that there are costs associated with the bank holding the properties, possibile legal issues, brokerage fees to sell it etc… Also in this particular situation you are totally ignoring the liquidity needs of the lending entity. Finally I believe we have already seen that it is not possible to dump all the properties on the open market as it may crash it.

Now in theory YES I agree with you 100 percent. I even agree with the proposal that you put forth. However it makes to much sense. It also levels the playing field. Look it if “could” happen, that is, if the government really wanted to look out for all people rather then just looking out for Wall St, then yes this is the right way to do it.

However, in the world we live in, I think the next best thing is to let more rich Wall St guys get alot richer. Let the banks liquidate to investors, then bail the banks out, then the investors make more money over time on the properties they bought in bulk.

Sad but…I guess it how it will go. [/quote]

That thinking is the problem “crash the market” is more important then ripping mom and pop off. I am so tired of people saying how unimportant “moral hazard” is. I know that cash is king bulk gets better prices………but show the transaction!!!!!

[aldante]

[quote=SD Realtor]CAR you are a smart cookie. I think though that in some cases you have make a better assessment of the time value of money. Remember that there are costs associated with the bank holding the properties, possibile legal issues, brokerage fees to sell it etc… Also in this particular situation you are totally ignoring the liquidity needs of the lending entity. Finally I believe we have already seen that it is not possible to dump all the properties on the open market as it may crash it.

Now in theory YES I agree with you 100 percent. I even agree with the proposal that you put forth. However it makes to much sense. It also levels the playing field. Look it if “could” happen, that is, if the government really wanted to look out for all people rather then just looking out for Wall St, then yes this is the right way to do it.

However, in the world we live in, I think the next best thing is to let more rich Wall St guys get alot richer. Let the banks liquidate to investors, then bail the banks out, then the investors make more money over time on the properties they bought in bulk.

Sad but…I guess it how it will go. [/quote]

That thinking is the problem “crash the market” is more important then ripping mom and pop off. I am so tired of people saying how unimportant “moral hazard” is. I know that cash is king bulk gets better prices………but show the transaction!!!!!

[aldante]

[quote=SD Realtor]CAR you are a smart cookie. I think though that in some cases you have make a better assessment of the time value of money. Remember that there are costs associated with the bank holding the properties, possibile legal issues, brokerage fees to sell it etc… Also in this particular situation you are totally ignoring the liquidity needs of the lending entity. Finally I believe we have already seen that it is not possible to dump all the properties on the open market as it may crash it.

Now in theory YES I agree with you 100 percent. I even agree with the proposal that you put forth. However it makes to much sense. It also levels the playing field. Look it if “could” happen, that is, if the government really wanted to look out for all people rather then just looking out for Wall St, then yes this is the right way to do it.

However, in the world we live in, I think the next best thing is to let more rich Wall St guys get alot richer. Let the banks liquidate to investors, then bail the banks out, then the investors make more money over time on the properties they bought in bulk.

Sad but…I guess it how it will go. [/quote]

That thinking is the problem “crash the market” is more important then ripping mom and pop off. I am so tired of people saying how unimportant “moral hazard” is. I know that cash is king bulk gets better prices………but show the transaction!!!!!

[Author]

Posts