Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
temeculaguy
ParticipantI don’t like that article for two reasons.
1. I believe that shadow inventory is bank owned homes being kept off the market. Extending it to homeowners who would like to sell, aren’t distressed but choose to not sell in this market, that has always existed, in more places than housing, that’s just buyer/seller sentiment. I also see significantly less brown lawn vacants that have already been taken back by banks just sitting forever unlisted, everyone that I stalked for nearly three years, did list and sell eventually, time lines varied, but now the brown lawns are so much more scarce in my hood than they were two years ago or a year ago. You can say it is a local thing but bank/governemnt conspiracy theories make no mention of zip code bias so I can extend my local research to the broader market on this issue.
2. using the foreclosure radar or other service to compare active listings and the total hits from the pay site, in the example it was 4 to 1 (1600 hits to 400 something listings). We’ve had this argument about the differences of the pay sites, their protocols, their stale and orphaned data and the vast differencs between the sites. Bad data leads to bad conclusions. The one consiracy theory I do believe is that pay sites exaggerate their data.
Maybe everything else is correct, I don’t know but once I see an argument based on something I have personally fact checked and disproved, I tend to ignore the rest. I’m silly that way
One other observation, while I know people who have lasted a long time not paying or gaming the system and playing the loan mod/short sale extendo game, I’ve also seen people get tossed quickly or at least the traditional timeline, it may have to do with who the servicer is and how good or backed up they are. We had a poster a few weeks back wanting to know if there was any recourse for their friend who was getting tossed in something like 3 months and felt cheated that he didn’t get the free 18 months he hears about.
ParticipantI don’t like that article for two reasons.
1. I believe that shadow inventory is bank owned homes being kept off the market. Extending it to homeowners who would like to sell, aren’t distressed but choose to not sell in this market, that has always existed, in more places than housing, that’s just buyer/seller sentiment. I also see significantly less brown lawn vacants that have already been taken back by banks just sitting forever unlisted, everyone that I stalked for nearly three years, did list and sell eventually, time lines varied, but now the brown lawns are so much more scarce in my hood than they were two years ago or a year ago. You can say it is a local thing but bank/governemnt conspiracy theories make no mention of zip code bias so I can extend my local research to the broader market on this issue.
2. using the foreclosure radar or other service to compare active listings and the total hits from the pay site, in the example it was 4 to 1 (1600 hits to 400 something listings). We’ve had this argument about the differences of the pay sites, their protocols, their stale and orphaned data and the vast differencs between the sites. Bad data leads to bad conclusions. The one consiracy theory I do believe is that pay sites exaggerate their data.
Maybe everything else is correct, I don’t know but once I see an argument based on something I have personally fact checked and disproved, I tend to ignore the rest. I’m silly that way
One other observation, while I know people who have lasted a long time not paying or gaming the system and playing the loan mod/short sale extendo game, I’ve also seen people get tossed quickly or at least the traditional timeline, it may have to do with who the servicer is and how good or backed up they are. We had a poster a few weeks back wanting to know if there was any recourse for their friend who was getting tossed in something like 3 months and felt cheated that he didn’t get the free 18 months he hears about.
ParticipantI don’t like that article for two reasons.
1. I believe that shadow inventory is bank owned homes being kept off the market. Extending it to homeowners who would like to sell, aren’t distressed but choose to not sell in this market, that has always existed, in more places than housing, that’s just buyer/seller sentiment. I also see significantly less brown lawn vacants that have already been taken back by banks just sitting forever unlisted, everyone that I stalked for nearly three years, did list and sell eventually, time lines varied, but now the brown lawns are so much more scarce in my hood than they were two years ago or a year ago. You can say it is a local thing but bank/governemnt conspiracy theories make no mention of zip code bias so I can extend my local research to the broader market on this issue.
2. using the foreclosure radar or other service to compare active listings and the total hits from the pay site, in the example it was 4 to 1 (1600 hits to 400 something listings). We’ve had this argument about the differences of the pay sites, their protocols, their stale and orphaned data and the vast differencs between the sites. Bad data leads to bad conclusions. The one consiracy theory I do believe is that pay sites exaggerate their data.
Maybe everything else is correct, I don’t know but once I see an argument based on something I have personally fact checked and disproved, I tend to ignore the rest. I’m silly that way
One other observation, while I know people who have lasted a long time not paying or gaming the system and playing the loan mod/short sale extendo game, I’ve also seen people get tossed quickly or at least the traditional timeline, it may have to do with who the servicer is and how good or backed up they are. We had a poster a few weeks back wanting to know if there was any recourse for their friend who was getting tossed in something like 3 months and felt cheated that he didn’t get the free 18 months he hears about.
Participantscaredy, I think you are experiencing a life change, perhaps middle age crazy onset. Last week it was pessimism about marriages, this week about owning nothing and the benefits of being a vagabond. From memory you have school aged kid(s)? You have no mobility, just do what the rest of us do, channel your crazy into something else, buy a harley, buy a vette, take up golf or join a gym. Worrying is a state of mind, so is fear, start working on the inside stuff before making big decisions on the outside stuff otherwise no strategy will bring hapiness.
Participantscaredy, I think you are experiencing a life change, perhaps middle age crazy onset. Last week it was pessimism about marriages, this week about owning nothing and the benefits of being a vagabond. From memory you have school aged kid(s)? You have no mobility, just do what the rest of us do, channel your crazy into something else, buy a harley, buy a vette, take up golf or join a gym. Worrying is a state of mind, so is fear, start working on the inside stuff before making big decisions on the outside stuff otherwise no strategy will bring hapiness.
Participantscaredy, I think you are experiencing a life change, perhaps middle age crazy onset. Last week it was pessimism about marriages, this week about owning nothing and the benefits of being a vagabond. From memory you have school aged kid(s)? You have no mobility, just do what the rest of us do, channel your crazy into something else, buy a harley, buy a vette, take up golf or join a gym. Worrying is a state of mind, so is fear, start working on the inside stuff before making big decisions on the outside stuff otherwise no strategy will bring hapiness.
Participantscaredy, I think you are experiencing a life change, perhaps middle age crazy onset. Last week it was pessimism about marriages, this week about owning nothing and the benefits of being a vagabond. From memory you have school aged kid(s)? You have no mobility, just do what the rest of us do, channel your crazy into something else, buy a harley, buy a vette, take up golf or join a gym. Worrying is a state of mind, so is fear, start working on the inside stuff before making big decisions on the outside stuff otherwise no strategy will bring hapiness.
Participantscaredy, I think you are experiencing a life change, perhaps middle age crazy onset. Last week it was pessimism about marriages, this week about owning nothing and the benefits of being a vagabond. From memory you have school aged kid(s)? You have no mobility, just do what the rest of us do, channel your crazy into something else, buy a harley, buy a vette, take up golf or join a gym. Worrying is a state of mind, so is fear, start working on the inside stuff before making big decisions on the outside stuff otherwise no strategy will bring hapiness.
Participanthttp://www.cnbc.com/id/32630317
diana just released an article referencing the conspiracy theories on blogs about banks sanbagging inventory. FWIW I do not believe they are sandbagging properties they have taken back already, based on my research, they sell them once they process them, however I do think they are purposely moving slow on the actual foreclosures because it pencils out better. The article points out a couple of things, that it takes a while to process a foreclosure, that their goal is to not foreclose if they can find another option and finally that the final step in the forclosure process is down about 50% in the past few months as they were waiting on yet another gov’t program. We’ve seen this happen a few times, as soon as some new program is in the pipeline, the banks hold off on the final step, then after they realize it’s mostly smoke and mirrors, they start to foreclose again.
One element the conspiracy theorists fail to adress is that most of the banks conducting the forclosures are just servicers of the loan, it isn’t their money to lose, it’s a third party investor or many third party investors. The other issue that never gets addressed is that there are many banks in competition, who would love to screw each other. If I was bank A and I could screw bank B and C out of existence by dumping all my foreclosures at once, I’d do it, so would they. But if I was bank A and I could foreclose now and lose my investors 300k or modify the loan, take in a grand less per month for the next three years, then back to full price and even tack back on the lost interest. I’d lose my investors 36k at most and probaby 10k or less if it’s the interest on the mod, I’d try that one first, because Bank A’s job isn’t to correct the market, it isn’t to decide who to reward, it isn’t to let patient and prudent people buy houses, bank A’s job is to make money or lose as little as possible.
Participanthttp://www.cnbc.com/id/32630317
diana just released an article referencing the conspiracy theories on blogs about banks sanbagging inventory. FWIW I do not believe they are sandbagging properties they have taken back already, based on my research, they sell them once they process them, however I do think they are purposely moving slow on the actual foreclosures because it pencils out better. The article points out a couple of things, that it takes a while to process a foreclosure, that their goal is to not foreclose if they can find another option and finally that the final step in the forclosure process is down about 50% in the past few months as they were waiting on yet another gov’t program. We’ve seen this happen a few times, as soon as some new program is in the pipeline, the banks hold off on the final step, then after they realize it’s mostly smoke and mirrors, they start to foreclose again.
One element the conspiracy theorists fail to adress is that most of the banks conducting the forclosures are just servicers of the loan, it isn’t their money to lose, it’s a third party investor or many third party investors. The other issue that never gets addressed is that there are many banks in competition, who would love to screw each other. If I was bank A and I could screw bank B and C out of existence by dumping all my foreclosures at once, I’d do it, so would they. But if I was bank A and I could foreclose now and lose my investors 300k or modify the loan, take in a grand less per month for the next three years, then back to full price and even tack back on the lost interest. I’d lose my investors 36k at most and probaby 10k or less if it’s the interest on the mod, I’d try that one first, because Bank A’s job isn’t to correct the market, it isn’t to decide who to reward, it isn’t to let patient and prudent people buy houses, bank A’s job is to make money or lose as little as possible.
Participanthttp://www.cnbc.com/id/32630317
diana just released an article referencing the conspiracy theories on blogs about banks sanbagging inventory. FWIW I do not believe they are sandbagging properties they have taken back already, based on my research, they sell them once they process them, however I do think they are purposely moving slow on the actual foreclosures because it pencils out better. The article points out a couple of things, that it takes a while to process a foreclosure, that their goal is to not foreclose if they can find another option and finally that the final step in the forclosure process is down about 50% in the past few months as they were waiting on yet another gov’t program. We’ve seen this happen a few times, as soon as some new program is in the pipeline, the banks hold off on the final step, then after they realize it’s mostly smoke and mirrors, they start to foreclose again.
One element the conspiracy theorists fail to adress is that most of the banks conducting the forclosures are just servicers of the loan, it isn’t their money to lose, it’s a third party investor or many third party investors. The other issue that never gets addressed is that there are many banks in competition, who would love to screw each other. If I was bank A and I could screw bank B and C out of existence by dumping all my foreclosures at once, I’d do it, so would they. But if I was bank A and I could foreclose now and lose my investors 300k or modify the loan, take in a grand less per month for the next three years, then back to full price and even tack back on the lost interest. I’d lose my investors 36k at most and probaby 10k or less if it’s the interest on the mod, I’d try that one first, because Bank A’s job isn’t to correct the market, it isn’t to decide who to reward, it isn’t to let patient and prudent people buy houses, bank A’s job is to make money or lose as little as possible.
Participanthttp://www.cnbc.com/id/32630317
diana just released an article referencing the conspiracy theories on blogs about banks sanbagging inventory. FWIW I do not believe they are sandbagging properties they have taken back already, based on my research, they sell them once they process them, however I do think they are purposely moving slow on the actual foreclosures because it pencils out better. The article points out a couple of things, that it takes a while to process a foreclosure, that their goal is to not foreclose if they can find another option and finally that the final step in the forclosure process is down about 50% in the past few months as they were waiting on yet another gov’t program. We’ve seen this happen a few times, as soon as some new program is in the pipeline, the banks hold off on the final step, then after they realize it’s mostly smoke and mirrors, they start to foreclose again.
One element the conspiracy theorists fail to adress is that most of the banks conducting the forclosures are just servicers of the loan, it isn’t their money to lose, it’s a third party investor or many third party investors. The other issue that never gets addressed is that there are many banks in competition, who would love to screw each other. If I was bank A and I could screw bank B and C out of existence by dumping all my foreclosures at once, I’d do it, so would they. But if I was bank A and I could foreclose now and lose my investors 300k or modify the loan, take in a grand less per month for the next three years, then back to full price and even tack back on the lost interest. I’d lose my investors 36k at most and probaby 10k or less if it’s the interest on the mod, I’d try that one first, because Bank A’s job isn’t to correct the market, it isn’t to decide who to reward, it isn’t to let patient and prudent people buy houses, bank A’s job is to make money or lose as little as possible.
Participanthttp://www.cnbc.com/id/32630317
diana just released an article referencing the conspiracy theories on blogs about banks sanbagging inventory. FWIW I do not believe they are sandbagging properties they have taken back already, based on my research, they sell them once they process them, however I do think they are purposely moving slow on the actual foreclosures because it pencils out better. The article points out a couple of things, that it takes a while to process a foreclosure, that their goal is to not foreclose if they can find another option and finally that the final step in the forclosure process is down about 50% in the past few months as they were waiting on yet another gov’t program. We’ve seen this happen a few times, as soon as some new program is in the pipeline, the banks hold off on the final step, then after they realize it’s mostly smoke and mirrors, they start to foreclose again.
One element the conspiracy theorists fail to adress is that most of the banks conducting the forclosures are just servicers of the loan, it isn’t their money to lose, it’s a third party investor or many third party investors. The other issue that never gets addressed is that there are many banks in competition, who would love to screw each other. If I was bank A and I could screw bank B and C out of existence by dumping all my foreclosures at once, I’d do it, so would they. But if I was bank A and I could foreclose now and lose my investors 300k or modify the loan, take in a grand less per month for the next three years, then back to full price and even tack back on the lost interest. I’d lose my investors 36k at most and probaby 10k or less if it’s the interest on the mod, I’d try that one first, because Bank A’s job isn’t to correct the market, it isn’t to decide who to reward, it isn’t to let patient and prudent people buy houses, bank A’s job is to make money or lose as little as possible.
August 31, 2009 at 11:50 AM in reply to: Banks to Flood the Markets with Foreclosures – CNBC Reports #451037ParticipantI’m torn, I agree with socratt and huckleberry and zeitegist all at the same time. I’ve heard it too many times to believe it, I’ve also seen every zig be met with a zag so likely there will be some form of intervention but I also realize that jumbo’s are not politically correct. It’s one thing to see some poor janitor and his 5 kids on the news being tossed out and everyone feeling sorry for them, but quite another for the million dollar home crowd having to load the bmw’s with all their posessions, the press would attack the gov’t if they bailed these folks out.
The only thing that doesn’t make sense is the size of the crowd that has prime jumbo loans and job losses. I’m sure there are plenty, but are there really millions? Most of the unemployed in the numbers between the good days of 5% unemployment and today’s 11% unemployment were the marginally employed and recently employed, not all but most. The demographic that takes prime jumbo’s tends to be better employed and better equipped to become re-employed, they took a hit but a smaller one thus far. Not enough for a theory, but it does raise some doubts that this comes to fruition like subprime did.
-
AuthorPosts
