[analyst]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan]

For example, take analyst’s category #4
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress .

These are a long way from being on the market. Maybe a couple years at the current pace. [/quote]

Only due to the government intervention rules. Shadow inventory is only of interest if you think there is a chance that government intervention will end. It will remain off the market and have no effect if government intervention continues at its current level (or increases).

If mark-to-market were reinstated, and buyer incentives were curtailed, all enjoying government largesse would know it was ending, and ALL the shadow inventory would come quickly to market, REO’s as bulk sales or normal listings, the rest as short sales and foreclosures proceeding at normal pace. The aggregate increase in supply and reduction in demand would have a rapid and substantial effect on price.

But, again, there is not much point to trying to calculate and debate the unknowable size of shadow inventory, and its potential effect on prices unless you think government intervention will subside. I put that probability at near zero.

[analyst]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan]

For example, take analyst’s category #4
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress .

These are a long way from being on the market. Maybe a couple years at the current pace. [/quote]

Only due to the government intervention rules. Shadow inventory is only of interest if you think there is a chance that government intervention will end. It will remain off the market and have no effect if government intervention continues at its current level (or increases).

If mark-to-market were reinstated, and buyer incentives were curtailed, all enjoying government largesse would know it was ending, and ALL the shadow inventory would come quickly to market, REO’s as bulk sales or normal listings, the rest as short sales and foreclosures proceeding at normal pace. The aggregate increase in supply and reduction in demand would have a rapid and substantial effect on price.

But, again, there is not much point to trying to calculate and debate the unknowable size of shadow inventory, and its potential effect on prices unless you think government intervention will subside. I put that probability at near zero.

[analyst]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan]

For example, take analyst’s category #4
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress .

These are a long way from being on the market. Maybe a couple years at the current pace. [/quote]

Only due to the government intervention rules. Shadow inventory is only of interest if you think there is a chance that government intervention will end. It will remain off the market and have no effect if government intervention continues at its current level (or increases).

If mark-to-market were reinstated, and buyer incentives were curtailed, all enjoying government largesse would know it was ending, and ALL the shadow inventory would come quickly to market, REO’s as bulk sales or normal listings, the rest as short sales and foreclosures proceeding at normal pace. The aggregate increase in supply and reduction in demand would have a rapid and substantial effect on price.

But, again, there is not much point to trying to calculate and debate the unknowable size of shadow inventory, and its potential effect on prices unless you think government intervention will subside. I put that probability at near zero.

[analyst]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan]

For example, take analyst’s category #4
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress .

These are a long way from being on the market. Maybe a couple years at the current pace. [/quote]

Only due to the government intervention rules. Shadow inventory is only of interest if you think there is a chance that government intervention will end. It will remain off the market and have no effect if government intervention continues at its current level (or increases).

If mark-to-market were reinstated, and buyer incentives were curtailed, all enjoying government largesse would know it was ending, and ALL the shadow inventory would come quickly to market, REO’s as bulk sales or normal listings, the rest as short sales and foreclosures proceeding at normal pace. The aggregate increase in supply and reduction in demand would have a rapid and substantial effect on price.

But, again, there is not much point to trying to calculate and debate the unknowable size of shadow inventory, and its potential effect on prices unless you think government intervention will subside. I put that probability at near zero.

[analyst]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan]

For example, take analyst’s category #4
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress .

These are a long way from being on the market. Maybe a couple years at the current pace. [/quote]

Only due to the government intervention rules. Shadow inventory is only of interest if you think there is a chance that government intervention will end. It will remain off the market and have no effect if government intervention continues at its current level (or increases).

If mark-to-market were reinstated, and buyer incentives were curtailed, all enjoying government largesse would know it was ending, and ALL the shadow inventory would come quickly to market, REO’s as bulk sales or normal listings, the rest as short sales and foreclosures proceeding at normal pace. The aggregate increase in supply and reduction in demand would have a rapid and substantial effect on price.

But, again, there is not much point to trying to calculate and debate the unknowable size of shadow inventory, and its potential effect on prices unless you think government intervention will subside. I put that probability at near zero.

[analyst]

The phrase “shadow inventory” came into existence to describe quantities of properties which were expected to appear as listings for sale, but, for some reason, did not.

In that context, there is no difference between any of the following:
1. REO not listed for sale
2. NOT, sale postponed, no short sale in progress
3. NOD, NOT not issued, no short sale in progress
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress

They are all part of shadow inventory, since each of them is a -1 to the market.

Since only the servicer has details about category 4, nobody has the information required to accurately calculate shadow inventory.

And, it doesn’t matter much as long as the mark-to-market rules are suspended and the buyer incentives remain as they are (low interest rates, low down payments, down payment assistance, non-recourse loans). The shadow inventory will remain in the shadows, released to the market at a pace chosen by the owners of the impaired mortgages.

They will choose between one large immediate loss, and years of monthly losses, hopefully followed by a rebound in prices.

[analyst]

The phrase “shadow inventory” came into existence to describe quantities of properties which were expected to appear as listings for sale, but, for some reason, did not.

In that context, there is no difference between any of the following:
1. REO not listed for sale
2. NOT, sale postponed, no short sale in progress
3. NOD, NOT not issued, no short sale in progress
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress

They are all part of shadow inventory, since each of them is a -1 to the market.

Since only the servicer has details about category 4, nobody has the information required to accurately calculate shadow inventory.

And, it doesn’t matter much as long as the mark-to-market rules are suspended and the buyer incentives remain as they are (low interest rates, low down payments, down payment assistance, non-recourse loans). The shadow inventory will remain in the shadows, released to the market at a pace chosen by the owners of the impaired mortgages.

They will choose between one large immediate loss, and years of monthly losses, hopefully followed by a rebound in prices.

[analyst]

The phrase “shadow inventory” came into existence to describe quantities of properties which were expected to appear as listings for sale, but, for some reason, did not.

In that context, there is no difference between any of the following:
1. REO not listed for sale
2. NOT, sale postponed, no short sale in progress
3. NOD, NOT not issued, no short sale in progress
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress

They are all part of shadow inventory, since each of them is a -1 to the market.

Since only the servicer has details about category 4, nobody has the information required to accurately calculate shadow inventory.

And, it doesn’t matter much as long as the mark-to-market rules are suspended and the buyer incentives remain as they are (low interest rates, low down payments, down payment assistance, non-recourse loans). The shadow inventory will remain in the shadows, released to the market at a pace chosen by the owners of the impaired mortgages.

They will choose between one large immediate loss, and years of monthly losses, hopefully followed by a rebound in prices.

[analyst]

The phrase “shadow inventory” came into existence to describe quantities of properties which were expected to appear as listings for sale, but, for some reason, did not.

In that context, there is no difference between any of the following:
1. REO not listed for sale
2. NOT, sale postponed, no short sale in progress
3. NOD, NOT not issued, no short sale in progress
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress

They are all part of shadow inventory, since each of them is a -1 to the market.

Since only the servicer has details about category 4, nobody has the information required to accurately calculate shadow inventory.

And, it doesn’t matter much as long as the mark-to-market rules are suspended and the buyer incentives remain as they are (low interest rates, low down payments, down payment assistance, non-recourse loans). The shadow inventory will remain in the shadows, released to the market at a pace chosen by the owners of the impaired mortgages.

They will choose between one large immediate loss, and years of monthly losses, hopefully followed by a rebound in prices.

[analyst]

The phrase “shadow inventory” came into existence to describe quantities of properties which were expected to appear as listings for sale, but, for some reason, did not.

In that context, there is no difference between any of the following:
1. REO not listed for sale
2. NOT, sale postponed, no short sale in progress
3. NOD, NOT not issued, no short sale in progress
4. delinquent, NOD not issued, no short sale in progress

They are all part of shadow inventory, since each of them is a -1 to the market.

Since only the servicer has details about category 4, nobody has the information required to accurately calculate shadow inventory.

And, it doesn’t matter much as long as the mark-to-market rules are suspended and the buyer incentives remain as they are (low interest rates, low down payments, down payment assistance, non-recourse loans). The shadow inventory will remain in the shadows, released to the market at a pace chosen by the owners of the impaired mortgages.

They will choose between one large immediate loss, and years of monthly losses, hopefully followed by a rebound in prices.

[analyst]

ZILLOW, while sometimes useful for certain purposes, can never be relied upon for a quick reliable indication of property value.

One must always examine the 10-year chart of Zestimates, and the maximum amount of previous sales data available. Even then, there will be numbers that just don’t make sense. This is such a case.

Prior sales:
1991 83K
2007 175K
2008 390K
2009 130K

In the sales history, asterisks indicate that the 390K sale was not included in Zestimate, and that the 130K sale was included in Zestimate. But the graph shows otherwise.

There is a logic error in the Zillow computer program that produces these displays under certain circumstances. I have seen this condition before.

Taking all the Zillow data into account, unless the property has been rezoned to significantly increase its value, one might be inclined to suspect collusion between seller, buyer, and appraiser to produce a sham sale for $390K in 2008.

[analyst]

ZILLOW, while sometimes useful for certain purposes, can never be relied upon for a quick reliable indication of property value.

One must always examine the 10-year chart of Zestimates, and the maximum amount of previous sales data available. Even then, there will be numbers that just don’t make sense. This is such a case.

Prior sales:
1991 83K
2007 175K
2008 390K
2009 130K

In the sales history, asterisks indicate that the 390K sale was not included in Zestimate, and that the 130K sale was included in Zestimate. But the graph shows otherwise.

There is a logic error in the Zillow computer program that produces these displays under certain circumstances. I have seen this condition before.

Taking all the Zillow data into account, unless the property has been rezoned to significantly increase its value, one might be inclined to suspect collusion between seller, buyer, and appraiser to produce a sham sale for $390K in 2008.

[analyst]

ZILLOW, while sometimes useful for certain purposes, can never be relied upon for a quick reliable indication of property value.

One must always examine the 10-year chart of Zestimates, and the maximum amount of previous sales data available. Even then, there will be numbers that just don’t make sense. This is such a case.

Prior sales:
1991 83K
2007 175K
2008 390K
2009 130K

In the sales history, asterisks indicate that the 390K sale was not included in Zestimate, and that the 130K sale was included in Zestimate. But the graph shows otherwise.

There is a logic error in the Zillow computer program that produces these displays under certain circumstances. I have seen this condition before.

Taking all the Zillow data into account, unless the property has been rezoned to significantly increase its value, one might be inclined to suspect collusion between seller, buyer, and appraiser to produce a sham sale for $390K in 2008.

[analyst]

ZILLOW, while sometimes useful for certain purposes, can never be relied upon for a quick reliable indication of property value.

One must always examine the 10-year chart of Zestimates, and the maximum amount of previous sales data available. Even then, there will be numbers that just don’t make sense. This is such a case.

Prior sales:
1991 83K
2007 175K
2008 390K
2009 130K

In the sales history, asterisks indicate that the 390K sale was not included in Zestimate, and that the 130K sale was included in Zestimate. But the graph shows otherwise.

There is a logic error in the Zillow computer program that produces these displays under certain circumstances. I have seen this condition before.

Taking all the Zillow data into account, unless the property has been rezoned to significantly increase its value, one might be inclined to suspect collusion between seller, buyer, and appraiser to produce a sham sale for $390K in 2008.

[analyst]

ZILLOW, while sometimes useful for certain purposes, can never be relied upon for a quick reliable indication of property value.

One must always examine the 10-year chart of Zestimates, and the maximum amount of previous sales data available. Even then, there will be numbers that just don’t make sense. This is such a case.

Prior sales:
1991 83K
2007 175K
2008 390K
2009 130K

In the sales history, asterisks indicate that the 390K sale was not included in Zestimate, and that the 130K sale was included in Zestimate. But the graph shows otherwise.

There is a logic error in the Zillow computer program that produces these displays under certain circumstances. I have seen this condition before.

Taking all the Zillow data into account, unless the property has been rezoned to significantly increase its value, one might be inclined to suspect collusion between seller, buyer, and appraiser to produce a sham sale for $390K in 2008.

[Author]

Posts