Headlines...

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/business/economy/14bubble.html">Same Old Hope: This Bubble Is Different </a>



This time is different.



That?s what people argue every time a bubble inflates, and what they think every time they are chastened by its popping. But century after century, decade after decade and year after year, human beings irrationally exuberate all over again.



Not long ago, the housing bubble burst and brought the global economy to a standstill. Now economists, recognizing that bubbles tend to come in bunches, are on the lookout for the next market to fizzle. They say that governments, central banks and international bodies should scrutinize a few markets that look likely to froth over in the next few years, like capital markets in China, commodities like gold and oil, and government bonds in heavily indebted countries like the United States.



?Globally, a lot of money is now seeking higher returns once again,? said Rachel Ziemba, senior analyst at RGE Monitor. The steadying of the economy, liquidity injections by governments and big returns reaped early this year by investment banks are encouraging more traders to dip their toes back in the water in search of the next big thing.



?As long as compensation and bonuses are based on short-term performance in the market,? she said, ?that?s going to encourage risk-seeking behavior.?



Bubbles are episodes of collective human madness ? euphoria over investments whose skyrocketing values are unsustainable.



They tend to arise from perceptions of pending shortages (as happened last year, with the oil bubble); from glamorized new technologies or investment frontiers (like the dot-com bubble of the 1990s, the radio bubble of the 1920s or the multiple railroad bubbles of the 19th century); or from faddish cultural obsessions (like the Dutch tulip bubble of the 17th century, or the more recent Beanie Babies bubble).



Often they are based on legitimate expectations of high growth that are ?extrapolated into the stratosphere,? as the economist Daniel Yergin, chairman of IHS-Cambridge Energy Research Associates, put it. Such is the fear over investment in emerging markets like China.



?I?m a long-term bull on Asia, but right now it?s premature to be celebrating the ?Asian Century,? like some investors seem to be doing,? said Stephen Roach, chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia.



The Shanghai Stock Exchange Composite Index, for example, nearly doubled from November to July before pulling back last month. ?People seem to believe the baton of global economic leadership is being seamlessly passed from the West to the East. That?s going to happen, but not for another 5 to 10 years at least.?



Similarly premature excitement inflated what became known as the South Sea bubble, a 18th century mania over British trade with emerging Latin American markets. (Aside: Even the brilliant Sir Isaac Newton, seduced by the mirage of infinitely rising stock prices, lost a lot in the South Sea bubble ? which is somewhat ironic, given his famous recognition that what goes up must come down.)



Economists also worry that commodity bubbles, which tend to be more cyclical, may strike again. Oil and gold prices are rising, and though both of those commodities have boomed and busted many times in the last century, investors may bet on unrealistically high growth once more. Gold prices, for example, have risen more than 30 percent from a year ago.



?With every commodity bubble, you see a whole new set of rationalizations,? Mr. Yergin said. ?People find ways to shut out the reality of economic processes. If oil prices shoot up, investors are always surprised to see demand go down again.?



In each of these markets, the inflation and deflation of prices would be painful to investors but may not have as far-reaching consequences as the recent housing and credit collapses.



But a sovereign debt bubble ? which many argue is driving the acceleration in gold prices ? could prove far more dangerous.



So many countries, like the United States, are running up such large national debts as a percentage of their overall economies that they could risk eventual default. Even without outright default on their obligations, the value of government bonds sold to finance these deficits could plunge, costing investors a lot.



?Talk about a big bubble that really affects the global economy,? said Kenneth Rogoff, an economics professor at Harvard whose new book, ?This Time Is Different,? chronicles 800 years of debt-driven financial crises.



?The huge run-up in government debt has led to patently unsustainable fiscal policies across a number of major countries,? he said. ?So far, the rest of the world?s been willing to finance it, primarily with savings from China and elsewhere, but if investors? confidence is shaken, we might see the interest rates on long-term debt rising, and rising very sharply.?



Debt crises are usually associated with developing countries, like Brazil, Argentina or Zimbabwe. But they can affect big, rich economies too, where the scale of global damage can be much greater.



?Look at California,? Mr. Rogoff said. ?It?s incredibly rich, but Californians want a lot of services but don?t feel like taxing themselves to pay for them. You can be incredibly rich and still go bankrupt.?



The depth and breadth of the pain unleashed by the recent housing bust have led political leaders and central bankers to reconsider their duties to pre-empt, rather than just respond to, potential bubbles, and the same is true with the potential bubbles that economists foresee today.



China has started to tighten monetary policy to rein in the hype surrounding its equities. Politicians in the United States, while torn over the means, are discussing ways to bring the deficit until control.



The Group of 20, at its coming meeting in Pittsburgh, is expected to address ways to calm financial frenzies. The solution may involve additional regulation, guidelines for financial compensation and possibly requirements for more market transparency so that, at least in theory, investors can better judge what they are taking on.



But however stringent such new regulations may be, economists say, they cannot completely defeat human nature. Investors will continue to be hypnotized by get-rich-quick deals, seeking investments that magically double, double without toil or trouble.



?Ultimately, bubbles are a human phenomenon,? said Robert Shiller, a Yale economics professor and Cassandra of the current crisis. ?People just get a little crazy.?
 
<a href="http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewarticle/articleid/3481157">Toxic ARMs Loans Are Still Owned By Banks: Don?t Buy The Optimistic Banking Sector Scenario</a>



Option ARMs (adjustable rate loans) are the dubious name for a mortgage product which has caused financial destruction and will continue to do so for years to come. News Headlines about ARMs loans have faded over the past year but will soon be back in the limelight showing that they have not gone away. From late 2009 through 2012 the amount of ARMs loans resting will raise. These toxic mortgages allowed borrowers an array of payment options. Data released this week shows things are much worse than we had initially thought. In fact they should have been called minimum payment mortgages because over 90 percent of those who took out ARMs mortgages elected to go with the minimum payment option.



These loans have default rates comparable to subprime loans. In a decade long housing bubble, option ARMs were a lucrative and inviting mortgage for quick talking mortgage brokers chasing big yields. And many borderline qualified buyers used these ARMs mortgages with lower payments to squeeze into more house then they could really afford. As well as house flippers who were looking for a quick buck used ARMs loans, are now stuck with properties they could not sell so are now renting them out. But one thing is certain and that is these mortgages are here for the next few years and will cause additional defaults and problems for already weak banks.



Currently 46 percent of option ARM loans are 30 days late. And most of these loans were made by the likes of now defunct Washington Mutual in states like California, Arizona, Nevada, and Florida; the states hit worst by the bursting of the housing bubble. And 75 percent of all outstanding option ARMs loans are in those states.



Of the currently $189 billion in option ARM loans outstanding, 70 percent will recast (reset) over the next two years. Some people wanted to believe that this problem was resolved by loan modifications but only 3.5% of ARMs loans have been modified. Fact is expectations for losses range from 35 to 45 percent assuming home prices do not decline in the areas where these loans have been made. If we assume the 45 percent loss ratio, we are looking at $85 billion in losses simply from option ARMs. And I would suggest the housing market has another 15-25% correction to go by 2012. So the losses from ARMs loans could exceed $100 billion in losses. The current banking scenario is just too upbeat for my liking.



Banks are holding onto these mortgages as if they were at face value. Some banks have allocated loss reserves for these loans but nothing in the 45 percent + range. They are overly optimistic as usual but these loans are defaulting in mass, and will increase over the next two years.



Another reason for the massive amount of defaults is the severity of their negative equity (upside down on the mortgage). When these loans were made, loan-to-value ratios were roughly at 80 percent. They are now at 126 percent. Many of these loans were made in conjunction with piggy-back products so that 80 percent is deceptive. Many option ARMs were combined as an 80/20 or 80/10/10 loan. So many of these loans are attached to homes with at least two mortgages.



The second mortgage disaster is going to hit in full force over the next two years, recovering anything from the second loan after the foreclosure process happens chances will be slim to zero.



Banks are delaying foreclosure as long as possible. They are stalling hoping Washington can somehow artificially juice the market to unload these loans. Tax credits and other incentives are simply methods of creating an artificial market to unload this junk to the average American. Banks simply have not come to terms with the option ARMs which are sitting on there balance sheets. Loan modifications of 3.5%, is nothing especially if we consider that a loan modification constitutes extending the loan term.



At least 90% of ARMs loans are negatively amortizing. In fact, as the home values have plummeted the mortgage balance has increased, a double whammy. Many buyers rushing into the hot 2004-2005 real estate market just assumed the market value of their homes would increase, this was not the case. When these loans will reset even with favorable interest rates thanks to the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve annihilating the U.S. Dollar, the typical payment will readjust to 63% higher than the original minimum payment. In many cases, it will double. Just imagine the scenario if the Federal reserve is forced to raise interest rates to fight out of control inflation, minimum payments could go up on average of 75% plus. This is an unlikely scenario the Fed will do its best to keep interest rates artificially low during this ARMs reset period 2009-2012.



Only 12 percent of all outstanding option ARMs have reset so far. As we enter 2010, many of these vintage loans 3 and 5 year ARMs loans from 2004-2007 will start hitting their reset dates. Some have pointed out that Wells Fargo has some 10 year Pay Option ARMs but clearly that is a tiny part of the entire pool, as well as some 7 year ARMs. Bottom line is 70 percent of these loans will reset in the next 2 years and banks are trying everything they can to offload this toxic mortgage waste to the taxpayer like every other mistake they have made.
 
[quote author="IrvineRenter" date=1253080228]<a href="http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewarticle/articleid/3481157">Toxic ARMs Loans Are Still Owned By Banks: Don?t Buy The Optimistic Banking Sector Scenario</a>



Option ARMs (adjustable rate loans) are the dubious name for a mortgage product which has caused financial destruction and will continue to do so for years to come. News Headlines about ARMs loans have faded over the past year but will soon be back in the limelight showing that they have not gone away. From late 2009 through 2012 the amount of ARMs loans resting will raise. These toxic mortgages allowed borrowers an array of payment options. Data released this week shows things are much worse than we had initially thought. In fact they should have been called minimum payment mortgages because over 90 percent of those who took out ARMs mortgages elected to go with the minimum payment option.



These loans have default rates comparable to subprime loans. In a decade long housing bubble, option ARMs were a lucrative and inviting mortgage for quick talking mortgage brokers chasing big yields. And many borderline qualified buyers used these ARMs mortgages with lower payments to squeeze into more house then they could really afford. As well as house flippers who were looking for a quick buck used ARMs loans, are now stuck with properties they could not sell so are now renting them out. But one thing is certain and that is these mortgages are here for the next few years and will cause additional defaults and problems for already weak banks.



Currently 46 percent of option ARM loans are 30 days late. And most of these loans were made by the likes of now defunct Washington Mutual in states like California, Arizona, Nevada, and Florida; the states hit worst by the bursting of the housing bubble. And 75 percent of all outstanding option ARMs loans are in those states.



Of the currently $189 billion in option ARM loans outstanding, 70 percent will recast (reset) over the next two years. Some people wanted to believe that this problem was resolved by loan modifications but only 3.5% of ARMs loans have been modified. Fact is expectations for losses range from 35 to 45 percent assuming home prices do not decline in the areas where these loans have been made. If we assume the 45 percent loss ratio, we are looking at $85 billion in losses simply from option ARMs. And I would suggest the housing market has another 15-25% correction to go by 2012. So the losses from ARMs loans could exceed $100 billion in losses. The current banking scenario is just too upbeat for my liking.



Banks are holding onto these mortgages as if they were at face value. Some banks have allocated loss reserves for these loans but nothing in the 45 percent + range. They are overly optimistic as usual but these loans are defaulting in mass, and will increase over the next two years.



Another reason for the massive amount of defaults is the severity of their negative equity (upside down on the mortgage). When these loans were made, loan-to-value ratios were roughly at 80 percent. They are now at 126 percent. Many of these loans were made in conjunction with piggy-back products so that 80 percent is deceptive. Many option ARMs were combined as an 80/20 or 80/10/10 loan. So many of these loans are attached to homes with at least two mortgages.



The second mortgage disaster is going to hit in full force over the next two years, recovering anything from the second loan after the foreclosure process happens chances will be slim to zero.



Banks are delaying foreclosure as long as possible. They are stalling hoping Washington can somehow artificially juice the market to unload these loans. Tax credits and other incentives are simply methods of creating an artificial market to unload this junk to the average American. Banks simply have not come to terms with the option ARMs which are sitting on there balance sheets. Loan modifications of 3.5%, is nothing especially if we consider that a loan modification constitutes extending the loan term.



At least 90% of ARMs loans are negatively amortizing. In fact, as the home values have plummeted the mortgage balance has increased, a double whammy. Many buyers rushing into the hot 2004-2005 real estate market just assumed the market value of their homes would increase, this was not the case. When these loans will reset even with favorable interest rates thanks to the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve annihilating the U.S. Dollar, the typical payment will readjust to 63% higher than the original minimum payment. In many cases, it will double. Just imagine the scenario if the Federal reserve is forced to raise interest rates to fight out of control inflation, minimum payments could go up on average of 75% plus. This is an unlikely scenario the Fed will do its best to keep interest rates artificially low during this ARMs reset period 2009-2012.



Only 12 percent of all outstanding option ARMs have reset so far. As we enter 2010, many of these vintage loans 3 and 5 year ARMs loans from 2004-2007 will start hitting their reset dates. Some have pointed out that Wells Fargo has some 10 year Pay Option ARMs but clearly that is a tiny part of the entire pool, as well as some 7 year ARMs. Bottom line is 70 percent of these loans will reset in the next 2 years and banks are trying everything they can to offload this toxic mortgage waste to the taxpayer like every other mistake they have made.</blockquote>




[quote author="Geotpf" date=1253049507]I think prices have mostly stabilized, but in many places at a rate above rental parity. If you plan on living in one place for a long time (say, ten years or more), now is probably the best time to buy, due to low interest rates and prices. But there's no rush-look for the perfect place at the perfect price-while interest rates and prices aren't going to go down much any time soon, they aren't going to go up much soon either.



If you think you will likely move any time within the next decade or so, I would simply rent, especially in Irvine.



Just my worthless opinion. :)</blockquote>


Yup, now is the best time to buy. Obviously, prices have mostly stabilized and prices aren't going to go down much any time soon. Why would they with 46% of Option ARM holders 30 days late on their mortgage? And ARM's resetting for the next ten years?









I want to right a wrong in the previous article. The Federal Reserve does not control interest rates. If you look at the Fed's 96 year history, you will see that 95% of the time the Fed's rates follow private rates, and when they don't, misery follows.
 
[quote author="awgee" date=1253081873]I want to right a wrong in the previous article. The Federal Reserve does not control interest rates. If you look at the Fed's 96 year history, you will see that 95% of the time the Fed's rates follow private rates, and when they don't, misery follows.</blockquote>


awgee, what are you using to define "private rates" and do you have a link/graph showing the correlation?
 
[quote author="Nude" date=1253087164][quote author="awgee" date=1253081873]I want to right a wrong in the previous article. The Federal Reserve does not control interest rates. If you look at the Fed's 96 year history, you will see that 95% of the time the Fed's rates follow private rates, and when they don't, misery follows.</blockquote>


awgee, what are you using to define "private rates" and do you have a link/graph showing the correlation?</blockquote>
Everything other than Fed lending rates, because everything else is sold on the open market.

Unless you can think of something else.

Of course I do not have a graph or link. I have everything memorized, and just the way I want to remember it.

That is what I don't get about those recent threads where everybody is asking everybody for their reference or site. Geez, isn't my own credibility better than anybody I may cite or reference? Nah, don't answer that.

Seriously, when I run across the history, I will post.

But, just off the top of your head. Did Greenspan lower rates before they were already headed down or after, and did he raise rates before or after they were heading higher?
 
<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/09/15/MNBC19MVAP.DTL&type=realestate">Home prices' big role as crisis hit state hard</a>





(09-14) 21:30 PDT -- The bankruptcy of Lehman Bros. reverberated with particular fury in California, where it helped deepen a recession already under way and sent the Bay Area into a spiral of job losses that has not yet ended.



California, whose 11.9 percent unemployment rate exceeds the 9.7 percent U.S. average, is suffering disproportionately from the aftereffects of the ensuing crisis because it was such a big culprit in the excesses that led the financial system to ruin.



"Lehman was a symptom of the bubble bursting in housing and credit in general, as much as it was a cause for the even worse consequences that followed," said Ken Rosen, chair of the Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics at UC Berkeley.



"The housing market in California helped cause the crisis," Rosen added.



Esmael Adibi, director of the Anderson Center for Economic Research at Chapman College, echoed that view, saying California home prices, pumped up by subprime mortgages, started dropping more than a year before Lehman fell.



After peaking at $594,000 in June 2007, the statewide median price for a single family home had already fallen nearly 47 percent to $316,900 by September 2008. Adibi said such declines made many mortgage-backed securities worthless and called into question the value of other similar and widely held forms of debt.

'Everybody ... guilty'



"Lehman was just one part of this game," he said. "Everybody was basically guilty."



When U.S. authorities let Lehman fail - a decision still questioned - there was a paralyzing loss of confidence in the entire financial system.



"Everything just came to a standstill," said Rodney Brown, president of the California Bankers Association. "It led us up to the edge of a precipice, and we looked over."



In a speech Monday, San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank President Janet Yellen said subsequent actions by financial authorities in the United States and abroad "succeeded in avoiding the second Great Depression that seemed to be a real possibility" a year ago.



Even so, the post-Lehman panic accelerated the job-destroying force of the recession that had started in December 2007.



"There was a sharp drop in the demand for everything," Rosen said. "Consumers went into bunker mentality. Corporations cut back and started laying off. That created an unemployment crisis. Retail sales dropped further. All of this factored into the state's budget crisis because of the drop in sales and income taxes."

Credit crunch



One immediate consequence of the Lehman collapse was a credit crunch that affected consumers, businesses, and even state and local governments.



"There were times when we just couldn't borrow," said California Treasurer Bill Lockyer in an interview. Stephen Levy, with the Center for the Continuing Study of the California Economy in Palo Alto, said the state labor market had been in decline since July 2007 when payroll employment peaked at 15.2 million jobs, as the deflating housing bubble took the steam out of our economy.



But Levy said the nine-county Bay Area had been somewhat immune to the early stages of the recession and didn't start to experience systemic job losses until November 2008.



"Lehman hastened the recession coming to the Bay Area," he said, by curtailing world trade, which hurt Silicon Valley exports, and crippling stock prices, which led venture capitalists to cut investments in startups.



A year after Lehman's downfall, the global, U.S. and California economies seem to be slowly healing, Yellen said Monday.



But the rebound is weak as consumers save instead of spend and as businesses defer hiring.



"The unemployment rate will remain elevated for a few more years, meaning hardship for millions of workers," she said.

A warning



More ominously, Yellen said weak spending and a sluggish recovery could lead to "a financial contagion" of commercial real estate defaults that would hurt small and medium-size banks.



Brown, of the California Bankers Association, said the state economy remains weak.



"You can't have one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation and diminished revenues flowing into our state's coffers and imagine things are going to get better soon," he said.



Meanwhile, the Bay Area must hope that signs of increased trade in high-tech goods and hints of an uptick in venture capital activity will help pull the region out of its hiring slump.



"The job losses started here later, but they caught up with a fury," said Levy, who reckons that the nine-county Bay Area has lost about 160,000 jobs, or nearly 5 percent of its workforce, since Lehman failed.
 
Here comes the foreign cash buyers:



<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125243309793493085.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular">CIC Looks to Pile Cash Into U.S. Real Estate </a>



China's $300 billion sovereign-wealth fund is eyeing big investments in distressed U.S. real estate, according to people familiar with the matter. To finance some of the deals, China may rely on an old trading partner: the U.S. government.



In recent weeks, officials from China Investment Corp. have held talks with U.S. private-equity fund managers, including BlackRock Inc., Invesco Ltd. and Lone Star Funds, about potential investments in beaten-down property assets, namely mortgage securities backed by office buildings, hotels, strip malls and other commercial property. CIC also is considering buying ownership interests in buildings, according to the people with knowledge of the matter.



In addition, CIC is weighing investing through one of the U.S. government's bailout programs, the Treasury's Public-Private Investment Program, known as PPIP. The program is designed to rid banks of toxic mortgage securities by enticing investors to buy these assets with financing from the U.S. government.



Representatives for CIC, BlackRock, Invesco and Lone Star declined to comment.



The discussions come at a time when CIC, which had nearly $300 billion in assets at the end of last year, is moving to deploy its capital after a relatively idle 2008. Property markets world-wide have plunged since the credit-market crisis that started in mid-2007, creating opportunities for cash-rich buyers. In the U.S., commercial property values already have dropped 35% from the peak.



Last year, CIC deployed just $4.8 billion in global financial markets. This year it invested that much in a single month, CIC Chairman Lou Jiwei said last month. He said that if CIC's future returns are good enough, it might ask the government to let it invest more of China's foreign-exchange reserves, which now total $2.132 trillion.

[cic and u.s. real estate] Imaginechina/Associated Press



CIC Chairman Lou Jiwei is sitting on a $300 billion investment chest.



It is unclear how much CIC intends to allocate to U.S. real estate. But in order to achieve any meaningful diversification in its portfolio, the fund would need to set aside between $4 billion and $10 billion to global property investments in the next year and a half, estimates Michael McCormack, an executive director at Z-Ben Advisors, a consulting firm in Shanghai. By 2014, he projects that CIC's U.S. property investments alone could amount to more than $20 billion.



The U.S. property market is appealing to the Chinese partly because of the financing being offered through the PPIP program.



Under the program, the Treasury will co-invest with funds that buy toxic mortgages that have been clogging banks' balance sheets. The U.S. government, through the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, also will make financing available to the ventures. In other words, CIC and the Treasury would be partners in borrowing money from the U.S. government to buy troubled mortgages.

[foreign investment in u.s. real estate]



The Treasury, which plans to allocate as much as $30 billion to PPIP, has designated nine fund managers, including BlackRock and Invesco, to raise at least $500 million of private capital each by the end of September. The Treasury then will provide equity capital up to 100% of the private capital raised by the fund managers. The fund-raising efforts are off to a relatively slow start, as many investors remain wary of the red tape associated with investing in a government-sponsored program.



The possibility of a sovereign-wealth fund investing through PPIP was envisioned in the program's design. It limits investments by any single investor to no more than 9.9% of each PPIP fund. The cap was intended to assuage any concerns that any one investor, like China, could control too much, according to government officials. A Treasury spokeswoman declined to comment.



To be sure, CIC and other sovereign-wealth funds face some obstacles to investing in U.S. real estate. Economic distress has raised the ire on Capitol Hill, with some lawmakers pointing the finger at China. They claim that heavy purchases of U.S. government bonds by the Chinese helped inflate the credit bubble by keeping interest rates low.



Elected officials have for decades been concerned about foreign investment in U.S. real estate. In the early 1980s, Congress approved a tax on capital gains from foreign sales of U.S. property. That tax, however, didn't stop Japanese investors in the 1980s from investing about $77 billion in the U.S. property markets, buying such assets as Rockefeller Center in New York and the Pebble Beach golf course in California.



CIC is unlikely to replicate those investments. It has consistently taken minority stakes, often below 10%, in part to defuse political risk. CIC's "debut in the U.S. property market likely will be double arm's-length investments," meaning through U.S. fund managers, with a minority stake in the fund, as opposed to direct stakes in actual properties, Mr. McCormack said.



And the woes in the U.S. marketplace might work in the favor of foreign investors like CIC. U.S. real-estate executives are lobbying to amend tax law to encourage overseas capital to flow into U.S. real estate, thus helping prevent a further decline in commercial-property values.



"Simple reforms could be made that would help address the equity shortfall our markets need to recover," said Jeffrey Deboer, president of Real Estate Roundtable, a trade group that is spearheading the lobbying efforts.



CIC's foray into international markets, including its stakes in Blackstone Group LP and Morgan Stanley, has been marked with big losses, at least on paper. But it recently has signaled a willingness to reopen the purse, selecting both firms to help oversee new investments in hedge funds. Also this year, it bought stakes in China-focused alternative asset-management firm Citic Capital Holdings Ltd. and U.S. asset manager BlackRock and has been in discussions about allocating billions more to hedge funds.



It recently made an investment in Goodman Group, a real-estate trust in Australia, and bought a stake in Songbird Estates PLC, the majority shareholder of Canary Wharf Group, an owner and developer of office towers and retail stores in London.



In addition, CIC has committed about $800 million to a Morgan Stanley global property fund, which intends to raise more than $5 billion and invests in real estate world-wide, according to a person familiar with the matter. A Morgan Stanley spokeswoman declined to comment.

?Deborah Solomon contributed to this article.



Write to Lingling Wei at lingling.wei@dowjones.com and Jason Dean at jason.dean@wsj.com
 
It's like they are a holder looking for a bag, a catcher looking for a knife, a Japan looking for a Rockefeller Center. Who in their right mind would invest in Toxic MBS when the Feds are still playing "extend and pretend" with housing? Especially as the most likely outcome for a foreign bag holder is that the Fed stop trying to prop things up and let the market sink to fundamental levels. They can't possibly be this stupid.
 
[quote author="Nude" date=1253110456]It's like they are a holder looking for a bag, a catcher looking for a knife, a Japan looking for a Rockefeller Center. Who in their right mind would invest in Toxic MBS when the Feds are still playing "extend and pretend" with housing? Especially as the most likely outcome for a foreign bag holder is that the Fed stop trying to prop things up and let the market sink to fundamental levels. They can't possibly be this stupid.</blockquote>


You don't have to look that far away in China for stupid knife catchers. Just look locally for the relatives who bought Ivy.
 
<a href="http://www.latimes.com/classified/realestate/news/la-fi-harney20-2009sep20,0,2560658.story">Homeowners who 'strategically default' on loans a growing problem</a>



This can't be good for that mythical shadow inventory people keep insisting doesn't exist.
 
[quote author="Nude" date=1253409051]<a href="http://www.latimes.com/classified/realestate/news/la-fi-harney20-2009sep20,0,2560658.story">Homeowners who 'strategically default' on loans a growing problem</a>



This can't be good for that mythical shadow inventory people keep insisting doesn't exist.</blockquote>


Wait, you mean people that have a history of being wise money managers can figure out that being upside down hundreds of thousands of dollars is a losing proposition? I'm shocked!
 
[quote author="No_Such_Reality" date=1253412754][quote author="Nude" date=1253409051]<a href="http://www.latimes.com/classified/realestate/news/la-fi-harney20-2009sep20,0,2560658.story">Homeowners who 'strategically default' on loans a growing problem</a>



This can't be good for that mythical shadow inventory people keep insisting doesn't exist.</blockquote>


Wait, you mean people that have a history of being wise money managers can figure out that being upside down hundreds of thousands of dollars is a losing proposition? I'm shocked!</blockquote>


AND they have enough brains to pull the trigger on thier "option"!



<img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_PLjNWOu-Zn0/ScpgE7diU0I/AAAAAAAAAd4/MR8l5f9sDtY/s400/shocked+to+find+gaming.jpg" alt="" />
 
Dont forget your winnings !



<object width="325" height="250"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/youtube" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="325" height="250"></embed></object>
 
The Gub'ment better hope this meme doesn't get lodged in Joe Public's head.



<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aEKc7Yh8ogXw">FDIC is broke, chairman muses...</a>
 
[quote author="Nude" date=1253409051]<a href="http://www.latimes.com/classified/realestate/news/la-fi-harney20-2009sep20,0,2560658.story">Homeowners who 'strategically default' on loans a growing problem</a>



This can't be good for that mythical shadow inventory people keep insisting doesn't exist.</blockquote>


That's not shadow inventory.



When people speak of ?shadow inventory? as some diabolical and manipulative scheme by banks to hide inventory they are sorely mistaken. In this sense there is NO SUCH THING as shadow inventory. I am in the employ of a leader in the electronic disposition of REO assets. 60% + of all foreclosure resales use our platform.



Before delving into the minds of REO sellers it is imperative to note that MANY MANY REO properties are already owned by non-bank entities, i.e. large investment groups (think Lone Star), property management conglomerates (think REDC), etc. I can tell you with 100% certainty that almost every bank wants desperately to sell these homes as fast as they can. If the REO property was already purchased as part of a bulk sale then the purchaser may be willing to hold onto that asset for the time being.



Now let?s assume that a well known bank owns an REO property. Here is just a sliver of what they are dealing with:



1) Congressional pressure (even if it is just perceived) to modify mortgages

2) Foreclosure Moratoriums

3) Invalid foreclosures. This is happening quite often now with borrowers filing BK after the NTS notice but before auction.

4) There are REDEMPTION states like FL and MN where the borrower has a set number of days (90 days or more) to cure the account and save the home

5) There are CONFIRMATION states like OH that have the same effect in delaying resale

6) Evictions?The eviction process is very costly and back logged. Banks have agents offer ?Cash for Keys? sometimes in excess of 3% of the unpaid principal balance for the occupant to vacate the property. Evictions are also handled at the state and local level which is a nightmare.

7) Rental Agreements. In cases where an REO was a rental and it is occupied by a tenant, banks are being required to collect rent checks and honor the existing signed lease agreement. They cannot even order an eviction until the lease expires.

8) Code Violations

9) Repairs. Most banks that use our system are increasing the repairs done on properties. The rational being that as the pool of cash buyers/investors starts to dry up, the general population is in dire need of FHA financing. This type of financing can be quite restrictive inregards to the condition of the colateral.

10) Understaffed. Simply put many banks are not equipped to handle the sheer volume of transactions that are needed. Many use outsourcers to actually manage the day to day activities.
 
<strong>Worst yet to come in housing market</strong>



As bad as the housing market has been for the past two years, worse times may be ahead, says a real estate consultant.



That?s because there is a massive supply of homes that are already in the foreclosure process that will certainly drive home prices down even further when they are sold, says John Burns Real Estate Consulting Inc. of Irvine.



?We have been projecting a ?W? shaped recovery for some time, and we are becoming even more convinced that we are right. The shape of the second leg down is almost completely dependent on the level of government intervention that will take place,? Burns says in a report Wednesday.



The report says that banks have not been aggressively taking title to homes and selling them, which has resulted in very few distressed sales in comparison to the actual level of distress in the market.



?This delay in REO sales, along with historically low mortgage rates and an $8,000 tax credit, has helped to stabilize the housing market ? temporarily,? the report says.



By Burns? calculations, 10 percent of all homeowners in the country are delinquent.



?Based on historical trend analysis by Amherst Securities, 6.94 million homes that are already delinquent will be liquidated, which is more than a one year supply of distressed sales poised to hit the market sometime in 2010 and 2011. During Q1 2005, that figure was only 1.27 million,? it says.



Defaults continue to grow at the rate of approximately 300,000 per month, assuring that the number of distressed sales will grow and will continue through 2012, says Burns.



?Demand needs to continue to be stimulated to bring down supply, particularly while the country continues to lose jobs. Without continued government intervention, home prices will plummet, banks and the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) will continue to lose money, and the economy has virtually no chance of increasing overall employment in 2010,? says the report.



http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=13265
 
[quote author="morekaos" date=1222397373][quote author="muzie" date=1222318982][quote author="morekaos" date=1222249308][quote author="morekaos" date=1221733714]The 4 Horseman of the Apocolypse. Bear Stearns, Lehman, Morgan and Goldman. Two down, two to go</blockquote>


I am a big man. I can admit when I am wrong...



<span style="font-size: 13px;"><strong>Buffett boosts Goldman Sachs with $5-billion investment</strong></span>



http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2008/09/warren-buffett.html</blockquote>


Huh... So Buffet investing in this company instantly makes it a great company?



Seriously, if Warren were the Pope it'd be all the same. Long ago, it used to be that great companies with potential would come up and in turn Buffet would invest in them. Today, everybody is so hung up on his words that the chain of causation has reversed.</blockquote>


He is usually right more than he is wrong. He is certainly not the Pope but I don't usually bet against him. He got some great terms and this looked a lot like his purchase of Solomon. Did pretty well with that one in the end.</blockquote>


In retrospect I think he pulled it off again. Like I have often said, Don't bet against this man.
 
[quote author="IrvineRenter" date=1172616132]IMO, the weakening of the US dollar is part of the equation moving forward. The only way we can get wage inflation to prop up real estate values would be to devalue the dollar. If the value of the dollar remains high, any pressure to increase wages will result in more overseas outsourcing: wage arbitrage. The only way we can raise wages and not lose the jobs overseas is to devalue our currency so the overseas move is not less expensive. Since an increase in wages is about the only way to keep real estate prices high, a devaluation of the dollar is likely. imports will be more expensive, and overseas travel will be more expensive, but if you stay home and buy American, everything will be OK.</blockquote>


Everything will be OK? This is a standard of living bubble losing air before your very eyes and everything will be OK? What % of stuff you own is american?
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1187165655]Whoa did I not catch where the Yen traded yesterday? At 1:15 AM it is at 116.77.</blockquote>


Anyone else remember the fear and trepidation we all felt seeing the carry trade unwind as the Yen kept dropping?



As I type this, CNNMoney is showing the Yen at 91.80 and wavering. I read a few pages of this thread after this post by crackercakes and I have to say... it sure seems like things should have been much worse than they turned out to be. Could it be that we've talked ourselves into a vision of the future that is as wildly off track as some of the predictions we made back in July of 2007?
 
Back
Top