[stansd]

I’m thinking this may just be cash management by lenders facing liquidity problems. If the loan is one their books, foreclosing means 6 months or so of no payment followed by a cash inflow upon sale of the house (complicated by lower assets on their books, but that’s more of an accounting issue). In the end, it’s more cash than is probably available now based on what they could sell the loans for in the secondary market, but their liquidity problems are short and not long term.

I’m starting to think those folks who have been saying these guys are all going bk are right. I can’t imagine a lot of economic logic in doing this, but I can imagine a lot of accounting shenanigens/trying to get better treatment when you go bk.

I’d be interested to hear the insights of others who are more knowledgeable about the industry.

Stan

[stansd]

I’m thinking this may just be cash management by lenders facing liquidity problems. If the loan is one their books, foreclosing means 6 months or so of no payment followed by a cash inflow upon sale of the house (complicated by lower assets on their books, but that’s more of an accounting issue). In the end, it’s more cash than is probably available now based on what they could sell the loans for in the secondary market, but their liquidity problems are short and not long term.

I’m starting to think those folks who have been saying these guys are all going bk are right. I can’t imagine a lot of economic logic in doing this, but I can imagine a lot of accounting shenanigens/trying to get better treatment when you go bk.

I’d be interested to hear the insights of others who are more knowledgeable about the industry.

Stan

[stansd]

I’m thinking this may just be cash management by lenders facing liquidity problems. If the loan is one their books, foreclosing means 6 months or so of no payment followed by a cash inflow upon sale of the house (complicated by lower assets on their books, but that’s more of an accounting issue). In the end, it’s more cash than is probably available now based on what they could sell the loans for in the secondary market, but their liquidity problems are short and not long term.

I’m starting to think those folks who have been saying these guys are all going bk are right. I can’t imagine a lot of economic logic in doing this, but I can imagine a lot of accounting shenanigens/trying to get better treatment when you go bk.

I’d be interested to hear the insights of others who are more knowledgeable about the industry.

Stan

[stansd]

I’m thinking this may just be cash management by lenders facing liquidity problems. If the loan is one their books, foreclosing means 6 months or so of no payment followed by a cash inflow upon sale of the house (complicated by lower assets on their books, but that’s more of an accounting issue). In the end, it’s more cash than is probably available now based on what they could sell the loans for in the secondary market, but their liquidity problems are short and not long term.

I’m starting to think those folks who have been saying these guys are all going bk are right. I can’t imagine a lot of economic logic in doing this, but I can imagine a lot of accounting shenanigens/trying to get better treatment when you go bk.

I’d be interested to hear the insights of others who are more knowledgeable about the industry.

Stan

[stansd]

I’m thinking this may just be cash management by lenders facing liquidity problems. If the loan is one their books, foreclosing means 6 months or so of no payment followed by a cash inflow upon sale of the house (complicated by lower assets on their books, but that’s more of an accounting issue). In the end, it’s more cash than is probably available now based on what they could sell the loans for in the secondary market, but their liquidity problems are short and not long term.

I’m starting to think those folks who have been saying these guys are all going bk are right. I can’t imagine a lot of economic logic in doing this, but I can imagine a lot of accounting shenanigens/trying to get better treatment when you go bk.

I’d be interested to hear the insights of others who are more knowledgeable about the industry.

Stan

[stansd]

Yep, saw that SDR, and deeply appreciate the compilation/trend it provides. Until now, I’d been assuming that % would be pretty close to the actual, but the more I think about it, the double counting may be pretty significant.

I’m wondering if there is an any easy way to determine the amount of double counting by doing a search where you look for instances of the words short sale in 2 of the three different fields, or all three? I’m thinking based on the methodology you are using that , there are only 8 unique combinations (man my statistics are rusty-took me 5 minutes to figure that out:) of words that would trigger on your search:

short sale in none of these sections
X short sale in remarks only
X short sale in confidential remarks only
X short sale in supplement only
XX short sale in remarks and confidential remarks
XX short sale in remarks and supplement
XX short sale in confidential and supplement
XXX short sale in remarks, confidential, and supplement

You would be picking up all of these using your methodology and would be double or triple counting the ones with an XX or XXX.

Easy to sit here and ask others to do work, but I would love to see how many hits you would get in the XX/XXX searches-If we subtracted that from the total you got doing things the normal way, I think it would give an indication of the true percentage.

I would love to see this just one time if you are so inclined, but regardless, I appreciate the faithful posting of the trend.

Stan

[stansd]

Yep, saw that SDR, and deeply appreciate the compilation/trend it provides. Until now, I’d been assuming that % would be pretty close to the actual, but the more I think about it, the double counting may be pretty significant.

I’m wondering if there is an any easy way to determine the amount of double counting by doing a search where you look for instances of the words short sale in 2 of the three different fields, or all three? I’m thinking based on the methodology you are using that , there are only 8 unique combinations (man my statistics are rusty-took me 5 minutes to figure that out:) of words that would trigger on your search:

short sale in none of these sections
X short sale in remarks only
X short sale in confidential remarks only
X short sale in supplement only
XX short sale in remarks and confidential remarks
XX short sale in remarks and supplement
XX short sale in confidential and supplement
XXX short sale in remarks, confidential, and supplement

You would be picking up all of these using your methodology and would be double or triple counting the ones with an XX or XXX.

Easy to sit here and ask others to do work, but I would love to see how many hits you would get in the XX/XXX searches-If we subtracted that from the total you got doing things the normal way, I think it would give an indication of the true percentage.

I would love to see this just one time if you are so inclined, but regardless, I appreciate the faithful posting of the trend.

Stan

[stansd]

Yep, saw that SDR, and deeply appreciate the compilation/trend it provides. Until now, I’d been assuming that % would be pretty close to the actual, but the more I think about it, the double counting may be pretty significant.

I’m wondering if there is an any easy way to determine the amount of double counting by doing a search where you look for instances of the words short sale in 2 of the three different fields, or all three? I’m thinking based on the methodology you are using that , there are only 8 unique combinations (man my statistics are rusty-took me 5 minutes to figure that out:) of words that would trigger on your search:

short sale in none of these sections
X short sale in remarks only
X short sale in confidential remarks only
X short sale in supplement only
XX short sale in remarks and confidential remarks
XX short sale in remarks and supplement
XX short sale in confidential and supplement
XXX short sale in remarks, confidential, and supplement

You would be picking up all of these using your methodology and would be double or triple counting the ones with an XX or XXX.

Easy to sit here and ask others to do work, but I would love to see how many hits you would get in the XX/XXX searches-If we subtracted that from the total you got doing things the normal way, I think it would give an indication of the true percentage.

I would love to see this just one time if you are so inclined, but regardless, I appreciate the faithful posting of the trend.

Stan

[stansd]

Yep, saw that SDR, and deeply appreciate the compilation/trend it provides. Until now, I’d been assuming that % would be pretty close to the actual, but the more I think about it, the double counting may be pretty significant.

I’m wondering if there is an any easy way to determine the amount of double counting by doing a search where you look for instances of the words short sale in 2 of the three different fields, or all three? I’m thinking based on the methodology you are using that , there are only 8 unique combinations (man my statistics are rusty-took me 5 minutes to figure that out:) of words that would trigger on your search:

short sale in none of these sections
X short sale in remarks only
X short sale in confidential remarks only
X short sale in supplement only
XX short sale in remarks and confidential remarks
XX short sale in remarks and supplement
XX short sale in confidential and supplement
XXX short sale in remarks, confidential, and supplement

You would be picking up all of these using your methodology and would be double or triple counting the ones with an XX or XXX.

Easy to sit here and ask others to do work, but I would love to see how many hits you would get in the XX/XXX searches-If we subtracted that from the total you got doing things the normal way, I think it would give an indication of the true percentage.

I would love to see this just one time if you are so inclined, but regardless, I appreciate the faithful posting of the trend.

Stan

[stansd]

Yep, saw that SDR, and deeply appreciate the compilation/trend it provides. Until now, I’d been assuming that % would be pretty close to the actual, but the more I think about it, the double counting may be pretty significant.

I’m wondering if there is an any easy way to determine the amount of double counting by doing a search where you look for instances of the words short sale in 2 of the three different fields, or all three? I’m thinking based on the methodology you are using that , there are only 8 unique combinations (man my statistics are rusty-took me 5 minutes to figure that out:) of words that would trigger on your search:

short sale in none of these sections
X short sale in remarks only
X short sale in confidential remarks only
X short sale in supplement only
XX short sale in remarks and confidential remarks
XX short sale in remarks and supplement
XX short sale in confidential and supplement
XXX short sale in remarks, confidential, and supplement

You would be picking up all of these using your methodology and would be double or triple counting the ones with an XX or XXX.

Easy to sit here and ask others to do work, but I would love to see how many hits you would get in the XX/XXX searches-If we subtracted that from the total you got doing things the normal way, I think it would give an indication of the true percentage.

I would love to see this just one time if you are so inclined, but regardless, I appreciate the faithful posting of the trend.

Stan

[stansd]

Dr. housing bubble posted the below in his recent post:

Heart of Foreclosure Darkness: Every County in Southern California is now Negative Year over Year.

County Percent Short Sale to Overall County Inventory
Los Angeles 5.59%
Orange County 2.80%
San Diego 8.78%
Riverside 11.19%
Ventura 3.41%
San Bernardino 6.54%

Anyone know why these percentages are so much lower than those on the short sale monitor? I know it’s only a directional trend, but I’ve been thinking SD was much higher than 9%…if not, changes my views a bit.

Stan

[stansd]

Dr. housing bubble posted the below in his recent post:

Heart of Foreclosure Darkness: Every County in Southern California is now Negative Year over Year.

County Percent Short Sale to Overall County Inventory
Los Angeles 5.59%
Orange County 2.80%
San Diego 8.78%
Riverside 11.19%
Ventura 3.41%
San Bernardino 6.54%

Anyone know why these percentages are so much lower than those on the short sale monitor? I know it’s only a directional trend, but I’ve been thinking SD was much higher than 9%…if not, changes my views a bit.

Stan

[stansd]

Dr. housing bubble posted the below in his recent post:

Heart of Foreclosure Darkness: Every County in Southern California is now Negative Year over Year.

County Percent Short Sale to Overall County Inventory
Los Angeles 5.59%
Orange County 2.80%
San Diego 8.78%
Riverside 11.19%
Ventura 3.41%
San Bernardino 6.54%

Anyone know why these percentages are so much lower than those on the short sale monitor? I know it’s only a directional trend, but I’ve been thinking SD was much higher than 9%…if not, changes my views a bit.

Stan

[stansd]

Dr. housing bubble posted the below in his recent post:

Heart of Foreclosure Darkness: Every County in Southern California is now Negative Year over Year.

County Percent Short Sale to Overall County Inventory
Los Angeles 5.59%
Orange County 2.80%
San Diego 8.78%
Riverside 11.19%
Ventura 3.41%
San Bernardino 6.54%

Anyone know why these percentages are so much lower than those on the short sale monitor? I know it’s only a directional trend, but I’ve been thinking SD was much higher than 9%…if not, changes my views a bit.

Stan

[stansd]

Dr. housing bubble posted the below in his recent post:

Heart of Foreclosure Darkness: Every County in Southern California is now Negative Year over Year.

County Percent Short Sale to Overall County Inventory
Los Angeles 5.59%
Orange County 2.80%
San Diego 8.78%
Riverside 11.19%
Ventura 3.41%
San Bernardino 6.54%

Anyone know why these percentages are so much lower than those on the short sale monitor? I know it’s only a directional trend, but I’ve been thinking SD was much higher than 9%…if not, changes my views a bit.

Stan

[Author]

Posts