From Foreclosuretruth.com (Foreclosureradar.com's blog)-There is no shadow inventory (and no politcal will to foreclose)

I just like how people say wait wait wait, FR isn't reliable because there are more REO out there that they don't list, but at the same time when it comes to debating that there are less REOs, FR is the voice of GOD.
 
[quote author="irvine_home_owner" date=1257575235]Is "shadow" the new "sex"?</blockquote>


It depends on what your definition of the word "is" is.
 
I do wonder if much of this "pre-shadow inventory" ever becomes bank owned. The banks, or the government, or whoever, are really doing a good job keeping kicking it down the road. I would have thought it would start to trickle out a little by now.



Oh, and good job to our webmaster for posting an actual example of a property that actually was shadow inventory for over a year in today's blog post. :)
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1257526695]Funny, I show the math month after month that shows the REO sales from the MLS have never kept pace with the foreclosures from DataQuick. I also know that Foreclosure Radar misses quite a few properties. I, like awgee, know of several properties that are sitting as REO from more than six months ago. Someone's data is not accurate here, and when you are focused on a more micro level vs. a macro level it is easier to study and know a micro area than it is to know a macro area. Of course there might also be some bias in hoping this is true when you have recently purchased a house, because you want this to be true. No one wants to make a mistake. Lets see how the next year pans out... who wants to bet against me?



Got jobs?</blockquote>


I think it's pretty obvious I bet against you.



How much will that .3% increase in unemployment hurt housing prices compared to the turn around and decrease of .5%? As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is moot. Corporate America seems to be doing pretty well.

<img src="http://occoastalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/unemployment.bmp" alt="" />
 
Does anyone have the latest number on what the cure rate is and how recent the update is? I have a feeling that the current cure rate is much higher than the 6.6% percent previously stated. Wellsfargo, for one, is modifying like crazy right now. One of my neighbors didn't pay her mortgage for 14 months, got two extensions, and finally 2 days before her sale date Wellsfargo washed away her backed payments and reduced her mortgage. Crazy.
 
[quote author="Geotpf" date=1257575814]I do wonder if much of this "pre-shadow inventory" ever becomes bank owned. The banks, or the government, or whoever, are really doing a good job keeping kicking it down the road. I would have thought it would start to trickle out a little by now.



Oh, and good job to our webmaster for posting an actual example of a property that actually was shadow inventory for over a year in today's blog post. :)</blockquote>


Good question.

If you want to see an example of what happens in any given week regarding trustee sales, check out <a href="http://www.cotohousingblog.com/?p=6104">www.CotoHousingBlog</a> tomorrow. Every Saturday, the CHB post the results of the scheduled trustee sales from the week. This week's post is fairly typical.



Funny thing about FR, it did not show 8 Hubbard as scheduled for suction until today, one day after the trustee sale was canceled. 8 Manchester was not shown as receiving an NOD until one week after escrow closed and the lender was paid. Nothing against FR, but no one source is accurate when dealing with all the foreclosures occuring.



I will extend my offer. If you pm me your zip code, I will send you a FR list of the REOs in your neighborhood, and you can check for yourself to see if there is shadow inventory in your neighborhood, no matter how you care to define it. I can not help by wonder why you do not want to know first hand.
 
[quote author="awgee" date=1257576303][quote author="Geotpf" date=1257575814]I do wonder if much of this "pre-shadow inventory" ever becomes bank owned. The banks, or the government, or whoever, are really doing a good job keeping kicking it down the road. I would have thought it would start to trickle out a little by now.



Oh, and good job to our webmaster for posting an actual example of a property that actually was shadow inventory for over a year in today's blog post. :)</blockquote>


Good question.

If you want to see an example of what happens in any given week regarding trustee sales, check out www.CotoHousingBlog tomorrow. Every Saturday, the CHB post the results of the scheduled trustee sales from the week. This week's post is fairly typical.



Funny thing about FR, it did not show 8 Hubbard as scheduled for suction until today, one day after the trustee sale was canceled. 8 Manchester was not shown as receiving an NOD until one week after escrow closed and the lender was paid. Nothing against FR, but no one source is accurate when dealing with all the foreclosures occuring.



I will extend my offer. If you pm me your zip code, I will send you a FR list of the REOs in your neighborhood, and you can check for yourself to see if there is shadow inventory in your neighborhood, no matter how you care to define it. I can not help by wonder why you do not want to know first hand.</blockquote>


I DID! And, it turned out to be one of the most heated and active threads I've seen. And, over 50% of the listings were incorrect.
 
[quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257575816][quote author="graphrix" date=1257526695]Funny, I show the math month after month that shows the REO sales from the MLS have never kept pace with the foreclosures from DataQuick. I also know that Foreclosure Radar misses quite a few properties. I, like awgee, know of several properties that are sitting as REO from more than six months ago. Someone's data is not accurate here, and when you are focused on a more micro level vs. a macro level it is easier to study and know a micro area than it is to know a macro area. Of course there might also be some bias in hoping this is true when you have recently purchased a house, because you want this to be true. No one wants to make a mistake. Lets see how the next year pans out... who wants to bet against me?



Got jobs?</blockquote>


I think it's pretty obvious I bet against you.



How much will that .3% increase in unemployment hurt housing prices compared to the turn around and decrease of .5%? As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is mute. Corporate America seems to be doing pretty well.

<img src="http://occoastalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/unemployment.bmp" alt="" /></blockquote>


First, the unemployment projections you posted are LUDICROUS. I knoe economics isn't your thing, but seriously, do you even read the news. If so, you may have caught the huge planned layoff numbers. Keep in mind that we are in the holiday seasons. January is typically a big month for firing seasonal workers. Combined with structural problems across multiple sectors (autos, commercial construction, retail), there is no f'ing way unemployment comes down in 2010.



Second, the word id Moot not mute.



Third, how the Hell do you come to the conclusion that corporate america is doing well? Oh, I guess the net income upside earnings surprised predicated on "productivity gains" (read: layoffs) have you convinced. I would suggest taking a look at top line revenue, than overlay GDP growth minus government stimulus, then run your new earnings projections. Thats how the big boys (Grantham, Gross, Doll etc,) are looking at things, and the future is ugly.
 
[quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257575816][quote author="graphrix" date=1257526695]Funny, I show the math month after month that shows the REO sales from the MLS have never kept pace with the foreclosures from DataQuick. I also know that Foreclosure Radar misses quite a few properties. I, like awgee, know of several properties that are sitting as REO from more than six months ago. Someone's data is not accurate here, and when you are focused on a more micro level vs. a macro level it is easier to study and know a micro area than it is to know a macro area. Of course there might also be some bias in hoping this is true when you have recently purchased a house, because you want this to be true. No one wants to make a mistake. Lets see how the next year pans out... who wants to bet against me?



Got jobs?</blockquote>


I think it's pretty obvious I bet against you.



How much will that .3% increase in unemployment hurt housing prices compared to the turn around and decrease of .5%? As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is mute. Corporate America seems to be doing pretty well.

<img src="http://occoastalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/unemployment.bmp" alt="" /></blockquote>


Are you high? 10% is doing pretty well? Are you on crack? That is double what it was in 2005 and we have more housing stock now. Fine you bet against me. One year from now, I bet the housing market will be doing worse or still flat and stagnant as it is now. Under 3000 sales is stagnant. What is your bet $100, or how about $1000? Either way you won't take it because you know you are wrong. You don't have the balls to do it because you know that my experience is better than your little over one year but failed economics experience.



Seriously, your chart is laughable. Never, not once in your life time have <strong>you</strong> ever seen double digit unemployment rates. For you to say that corporate America is doing pretty well just shows how naive you really are. In fact, it really is just ignorant.



And your math is bad. 9.8 - 10.2 = 0.04/9.8 = a 4% increase, it is not .3%. Talking about the BPS increase is useless and anyone who has taken statistics/econ knows this. You did take econ 101 at USC, didn't you?



Looking good Ricky Bobby junior, looking really good.
 
[quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257575816] As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is <strong>mute</strong>. </blockquote>


And I thought the permabulls just weren't listening. ;-P
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1257597393][quote author="RoLar_" date=1257575816][quote author="graphrix" date=1257526695]Funny, I show the math month after month that shows the REO sales from the MLS have never kept pace with the foreclosures from DataQuick. I also know that Foreclosure Radar misses quite a few properties. I, like awgee, know of several properties that are sitting as REO from more than six months ago. Someone's data is not accurate here, and when you are focused on a more micro level vs. a macro level it is easier to study and know a micro area than it is to know a macro area. Of course there might also be some bias in hoping this is true when you have recently purchased a house, because you want this to be true. No one wants to make a mistake. Lets see how the next year pans out... who wants to bet against me?



Got jobs?</blockquote>


I think it's pretty obvious I bet against you.



How much will that .3% increase in unemployment hurt housing prices compared to the turn around and decrease of .5%? As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is mute. Corporate America seems to be doing pretty well.

<img src="http://occoastalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/unemployment.bmp" alt="" /></blockquote>


Are you high? 10% is doing pretty well? Are you on crack? That is double what it was in 2005 and we have more housing stock now. Fine you bet against me. One year from now, I bet the housing market will be doing worse or still flat and stagnant as it is now. Under 3000 sales is stagnant. What is your bet $100, or how about $1000? Either way you won't take it because you know you are wrong. You don't have the balls to do it because you know that my experience is better than your little over one year but failed economics experience.



Seriously, your chart is laughable. Never, not once in your life time have <strong>you</strong> ever seen double digit unemployment rates. For you to say that corporate America is doing pretty well just shows how naive you really are. In fact, it really is just ignorant.



And your math is bad. 9.8 - 10.2 = 0.04/9.8 = a 4% increase, it is not .3%. Talking about the BPS increase is useless and anyone who has taken statistics/econ knows this. You did take econ 101 at USC, didn't you?



Looking good Ricky Bobby junior, looking really good.</blockquote>


Hey genius... keep up here... 10.1 - 9.8 = ????



Break out the calculator...



What was GDP? What is expected GDP? Stock market have rebounded quite nicely and support continues to hold. Are earnings not a indication of success? Have the reports on the financial sector and now the tech sector not been better than expected?



Professional and business sectors already adding jobs, temporary employment, which generally precedes broader hiring, increased by almost 34,000.



Even calculated risk's cited article states: "Most economists predict that the rate will in fact begin to fall next year, largely because of the federal government?s aggressive response ? fiscal stimulus, interest-rate cuts and a variety of creative steps by the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department. Friday?s report showed that monthly job losses continued to slow recently, though the improvement has been gradual. " - So that's give 2, max 3 quarters of slight increases in unemployment.



"The Bureau of Labor Statistics also revised its August and September unemployment numbers to reflect that 91,000 fewer jobs were lost over those two months than first reported." - I'm confused, is that positive or negative?



The best part about your post is your comment is how your bet has changed to 2 out of the 3 possible forcasts. At first, "I'm graphy, I'm so smart and everyone else is dumb, I bet the RE market will be worse in a year." NOW!! It's "I'm still right, but but but... I bet it the market will be worse or the flat..."



Next comment out of this child's mouth, "I'm smart, and I need to make sure I tell myself that in every post, and I bet the RE market will be worse or flat or slightly better!" HAHAHA



Child Please
 
[quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257603271][quote author="graphrix" date=1257597393][quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257575816][quote author="graphrix" date=1257526695]Funny, I show the math month after month that shows the REO sales from the MLS have never kept pace with the foreclosures from DataQuick. I also know that Foreclosure Radar misses quite a few properties. I, like awgee, know of several properties that are sitting as REO from more than six months ago. Someone's data is not accurate here, and when you are focused on a more micro level vs. a macro level it is easier to study and know a micro area than it is to know a macro area. Of course there might also be some bias in hoping this is true when you have recently purchased a house, because you want this to be true. No one wants to make a mistake. Lets see how the next year pans out... who wants to bet against me?



Got jobs?</blockquote>


I think it's pretty obvious I bet against you.



How much will that .3% increase in unemployment hurt housing prices compared to the turn around and decrease of .5%? As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is mute. Corporate America seems to be doing pretty well.

<img src="http://occoastalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/unemployment.bmp" alt="" /></blockquote>


Are you high? 10% is doing pretty well? Are you on crack? That is double what it was in 2005 and we have more housing stock now. Fine you bet against me. One year from now, I bet the housing market will be doing worse or still flat and stagnant as it is now. Under 3000 sales is stagnant. What is your bet $100, or how about $1000? Either way you won't take it because you know you are wrong. You don't have the balls to do it because you know that my experience is better than your little over one year but failed economics experience.



Seriously, your chart is laughable. Never, not once in your life time have <strong>you</strong> ever seen double digit unemployment rates. For you to say that corporate America is doing pretty well just shows how naive you really are. In fact, it really is just ignorant.



And your math is bad. 9.8 - 10.2 = 0.04/9.8 = a 4% increase, it is not .3%. Talking about the BPS increase is useless and anyone who has taken statistics/econ knows this. You did take econ 101 at USC, didn't you?



Looking good Ricky Bobby junior, looking really good.</blockquote>


Hey genious... keep up here... 10.1 - 9.8 = ????</blockquote>


Oh, the irony. ROFLMAO. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
[quote author="Sunshine" date=1257603854][quote author="RoLar_" date=1257603271][quote author="graphrix" date=1257597393][quote author="RoLar_" date=1257575816][quote author="graphrix" date=1257526695]Funny, I show the math month after month that shows the REO sales from the MLS have never kept pace with the foreclosures from DataQuick. I also know that Foreclosure Radar misses quite a few properties. I, like awgee, know of several properties that are sitting as REO from more than six months ago. Someone's data is not accurate here, and when you are focused on a more micro level vs. a macro level it is easier to study and know a micro area than it is to know a macro area. Of course there might also be some bias in hoping this is true when you have recently purchased a house, because you want this to be true. No one wants to make a mistake. Lets see how the next year pans out... who wants to bet against me?



Got jobs?</blockquote>


I think it's pretty obvious I bet against you.



How much will that .3% increase in unemployment hurt housing prices compared to the turn around and decrease of .5%? As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is mute. Corporate America seems to be doing pretty well.

<img src="http://occoastalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/unemployment.bmp" alt="" /></blockquote>


Are you high? 10% is doing pretty well? Are you on crack? That is double what it was in 2005 and we have more housing stock now. Fine you bet against me. One year from now, I bet the housing market will be doing worse or still flat and stagnant as it is now. Under 3000 sales is stagnant. What is your bet $100, or how about $1000? Either way you won't take it because you know you are wrong. You don't have the balls to do it because you know that my experience is better than your little over one year but failed economics experience.



Seriously, your chart is laughable. Never, not once in your life time have <strong>you</strong> ever seen double digit unemployment rates. For you to say that corporate America is doing pretty well just shows how naive you really are. In fact, it really is just ignorant.



And your math is bad. 9.8 - 10.2 = 0.04/9.8 = a 4% increase, it is not .3%. Talking about the BPS increase is useless and anyone who has taken statistics/econ knows this. You did take econ 101 at USC, didn't you?



Looking good Ricky Bobby junior, looking really good.</blockquote>


Hey genius... keep up here... 10.1 - 9.8 = ????</blockquote>


Oh, the irony. ROFLMAO. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:</blockquote>


Geez, I really need to re-read I guess and spell check... I thought this was just a blog.. But, I guess if that's all you got, I'm fine with that
 
And, I'm still confused... Unemployment is still expected to turn around next year and the housing market this year has been able to withstand larger increases in unemployment than are forecast for next year. So.. what's going to happen to the housing market once unemployment stabilizes, given that the housing market has withstood the increases of unemployment this past year? Let me guess, Shadow Inventory?



Or are we saying that unemployment doesn't stabilize next year?
 
[quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257603271][quote author="graphrix" date=1257597393][quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257575816][quote author="graphrix" date=1257526695]Funny, I show the math month after month that shows the REO sales from the MLS have never kept pace with the foreclosures from DataQuick. I also know that Foreclosure Radar misses quite a few properties. I, like awgee, know of several properties that are sitting as REO from more than six months ago. Someone's data is not accurate here, and when you are focused on a more micro level vs. a macro level it is easier to study and know a micro area than it is to know a macro area. Of course there might also be some bias in hoping this is true when you have recently purchased a house, because you want this to be true. No one wants to make a mistake. Lets see how the next year pans out... who wants to bet against me?



Got jobs?</blockquote>


I think it's pretty obvious I bet against you.



How much will that .3% increase in unemployment hurt housing prices compared to the turn around and decrease of .5%? As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is mute. Corporate America seems to be doing pretty well. </blockquote>


Are you high? 10% is doing pretty well? Are you on crack? That is double what it was in 2005 and we have more housing stock now. Fine you bet against me. One year from now, I bet the housing market will be doing worse or still flat and stagnant as it is now. Under 3000 sales is stagnant. What is your bet $100, or how about $1000? Either way you won't take it because you know you are wrong. You don't have the balls to do it because you know that my experience is better than your little over one year but failed economics experience.



Seriously, your chart is laughable. Never, not once in your life time have <strong>you</strong> ever seen double digit unemployment rates. For you to say that corporate America is doing pretty well just shows how naive you really are. In fact, it really is just ignorant.



And your math is bad. 9.8 - 10.2 = 0.04/9.8 = a 4% increase, it is not .3%. Talking about the BPS increase is useless and anyone who has taken statistics/econ knows this. You did take econ 101 at USC, didn't you?



Looking good Ricky Bobby junior, looking really good.</blockquote>


Hey genious... keep up here... 10.1 - 9.8 = ????



Break out the calculator... </blockquote>


I hope you brought your calculater to class, too. Graph used the wrong % when he wrote out the problem (10.2 instead of 10.1), and he typed .04 instead of .4, but his math was correct. That is, 10.2 - 9.8 = .4/9.8 = a 4% increase. You apparently need a lesson in calculating percentages. 10.1 - 9.8 = a .3 change, not a .3 <strong>percent</strong> increase from month to month.
 
[quote author="Sunshine" date=1257606709][quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257603271][quote author="graphrix" date=1257597393][quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257575816][quote author="graphrix" date=1257526695]Funny, I show the math month after month that shows the REO sales from the MLS have never kept pace with the foreclosures from DataQuick. I also know that Foreclosure Radar misses quite a few properties. I, like awgee, know of several properties that are sitting as REO from more than six months ago. Someone's data is not accurate here, and when you are focused on a more micro level vs. a macro level it is easier to study and know a micro area than it is to know a macro area. Of course there might also be some bias in hoping this is true when you have recently purchased a house, because you want this to be true. No one wants to make a mistake. Lets see how the next year pans out... who wants to bet against me?



Got jobs?</blockquote>


I think it's pretty obvious I bet against you.



How much will that .3% increase in unemployment hurt housing prices compared to the turn around and decrease of .5%? As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is mute. Corporate America seems to be doing pretty well. </blockquote>


Are you high? 10% is doing pretty well? Are you on crack? That is double what it was in 2005 and we have more housing stock now. Fine you bet against me. One year from now, I bet the housing market will be doing worse or still flat and stagnant as it is now. Under 3000 sales is stagnant. What is your bet $100, or how about $1000? Either way you won't take it because you know you are wrong. You don't have the balls to do it because you know that my experience is better than your little over one year but failed economics experience.



Seriously, your chart is laughable. Never, not once in your life time have <strong>you</strong> ever seen double digit unemployment rates. For you to say that corporate America is doing pretty well just shows how naive you really are. In fact, it really is just ignorant.



And your math is bad. 9.8 - 10.2 = 0.04/9.8 = a 4% increase, it is not .3%. Talking about the BPS increase is useless and anyone who has taken statistics/econ knows this. You did take econ 101 at USC, didn't you?



Looking good Ricky Bobby junior, looking really good.</blockquote>


Hey genious... keep up here... 10.1 - 9.8 = ????



Break out the calculator... </blockquote>


I hope you brought your calculater to class, too. Graph used the wrong % when he wrote out the problem (10.2 instead of 10.1), and he typed .04 instead of .4, but his math was correct. That is, 10.2 - 9.8 = .4/9.8 = a 4% increase. You apparently need a lesson in calculating percentages. 10.1 - 9.8 = a .3 change, not a .3 <strong>percent</strong> increase from month to month.</blockquote>


I was simply stating from the previous numbers an increase from 9.8% to 10.1%, an increase of .3. But, thank you for pointing out graphy's errors when trying to "correct" my math when it was just a miscommunication. Yes, a change of .3, like I said, I just labeled a value to it.
 
<strong></strong>[quote author="RoLar_USC" date=1257605588][quote author="Sunshine" date=1257603854][quote author="RoLar_" date=1257603271][quote author="graphrix" date=1257597393][quote author="RoLar_" date=1257575816][quote author="graphrix" date=1257526695]Funny, I show the math month after month that shows the REO sales from the MLS have never kept pace with the foreclosures from DataQuick. I also know that Foreclosure Radar misses quite a few properties. I, like awgee, know of several properties that are sitting as REO from more than six months ago. Someone's data is not accurate here, and when you are focused on a more micro level vs. a macro level it is easier to study and know a micro area than it is to know a macro area. Of course there might also be some bias in hoping this is true when you have recently purchased a house, because you want this to be true. No one wants to make a mistake. Lets see how the next year pans out... who wants to bet against me?



Got jobs?</blockquote>


I think it's pretty obvious I bet against you.



How much will that .3% increase in unemployment hurt housing prices compared to the turn around and decrease of .5%? As of right now, the jobs argument for the bears is mute. Corporate America seems to be doing pretty well.

<img src="http://occoastalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/unemployment.bmp" alt="" /></blockquote>


Are you high? 10% is doing pretty well? Are you on crack? That is double what it was in 2005 and we have more housing stock now. Fine you bet against me. One year from now, I bet the housing market will be doing worse or still flat and stagnant as it is now. Under 3000 sales is stagnant. What is your bet $100, or how about $1000? Either way you won't take it because you know you are wrong. You don't have the balls to do it because you know that my experience is better than your little over one year but failed economics experience.



Seriously, your chart is laughable. Never, not once in your life time have <strong>you</strong> ever seen double digit unemployment rates. For you to say that corporate America is doing pretty well just shows how naive you really are. In fact, it really is just ignorant.



And your math is bad. 9.8 - 10.2 = 0.04/9.8 = a 4% increase, it is not .3%. Talking about the BPS increase is useless and anyone who has taken statistics/econ knows this. You did take econ 101 at USC, didn't you?



Looking good Ricky Bobby junior, looking really good.</blockquote>


Hey genius... keep up here... 10.1 - 9.8 = ????</blockquote>


Oh, the irony. ROFLMAO. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:</blockquote>


Geez, I really need to re-read I guess and spell check... I thought this was just a blog.. But, I guess if that's all you got, I'm fine with that</blockquote>


Actually, I completely missed the misspelled word, which merely adds to the irony. In your arrogant haste, you failed to see -- many times -- your inability to exercise basic math skills -- the irony I first attempted to point out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top