Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SD Realtor
ParticipantOne thing that I find intriguing is that whenever I post something, invariably very few people interpret what I am writing in the same manner as I thought they would when I posted it….
I read sdr’s post and I don’t view it as being bullish so I guess you guys would paint me in black and white stripes and label me a bad guy… I view his posts in the same manner as my own, that is, I do not see bullishness or denial of a bull market. Rather the contrary…I also do see the same thing that he has said, that the zip codes here in question are going down and have gone down for awhile now. Have these zips fallen in the same manner or at the same rate as say Eastlake? No… can they? Perhaps. Will it happen in a few weeks time? No it will not.
I also would forecast a spring bump. Not a rally where spring prices exceed last spring prices, but an INCREASE in activity because that is typical of seasonal cycles regardless of the secular trend. To expect otherwise would indeed be illogical. Does it signify a change in direction? Not at all, but my interpretation of sdrs posts didn’t detect that at all. I am not saying a million midwesterners are gonna relocate here or anything like that. I am just saying that overall data ALWAYS SHOWS that there are more sales closed in the months of march, april, may and june then any other months. Back out those timeframes by 30 days (typical escrow length) and that would indicate that if there is anytime of the year that we see increases in homes going into escrow it is in the spring.
It is not a trend reversal nor is it being bullish. It is simply a statement of fact that there are always more closed escrows in the spring then any other time of year.
Why is that interpreted as being a bull? All secular markets have cyclical components last I checked. These increases do not mean a stalling of the depreciation cycle but they may serve to do a small amount of buoying in certain areas. It will fade as we move into summer…
SD Realtor
ParticipantOne thing that I find intriguing is that whenever I post something, invariably very few people interpret what I am writing in the same manner as I thought they would when I posted it….
I read sdr’s post and I don’t view it as being bullish so I guess you guys would paint me in black and white stripes and label me a bad guy… I view his posts in the same manner as my own, that is, I do not see bullishness or denial of a bull market. Rather the contrary…I also do see the same thing that he has said, that the zip codes here in question are going down and have gone down for awhile now. Have these zips fallen in the same manner or at the same rate as say Eastlake? No… can they? Perhaps. Will it happen in a few weeks time? No it will not.
I also would forecast a spring bump. Not a rally where spring prices exceed last spring prices, but an INCREASE in activity because that is typical of seasonal cycles regardless of the secular trend. To expect otherwise would indeed be illogical. Does it signify a change in direction? Not at all, but my interpretation of sdrs posts didn’t detect that at all. I am not saying a million midwesterners are gonna relocate here or anything like that. I am just saying that overall data ALWAYS SHOWS that there are more sales closed in the months of march, april, may and june then any other months. Back out those timeframes by 30 days (typical escrow length) and that would indicate that if there is anytime of the year that we see increases in homes going into escrow it is in the spring.
It is not a trend reversal nor is it being bullish. It is simply a statement of fact that there are always more closed escrows in the spring then any other time of year.
Why is that interpreted as being a bull? All secular markets have cyclical components last I checked. These increases do not mean a stalling of the depreciation cycle but they may serve to do a small amount of buoying in certain areas. It will fade as we move into summer…
SD Realtor
ParticipantOne thing that I find intriguing is that whenever I post something, invariably very few people interpret what I am writing in the same manner as I thought they would when I posted it….
I read sdr’s post and I don’t view it as being bullish so I guess you guys would paint me in black and white stripes and label me a bad guy… I view his posts in the same manner as my own, that is, I do not see bullishness or denial of a bull market. Rather the contrary…I also do see the same thing that he has said, that the zip codes here in question are going down and have gone down for awhile now. Have these zips fallen in the same manner or at the same rate as say Eastlake? No… can they? Perhaps. Will it happen in a few weeks time? No it will not.
I also would forecast a spring bump. Not a rally where spring prices exceed last spring prices, but an INCREASE in activity because that is typical of seasonal cycles regardless of the secular trend. To expect otherwise would indeed be illogical. Does it signify a change in direction? Not at all, but my interpretation of sdrs posts didn’t detect that at all. I am not saying a million midwesterners are gonna relocate here or anything like that. I am just saying that overall data ALWAYS SHOWS that there are more sales closed in the months of march, april, may and june then any other months. Back out those timeframes by 30 days (typical escrow length) and that would indicate that if there is anytime of the year that we see increases in homes going into escrow it is in the spring.
It is not a trend reversal nor is it being bullish. It is simply a statement of fact that there are always more closed escrows in the spring then any other time of year.
Why is that interpreted as being a bull? All secular markets have cyclical components last I checked. These increases do not mean a stalling of the depreciation cycle but they may serve to do a small amount of buoying in certain areas. It will fade as we move into summer…
SD Realtor
ParticipantOne thing that I find intriguing is that whenever I post something, invariably very few people interpret what I am writing in the same manner as I thought they would when I posted it….
I read sdr’s post and I don’t view it as being bullish so I guess you guys would paint me in black and white stripes and label me a bad guy… I view his posts in the same manner as my own, that is, I do not see bullishness or denial of a bull market. Rather the contrary…I also do see the same thing that he has said, that the zip codes here in question are going down and have gone down for awhile now. Have these zips fallen in the same manner or at the same rate as say Eastlake? No… can they? Perhaps. Will it happen in a few weeks time? No it will not.
I also would forecast a spring bump. Not a rally where spring prices exceed last spring prices, but an INCREASE in activity because that is typical of seasonal cycles regardless of the secular trend. To expect otherwise would indeed be illogical. Does it signify a change in direction? Not at all, but my interpretation of sdrs posts didn’t detect that at all. I am not saying a million midwesterners are gonna relocate here or anything like that. I am just saying that overall data ALWAYS SHOWS that there are more sales closed in the months of march, april, may and june then any other months. Back out those timeframes by 30 days (typical escrow length) and that would indicate that if there is anytime of the year that we see increases in homes going into escrow it is in the spring.
It is not a trend reversal nor is it being bullish. It is simply a statement of fact that there are always more closed escrows in the spring then any other time of year.
Why is that interpreted as being a bull? All secular markets have cyclical components last I checked. These increases do not mean a stalling of the depreciation cycle but they may serve to do a small amount of buoying in certain areas. It will fade as we move into summer…
SD Realtor
ParticipantGood lively postings…. of course I am right and you guys are all poo poo heads!
Seriously though, I am not by any means challenging the legality of the contracts nor that they do lie at the hands of the lender.
If I may be more constructive then… if we look forward rather then backwards, how then can we implement some sort of reform such that it will then reduce rampant speculation, as well as further obligate those who undertake the risk of buying a home so that we can
a) reduce fraud, speculation, and other ugly artifacts of what we have seen occur in this runup
b) much more important in my book, further delineate home ownership from asset investmentMy belief is not that eradicating non recourse will solve the problem and my apologies for not conveying it properly. However I feel that it would be a helpful step. No doubt adding curbs, regulation to the lending and institutional side of the equation will be most helpful.
SD Realtor
I do still hold my ground that more responsibility should be bourne by the buyer but I am just being a stubborn cuss and adding this in to get the last word
ParticipantGood lively postings…. of course I am right and you guys are all poo poo heads!
Seriously though, I am not by any means challenging the legality of the contracts nor that they do lie at the hands of the lender.
If I may be more constructive then… if we look forward rather then backwards, how then can we implement some sort of reform such that it will then reduce rampant speculation, as well as further obligate those who undertake the risk of buying a home so that we can
a) reduce fraud, speculation, and other ugly artifacts of what we have seen occur in this runup
b) much more important in my book, further delineate home ownership from asset investmentMy belief is not that eradicating non recourse will solve the problem and my apologies for not conveying it properly. However I feel that it would be a helpful step. No doubt adding curbs, regulation to the lending and institutional side of the equation will be most helpful.
SD Realtor
I do still hold my ground that more responsibility should be bourne by the buyer but I am just being a stubborn cuss and adding this in to get the last word
ParticipantGood lively postings…. of course I am right and you guys are all poo poo heads!
Seriously though, I am not by any means challenging the legality of the contracts nor that they do lie at the hands of the lender.
If I may be more constructive then… if we look forward rather then backwards, how then can we implement some sort of reform such that it will then reduce rampant speculation, as well as further obligate those who undertake the risk of buying a home so that we can
a) reduce fraud, speculation, and other ugly artifacts of what we have seen occur in this runup
b) much more important in my book, further delineate home ownership from asset investmentMy belief is not that eradicating non recourse will solve the problem and my apologies for not conveying it properly. However I feel that it would be a helpful step. No doubt adding curbs, regulation to the lending and institutional side of the equation will be most helpful.
SD Realtor
I do still hold my ground that more responsibility should be bourne by the buyer but I am just being a stubborn cuss and adding this in to get the last word
ParticipantGood lively postings…. of course I am right and you guys are all poo poo heads!
Seriously though, I am not by any means challenging the legality of the contracts nor that they do lie at the hands of the lender.
If I may be more constructive then… if we look forward rather then backwards, how then can we implement some sort of reform such that it will then reduce rampant speculation, as well as further obligate those who undertake the risk of buying a home so that we can
a) reduce fraud, speculation, and other ugly artifacts of what we have seen occur in this runup
b) much more important in my book, further delineate home ownership from asset investmentMy belief is not that eradicating non recourse will solve the problem and my apologies for not conveying it properly. However I feel that it would be a helpful step. No doubt adding curbs, regulation to the lending and institutional side of the equation will be most helpful.
SD Realtor
I do still hold my ground that more responsibility should be bourne by the buyer but I am just being a stubborn cuss and adding this in to get the last word
ParticipantGood lively postings…. of course I am right and you guys are all poo poo heads!
Seriously though, I am not by any means challenging the legality of the contracts nor that they do lie at the hands of the lender.
If I may be more constructive then… if we look forward rather then backwards, how then can we implement some sort of reform such that it will then reduce rampant speculation, as well as further obligate those who undertake the risk of buying a home so that we can
a) reduce fraud, speculation, and other ugly artifacts of what we have seen occur in this runup
b) much more important in my book, further delineate home ownership from asset investmentMy belief is not that eradicating non recourse will solve the problem and my apologies for not conveying it properly. However I feel that it would be a helpful step. No doubt adding curbs, regulation to the lending and institutional side of the equation will be most helpful.
SD Realtor
I do still hold my ground that more responsibility should be bourne by the buyer but I am just being a stubborn cuss and adding this in to get the last word
Participantsavedbypigs and others,
Fair enough about the intent of the nonrecourse loan. I can easily admit I am (or may be incorrect) about the intent of a non recourse loan.
However inherent in that definition of the nonrecourse loan is the catalyst for creating a mindset that will indeed reduce the obligation that is inherent in owning a home. Look I am an engineer. If one line of code is screwed up in an ASIC design that can cost my company 6 figures. They may have to run a new mask set, it will delay production, it will affect other people. There is a pride that comes with doing the job and being AFRAID of screwing it up. If I didn’t have that fear, if the ramifications were not as they were, I would perform in a sloppier manner.
I know the above is a poor analogy however my point is that the existence of the non recourse loan creates a hierarchy of trust that can and has failed. As noted above it is incumbent upon the creditor to ensure that the collateral protecting the obligation is sufficient.
Geez!
They don’t even have a clue of the net worth of many of these CDO bundles. They run simulations and models to guesstimate it. The ratings agencies, underwriting standards, appraisal processes… the entire structure with which is needed and the LENDERS RELY ON to “ensure the collateral protecting the obligation” has withered in the face of a rampant speculative bubble.
When we have well educated people posting on the internet that they will do much better by simply walking away from the loan, then to me that is a harbinger that perhaps the next time around we need to redesign the process. Yes he is exercising his legal right but maybe the next time around, if that right didn’t exist then maybe he would not have jumped into the game to begin with.
SD Realtor
Participantsavedbypigs and others,
Fair enough about the intent of the nonrecourse loan. I can easily admit I am (or may be incorrect) about the intent of a non recourse loan.
However inherent in that definition of the nonrecourse loan is the catalyst for creating a mindset that will indeed reduce the obligation that is inherent in owning a home. Look I am an engineer. If one line of code is screwed up in an ASIC design that can cost my company 6 figures. They may have to run a new mask set, it will delay production, it will affect other people. There is a pride that comes with doing the job and being AFRAID of screwing it up. If I didn’t have that fear, if the ramifications were not as they were, I would perform in a sloppier manner.
I know the above is a poor analogy however my point is that the existence of the non recourse loan creates a hierarchy of trust that can and has failed. As noted above it is incumbent upon the creditor to ensure that the collateral protecting the obligation is sufficient.
Geez!
They don’t even have a clue of the net worth of many of these CDO bundles. They run simulations and models to guesstimate it. The ratings agencies, underwriting standards, appraisal processes… the entire structure with which is needed and the LENDERS RELY ON to “ensure the collateral protecting the obligation” has withered in the face of a rampant speculative bubble.
When we have well educated people posting on the internet that they will do much better by simply walking away from the loan, then to me that is a harbinger that perhaps the next time around we need to redesign the process. Yes he is exercising his legal right but maybe the next time around, if that right didn’t exist then maybe he would not have jumped into the game to begin with.
SD Realtor
Participantsavedbypigs and others,
Fair enough about the intent of the nonrecourse loan. I can easily admit I am (or may be incorrect) about the intent of a non recourse loan.
However inherent in that definition of the nonrecourse loan is the catalyst for creating a mindset that will indeed reduce the obligation that is inherent in owning a home. Look I am an engineer. If one line of code is screwed up in an ASIC design that can cost my company 6 figures. They may have to run a new mask set, it will delay production, it will affect other people. There is a pride that comes with doing the job and being AFRAID of screwing it up. If I didn’t have that fear, if the ramifications were not as they were, I would perform in a sloppier manner.
I know the above is a poor analogy however my point is that the existence of the non recourse loan creates a hierarchy of trust that can and has failed. As noted above it is incumbent upon the creditor to ensure that the collateral protecting the obligation is sufficient.
Geez!
They don’t even have a clue of the net worth of many of these CDO bundles. They run simulations and models to guesstimate it. The ratings agencies, underwriting standards, appraisal processes… the entire structure with which is needed and the LENDERS RELY ON to “ensure the collateral protecting the obligation” has withered in the face of a rampant speculative bubble.
When we have well educated people posting on the internet that they will do much better by simply walking away from the loan, then to me that is a harbinger that perhaps the next time around we need to redesign the process. Yes he is exercising his legal right but maybe the next time around, if that right didn’t exist then maybe he would not have jumped into the game to begin with.
SD Realtor
Participantsavedbypigs and others,
Fair enough about the intent of the nonrecourse loan. I can easily admit I am (or may be incorrect) about the intent of a non recourse loan.
However inherent in that definition of the nonrecourse loan is the catalyst for creating a mindset that will indeed reduce the obligation that is inherent in owning a home. Look I am an engineer. If one line of code is screwed up in an ASIC design that can cost my company 6 figures. They may have to run a new mask set, it will delay production, it will affect other people. There is a pride that comes with doing the job and being AFRAID of screwing it up. If I didn’t have that fear, if the ramifications were not as they were, I would perform in a sloppier manner.
I know the above is a poor analogy however my point is that the existence of the non recourse loan creates a hierarchy of trust that can and has failed. As noted above it is incumbent upon the creditor to ensure that the collateral protecting the obligation is sufficient.
Geez!
They don’t even have a clue of the net worth of many of these CDO bundles. They run simulations and models to guesstimate it. The ratings agencies, underwriting standards, appraisal processes… the entire structure with which is needed and the LENDERS RELY ON to “ensure the collateral protecting the obligation” has withered in the face of a rampant speculative bubble.
When we have well educated people posting on the internet that they will do much better by simply walking away from the loan, then to me that is a harbinger that perhaps the next time around we need to redesign the process. Yes he is exercising his legal right but maybe the next time around, if that right didn’t exist then maybe he would not have jumped into the game to begin with.
SD Realtor
Participantsavedbypigs and others,
Fair enough about the intent of the nonrecourse loan. I can easily admit I am (or may be incorrect) about the intent of a non recourse loan.
However inherent in that definition of the nonrecourse loan is the catalyst for creating a mindset that will indeed reduce the obligation that is inherent in owning a home. Look I am an engineer. If one line of code is screwed up in an ASIC design that can cost my company 6 figures. They may have to run a new mask set, it will delay production, it will affect other people. There is a pride that comes with doing the job and being AFRAID of screwing it up. If I didn’t have that fear, if the ramifications were not as they were, I would perform in a sloppier manner.
I know the above is a poor analogy however my point is that the existence of the non recourse loan creates a hierarchy of trust that can and has failed. As noted above it is incumbent upon the creditor to ensure that the collateral protecting the obligation is sufficient.
Geez!
They don’t even have a clue of the net worth of many of these CDO bundles. They run simulations and models to guesstimate it. The ratings agencies, underwriting standards, appraisal processes… the entire structure with which is needed and the LENDERS RELY ON to “ensure the collateral protecting the obligation” has withered in the face of a rampant speculative bubble.
When we have well educated people posting on the internet that they will do much better by simply walking away from the loan, then to me that is a harbinger that perhaps the next time around we need to redesign the process. Yes he is exercising his legal right but maybe the next time around, if that right didn’t exist then maybe he would not have jumped into the game to begin with.
SD Realtor
-
AuthorPosts
