Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

How's your housing market?


Recommended Posts

Wall street journal article from today. Looks like there are a ton of refinancings out of ARMs. Don't think the resetting of Arms is going to be the disaster some make it out to be. Mortgage ApplicationsSurge on Decline in RatesBy REX NUTTINGDecember 14, 2006; Page D2The volume of applications for mortgages from major U.S. banks climbed to the highest level in more than a year last week, the Mortgage Bankers Association reported.Applications, encompassing both those for loans to purchase homes and for refinancing of existing mortgages, increased 11.4% last week from the previous week to the highest level since October 2005. Total applications are up 22.2% compared with the same week a year ago. Application volumes had been down by double-digit percentages for most of the year.Lower mortgage rates have spurred a rebound in loan applications, said Mark Fratantoni, senior economist for the mortgage bankers group, in a news statement. Average rates have fallen about 0.8 percentage point since early summer, he noted.Applications for a loan to buy a home rose 8.7% last week compared with the previous week, reaching the highest level since January. Purchase-loan volumes are down about 3% compared with the same week a year ago, the smallest year-over-year decline since January.By comparison, home sales are down about 14% compared with a year ago.The refinancing boom continued last week: Applications for refinancings rose 15.8% to the highest level seen since September 2005. Refinancing applications are up about 60% from a year ago.Refinancings accounted for 52.6% of all applications, representing the greatest share since April 2004.Lower mortgage rates have spurred a new refinance boom as borrowers flock to lock in lower rates or to get out of adjustable loans that are about to be reset at higher rates.The average rate for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage rose to 6.02% from a 14-month low of 5.98% the previous week. Since June, the benchmark rate has fallen from 6.86%.The rate for a 15-year fixed-rate loan, a popular vehicle for refinancing mortgages, averaged 5.75%, up from 5.66% a week earlier, which was the lowest rate since January.The average rate for a one-year adjustable-rate mortgage dropped to 5.76%, the lowest rate since March and down from the prior week's 5.79%. ARMs accounted for 24.9% of loan applications, up from a three-year low of 23.9% set the previous week.

:thumbup: i've been saying this for months.
Me too...paging T-Gunz.
Paging LHUCKS and bagger.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you happier now that the house next to you is going down in value and thus so is yours? Why didn't you do the smart thing and sell your house for $680k, rent for a couple years and buy your neighbors' house for $350k and be mortgage free? That is kind of like owning a stock at $200, knowing that it was only worth $100, but instead of selling just watching it slide down to $100 and then acting happy because you were right.Even TGunz would have dumped and run. Sounds like the smartest guy in your neighborhood was the guy that bought and flipped that house.

I bought my house to live in. Period. It is unique like no other since I designed it. I guarantee I could have sold it for over 1/2 million in 2004 or 2005. I could care less if the houses next to me sell for $250000 or $1 million. 30 years from now, I will still be living there. You fail to realize the brutal property taxes that you incur if you sell (losing ALL of your SOH value in this state) and try to buy an identical size house. Please think before you blabber.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bud of mine built two houses in an upper class area in Chicago suburbs. Both are over million dollar homes. He recently sold one at a break even point and the other at a loss just to get rid of them and get out from the carrying costs. The sad thing is that he GC slowed things down so much to the point that if he had a decent GC working them he would have had them on the market and sold for profit about a year ago.

That sucks. I can't imagine flipping is much fun at all these days. I wonder if people even still try. Even in NC, where you still see news shows about how Raleigh and Charlotte avoided all the downturns, the market is slow. The builder in my neighborhood has only a couple houses remaining out of a hundred or so that they built (2 other custom builders) over the past few years and they just dropped their prices. I know that they just want to dump ASAP and get their money because like any business, that capital drives their other new neighborhoods which they just started. I feel bad for a couple neighbors who "have" to move and those price drops hurt them the most because the builder will absolutely sell under market price just to be done and $$ is the reason that they "had" to move.
Why would the builder sell under market price? Why not just price the homes at market price and move them?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bud of mine built two houses in an upper class area in Chicago suburbs. Both are over million dollar homes. He recently sold one at a break even point and the other at a loss just to get rid of them and get out from the carrying costs. The sad thing is that he GC slowed things down so much to the point that if he had a decent GC working them he would have had them on the market and sold for profit about a year ago.

That sucks. I can't imagine flipping is much fun at all these days. I wonder if people even still try. Even in NC, where you still see news shows about how Raleigh and Charlotte avoided all the downturns, the market is slow. The builder in my neighborhood has only a couple houses remaining out of a hundred or so that they built (2 other custom builders) over the past few years and they just dropped their prices. I know that they just want to dump ASAP and get their money because like any business, that capital drives their other new neighborhoods which they just started. I feel bad for a couple neighbors who "have" to move and those price drops hurt them the most because the builder will absolutely sell under market price just to be done and $$ is the reason that they "had" to move.
Why would the builder sell under market price? Why not just price the homes at market price and move them?
depends what absorption "market" is getting. if it is only 1-2 and the edict comes down that they want to blow it out, they'll undercut the market temporarily to re-start sales velocity.

market may be an absorption of 2 per month, but if they want to move 7-9 per month there's just one thing they can do.

most of this though is in the periphery where builders have the biggest exposure right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wall street journal article from today. Looks like there are a ton of refinancings out of ARMs. Don't think the resetting of Arms is going to be the disaster some make it out to be.

i've been saying this for months.
:goodposting:
Think again.

Bill Gross from Pimco wouldn't consider this if what you say is true.

http://biz.yahoo.com/cnnm/070823/082307_gr...wners.html?.v=2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wall street journal article from today. Looks like there are a ton of refinancings out of ARMs. Don't think the resetting of Arms is going to be the disaster some make it out to be.

i've been saying this for months.
:D
Think again.

Bill Gross from Pimco wouldn't consider this if what you say is true.

http://biz.yahoo.com/cnnm/070823/082307_gr...wners.html?.v=2

check your sarcasm meter bro - i'm the biggest RE bear on this board.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bud of mine built two houses in an upper class area in Chicago suburbs. Both are over million dollar homes. He recently sold one at a break even point and the other at a loss just to get rid of them and get out from the carrying costs. The sad thing is that he GC slowed things down so much to the point that if he had a decent GC working them he would have had them on the market and sold for profit about a year ago.

That sucks. I can't imagine flipping is much fun at all these days. I wonder if people even still try. Even in NC, where you still see news shows about how Raleigh and Charlotte avoided all the downturns, the market is slow. The builder in my neighborhood has only a couple houses remaining out of a hundred or so that they built (2 other custom builders) over the past few years and they just dropped their prices. I know that they just want to dump ASAP and get their money because like any business, that capital drives their other new neighborhoods which they just started. I feel bad for a couple neighbors who "have" to move and those price drops hurt them the most because the builder will absolutely sell under market price just to be done and $$ is the reason that they "had" to move.
A buddy of mine owns his own mortgage brokerage business in Seattle. Seattle is one of the few markets, along with the markets in North Carolina, that still looks okay on a yr/yr basis. But there are signs that it is about to roll over, I think.Anyway, my buddy still gets random incoming calls from people who want to buy and flip houses. It's like the people considering doing this have been living in a cave, or something.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bud of mine built two houses in an upper class area in Chicago suburbs. Both are over million dollar homes. He recently sold one at a break even point and the other at a loss just to get rid of them and get out from the carrying costs. The sad thing is that he GC slowed things down so much to the point that if he had a decent GC working them he would have had them on the market and sold for profit about a year ago.

That sucks. I can't imagine flipping is much fun at all these days. I wonder if people even still try. Even in NC, where you still see news shows about how Raleigh and Charlotte avoided all the downturns, the market is slow. The builder in my neighborhood has only a couple houses remaining out of a hundred or so that they built (2 other custom builders) over the past few years and they just dropped their prices. I know that they just want to dump ASAP and get their money because like any business, that capital drives their other new neighborhoods which they just started. I feel bad for a couple neighbors who "have" to move and those price drops hurt them the most because the builder will absolutely sell under market price just to be done and $$ is the reason that they "had" to move.
Why would the builder sell under market price? Why not just price the homes at market price and move them?
depends what absorption "market" is getting. if it is only 1-2 and the edict comes down that they want to blow it out, they'll undercut the market temporarily to re-start sales velocity.

market may be an absorption of 2 per month, but if they want to move 7-9 per month there's just one thing they can do.

most of this though is in the periphery where builders have the biggest exposure right now.

Yeah, what he said.

Actually, I think the easy way to think about it is that if you or I have 2 houses sitting on the market waiting to get an extra, let's say 50k, then we might wait a few months because our mortgage is only 3k a month. A builder, on the other hand, isn't just trying to get the extra 50k, they want the entire $1million (let's say they sell for 500k instead of 550k) and are willing to give up the 100k because they need that capital for other projects where they can make a lot more than 100k.

I hope that makes sense. I understand where you are trying to get that the market value is whatever you sell at, but sometimes people are willing to sell for less than market for their own reasons. A old neighbor of ours sold their house after ours in summer 2006 for about 100k under market because they were retiring to a mansion because the woman was marrying someone who was ridiculously wealthy. I say undermarket because a neighbor a couple houses down sold their right after for almost 100k more. Now, the prices have declined in DC in the year since, but the people selling under market got exactly what they wanted, they sold the house in a matter of days when the average home was taking at least a few months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you happier now that the house next to you is going down in value and thus so is yours? Why didn't you do the smart thing and sell your house for $680k, rent for a couple years and buy your neighbors' house for $350k and be mortgage free? That is kind of like owning a stock at $200, knowing that it was only worth $100, but instead of selling just watching it slide down to $100 and then acting happy because you were right.Even TGunz would have dumped and run. Sounds like the smartest guy in your neighborhood was the guy that bought and flipped that house.

I bought my house to live in. Period. It is unique like no other since I designed it. I guarantee I could have sold it for over 1/2 million in 2004 or 2005. I could care less if the houses next to me sell for $250000 or $1 million. 30 years from now, I will still be living there. You fail to realize the brutal property taxes that you incur if you sell (losing ALL of your SOH value in this state) and try to buy an identical size house. Please think before you blabber.
:ph34r: Not worth arguing with someone laughing at his neighbors not realizing that their misfortune is also yours. I am sure the house flipper is pretty darn upset over all the $$$ he lost with the brutal property taxes. So upset, he probably only bought an E-class instead of an S.Seriously though, I don't care if you sold or not that wasn't my point. I would personally feel bad for my neighbor having a tough time selling, but I was and am friends with most of my neighbors. Something tells me you are the guy that people would rather not have in their neighborhood.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wall street journal article from today. Looks like there are a ton of refinancings out of ARMs. Don't think the resetting of Arms is going to be the disaster some make it out to be.

i've been saying this for months.
:thumbup:
http://www.scottsdale-sucks.com/dcranch/

The blog above paints a far less rosier picture of the Scottsdale/Arizona real estate market.

Our house has been on the market for two months in the Bay Area. We have had a TON of traffic thru our place, but haven't sold yet. I would say our current listing price is about 92% of the peak value. We have a bunch of people extremely interested, but the credit markets are making things difficult. Almost impossible to not have a jumbo loan out here.

Edited by Taxguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bud of mine built two houses in an upper class area in Chicago suburbs. Both are over million dollar homes. He recently sold one at a break even point and the other at a loss just to get rid of them and get out from the carrying costs. The sad thing is that he GC slowed things down so much to the point that if he had a decent GC working them he would have had them on the market and sold for profit about a year ago.

That sucks. I can't imagine flipping is much fun at all these days. I wonder if people even still try. Even in NC, where you still see news shows about how Raleigh and Charlotte avoided all the downturns, the market is slow. The builder in my neighborhood has only a couple houses remaining out of a hundred or so that they built (2 other custom builders) over the past few years and they just dropped their prices. I know that they just want to dump ASAP and get their money because like any business, that capital drives their other new neighborhoods which they just started. I feel bad for a couple neighbors who "have" to move and those price drops hurt them the most because the builder will absolutely sell under market price just to be done and $$ is the reason that they "had" to move.
A buddy of mine owns his own mortgage brokerage business in Seattle. Seattle is one of the few markets, along with the markets in North Carolina, that still looks okay on a yr/yr basis. But there are signs that it is about to roll over, I think.Anyway, my buddy still gets random incoming calls from people who want to buy and flip houses. It's like the people considering doing this have been living in a cave, or something.
That amazes me. You would be hard pressed not to know that the housing industry/mortgage industry has changed a lot over the last year.I have a feeling Seattle is a lot like North Carolina in that it saw a huge influx of people from California/NY/New England/DC/Florida where people made a ton of money on their houses. The Northwest/NC were kind of the second wavers of the RE market. Well, with the RE market tanking in all those locations, there are a lot less people who can move and there are a lot less people who can afford to buy houses. I don't think things will tank here in NC because I don't believe they ever got crazy (my house outside of DC almost tripled from 1998-2005), but things are slowing and I am sure there is enough froth to lose some steam. I have no idea on prices in Seattle, but it sounds like the same situation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bud of mine built two houses in an upper class area in Chicago suburbs. Both are over million dollar homes. He recently sold one at a break even point and the other at a loss just to get rid of them and get out from the carrying costs. The sad thing is that he GC slowed things down so much to the point that if he had a decent GC working them he would have had them on the market and sold for profit about a year ago.

That sucks. I can't imagine flipping is much fun at all these days. I wonder if people even still try. Even in NC, where you still see news shows about how Raleigh and Charlotte avoided all the downturns, the market is slow. The builder in my neighborhood has only a couple houses remaining out of a hundred or so that they built (2 other custom builders) over the past few years and they just dropped their prices. I know that they just want to dump ASAP and get their money because like any business, that capital drives their other new neighborhoods which they just started. I feel bad for a couple neighbors who "have" to move and those price drops hurt them the most because the builder will absolutely sell under market price just to be done and $$ is the reason that they "had" to move.
A buddy of mine owns his own mortgage brokerage business in Seattle. Seattle is one of the few markets, along with the markets in North Carolina, that still looks okay on a yr/yr basis. But there are signs that it is about to roll over, I think.Anyway, my buddy still gets random incoming calls from people who want to buy and flip houses. It's like the people considering doing this have been living in a cave, or something.
That amazes me. You would be hard pressed not to know that the housing industry/mortgage industry has changed a lot over the last year.I have a feeling Seattle is a lot like North Carolina in that it saw a huge influx of people from California/NY/New England/DC/Florida where people made a ton of money on their houses. The Northwest/NC were kind of the second wavers of the RE market. Well, with the RE market tanking in all those locations, there are a lot less people who can move and there are a lot less people who can afford to buy houses. I don't think things will tank here in NC because I don't believe they ever got crazy (my house outside of DC almost tripled from 1998-2005), but things are slowing and I am sure there is enough froth to lose some steam. I have no idea on prices in Seattle, but it sounds like the same situation.
No, prices in Seattle are high by national standards already. Not as high as Bay Area, Los Angeles, New York or Honolulu, but I can't think of any other major markets that are pricier overall.But there is population growth, the economy is very healthy, there is a lot of wealth in the area, and the market is very physically constrained by geographical features (mountains, lakes, Puget Sound, etc.).And while the market is doing better than most, it isn't like it has been totally unaffected. There is a lot more inventory on the market and it is moving a lot more slowly than it was. There will likely be a condo glut before long.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling Seattle is a lot like North Carolina in that it saw a huge influx of people from California/NY/New England/DC/Florida where people made a ton of money on their houses. The Northwest/NC were kind of the second wavers of the RE market. Well, with the RE market tanking in all those locations, there are a lot less people who can move and there are a lot less people who can afford to buy houses.

But on the flip side, the people who can no longer afford a home in California/NY/etc. are going to move to the northwest/NC/etc. and keep those prices inflated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling Seattle is a lot like North Carolina in that it saw a huge influx of people from California/NY/New England/DC/Florida where people made a ton of money on their houses. The Northwest/NC were kind of the second wavers of the RE market. Well, with the RE market tanking in all those locations, there are a lot less people who can move and there are a lot less people who can afford to buy houses.

But on the flip side, the people who can no longer afford a home in California/NY/etc. are going to move to the northwest/NC/etc. and keep those prices inflated.
True to a certain degree as I think there are a good amount of people that might not afford a home, period. I think our areas are better off just because they are actually growing, hence demand is still present. Again, I have no idea on Northwest pricing, but one of the huge reasons people are moving to NC is because an awesome house here is still a relative bargain to other areas and it wouldn't surprise me if in 15-20 years that Charlotte and Raleigh are much more prominent big cities. I know Atlanta in the early 2000s had a huge influx of 20 somethings and I heard that Charlotte has taken over that huge influx. That is big demographic to bring in and grow a city.I have yet to own a house in a normal market, so for me to say things seem slow, that might almost be silly if you look at any years before the boom and bust of the last 10 years. Slow to me now might actually be quite normal and about where it should be based on averages of the past 50 years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

For those calling a bottom:

S&P says subprime far from over; understated fraud

By Saikat Chatterjee and Anurag Joshi

REUTERS

6:37 a.m. October 9, 2007

MUMBAI – The U.S. subprime housing crisis will not peak until 2009, rating agency Standard and Poor's said on Tuesday, adding it had underestimated the extent of fraud in the industry.

S&P expected the world economy to grow 3.6 percent in 2007 and 3.5 percent in 2008, with emerging market economies driving growth. The U.S. economy would lag at 2 percent in both years, down from 2.9 percent in 2006.

Housing was the major weakness in the U.S. economy and the subprime crisis – which roiled global markets in late July and August – was far from over, although its shock value was wearing off, David Wyss, S&P's chief economist, said in Mumbai.

“We underestimated the extent to which fraud was occurring in the industry,” he said.

“It looks, based on some surveys that had been done, the extent of frauds increased sharply in 2006.”

S&P said the U.S. Federal Reserve had estimated that subprime losses could reach $150 billion, and Wyss said that would feed through to unemployment and remain a brake on growth.

“We think in the United States the housing market is not going to bottom until winter. We think the losses in these sectors won't really hit their peak until 2009,” Wyss said.

“We are not halfway through with this crisis yet.”

Emerging markets were far less vulnerable to credit market turmoil than during previous crises because of the capital flows attracted by high economic growth coupled with improved corporate governance standards, S&P said.

“World growth remains strong despite the weaknesses seen in the U.S. economy – especially in emerging markets because of healthy domestic demand conditions and export strength to non-U.S. markets,” it said in a report.

“The fact that the U.S. slowdown is concentrated in housing, which has relatively low import content, helps,” it said.

High commodity prices were also helping many emerging market economies, such as Latin American and African countries that are major exporters.

S&P estimated that, on a purchasing-power parity basis, the United States would contribute only 9 percent of world growth in 2007, compared with China's 33 percent and India's 12 percent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bud of mine built two houses in an upper class area in Chicago suburbs. Both are over million dollar homes. He recently sold one at a break even point and the other at a loss just to get rid of them and get out from the carrying costs. The sad thing is that he GC slowed things down so much to the point that if he had a decent GC working them he would have had them on the market and sold for profit about a year ago.

That sucks. I can't imagine flipping is much fun at all these days. I wonder if people even still try. Even in NC, where you still see news shows about how Raleigh and Charlotte avoided all the downturns, the market is slow. The builder in my neighborhood has only a couple houses remaining out of a hundred or so that they built (2 other custom builders) over the past few years and they just dropped their prices. I know that they just want to dump ASAP and get their money because like any business, that capital drives their other new neighborhoods which they just started. I feel bad for a couple neighbors who "have" to move and those price drops hurt them the most because the builder will absolutely sell under market price just to be done and $$ is the reason that they "had" to move.
A buddy of mine owns his own mortgage brokerage business in Seattle. Seattle is one of the few markets, along with the markets in North Carolina, that still looks okay on a yr/yr basis. But there are signs that it is about to roll over, I think.Anyway, my buddy still gets random incoming calls from people who want to buy and flip houses. It's like the people considering doing this have been living in a cave, or something.
That amazes me. You would be hard pressed not to know that the housing industry/mortgage industry has changed a lot over the last year.I have a feeling Seattle is a lot like North Carolina in that it saw a huge influx of people from California/NY/New England/DC/Florida where people made a ton of money on their houses. The Northwest/NC were kind of the second wavers of the RE market. Well, with the RE market tanking in all those locations, there are a lot less people who can move and there are a lot less people who can afford to buy houses. I don't think things will tank here in NC because I don't believe they ever got crazy (my house outside of DC almost tripled from 1998-2005), but things are slowing and I am sure there is enough froth to lose some steam. I have no idea on prices in Seattle, but it sounds like the same situation.
Seattle is starting to tip now. I was there for our corporate meetings last month and with all the cranes for high rises there, they are about to feel it. Our group locally in Seattle is starting to take notice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“We underestimated the extent to which fraud was occurring in the industry,” he said.

Whoever did the estimating should be fired, then. If we knew about it a year ago, then they've got no excuse.

Besides, the very concept of "liar loans" imply that fraud is involved. But nobody cared about fraud when housing prices were skyrocketing.

Maybe they should change the quote to "We underestimated the extent to which housing prices would decrease."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“We underestimated the extent to which fraud was occurring in the industry,” he said.

Whoever did the estimating should be fired, then. If we knew about it a year ago, then they've got no excuse.

Besides, the very concept of "liar loans" imply that fraud is involved. But nobody cared about fraud when housing prices were skyrocketing.

Maybe they should change the quote to "We underestimated the extent to which housing prices would decrease."

I agree with you to an extent, but lots of smart people are still in denial.

14k detached SFH on the market in San Diego and only ~ 800 will sell this month. Another 10k condos/attached homes on the market. Prices falling 1-2% per month.

There will be more foreclosures in San Diego in October than total sales. And the number of foreclosures will only be increasing for the next 10-12 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bud of mine built two houses in an upper class area in Chicago suburbs. Both are over million dollar homes. He recently sold one at a break even point and the other at a loss just to get rid of them and get out from the carrying costs. The sad thing is that he GC slowed things down so much to the point that if he had a decent GC working them he would have had them on the market and sold for profit about a year ago.

That sucks. I can't imagine flipping is much fun at all these days. I wonder if people even still try. Even in NC, where you still see news shows about how Raleigh and Charlotte avoided all the downturns, the market is slow. The builder in my neighborhood has only a couple houses remaining out of a hundred or so that they built (2 other custom builders) over the past few years and they just dropped their prices. I know that they just want to dump ASAP and get their money because like any business, that capital drives their other new neighborhoods which they just started. I feel bad for a couple neighbors who "have" to move and those price drops hurt them the most because the builder will absolutely sell under market price just to be done and $$ is the reason that they "had" to move.
A buddy of mine owns his own mortgage brokerage business in Seattle. Seattle is one of the few markets, along with the markets in North Carolina, that still looks okay on a yr/yr basis. But there are signs that it is about to roll over, I think.Anyway, my buddy still gets random incoming calls from people who want to buy and flip houses. It's like the people considering doing this have been living in a cave, or something.
That amazes me. You would be hard pressed not to know that the housing industry/mortgage industry has changed a lot over the last year.I have a feeling Seattle is a lot like North Carolina in that it saw a huge influx of people from California/NY/New England/DC/Florida where people made a ton of money on their houses. The Northwest/NC were kind of the second wavers of the RE market. Well, with the RE market tanking in all those locations, there are a lot less people who can move and there are a lot less people who can afford to buy houses. I don't think things will tank here in NC because I don't believe they ever got crazy (my house outside of DC almost tripled from 1998-2005), but things are slowing and I am sure there is enough froth to lose some steam. I have no idea on prices in Seattle, but it sounds like the same situation.
Seattle is starting to tip now. I was there for our corporate meetings last month and with all the cranes for high rises there, they are about to feel it. Our group locally in Seattle is starting to take notice.
There are thirteen construction cranes in downtown Bellevue right now. They are working on highrise office space, condos and some retail/mixed use projects. The commercial and retail projects probably still look okay (for now), since office and retail vacancy rates are very low, but the condo projects are another story. [old man]When I was a kid growin up there, the tallest building was 8 stories.[/old man] The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.

I looked at some market stats a couple days ago when I listed my home - that day there were (roughly) 350 new listings, 100 pendings, 100 solds, and 400 price reductions.You do the math. :shock:
550?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.

I looked at some market stats a couple days ago when I listed my home - that day there were (roughly) 350 new listings, 100 pendings, 100 solds, and 400 price reductions.You do the math. :shock:
550?
-5^2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.

I looked at some market stats a couple days ago when I listed my home - that day there were (roughly) 350 new listings, 100 pendings, 100 solds, and 400 price reductions.You do the math. :)
550?
Dude, you can't count! 950! DUH!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.

I looked at some market stats a couple days ago when I listed my home - that day there were (roughly) 350 new listings, 100 pendings, 100 solds, and 400 price reductions.You do the math. :goodposting:
nobody said there would be math.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“We underestimated the extent to which fraud was occurring in the industry,” he said.

Whoever did the estimating should be fired, then. If we knew about it a year ago, then they've got no excuse.

Besides, the very concept of "liar loans" imply that fraud is involved. But nobody cared about fraud when housing prices were skyrocketing.

Maybe they should change the quote to "We underestimated the extent to which housing prices would decrease."

Greed is good, greed works.

/GG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.

I looked at some market stats a couple days ago when I listed my home - that day there were (roughly) 350 new listings, 100 pendings, 100 solds, and 400 price reductions.You do the math. :goodposting:
Biggest no-brainer in the history of earth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.

I looked at some market stats a couple days ago when I listed my home - that day there were (roughly) 350 new listings, 100 pendings, 100 solds, and 400 price reductions.You do the math. :goodposting:
Where does one find such stats? I have a property about ready to go on the market and would be very interested in seeing these numbers for my area.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.

I looked at some market stats a couple days ago when I listed my home - that day there were (roughly) 350 new listings, 100 pendings, 100 solds, and 400 price reductions.You do the math. :)
Where does one find such stats? I have a property about ready to go on the market and would be very interested in seeing these numbers for my area.
Your friendly local multiple listing service. I work in a RE office.
So my RE agent could get me these? TIA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.

I looked at some market stats a couple days ago when I listed my home - that day there were (roughly) 350 new listings, 100 pendings, 100 solds, and 400 price reductions.You do the math. :thumbup:
Where does one find such stats? I have a property about ready to go on the market and would be very interested in seeing these numbers for my area.
Your friendly local multiple listing service. I work in a RE office.
So my RE agent could get me these? TIA
It's on the front page of the login page for the northwest mls - I'm not positive, but if I had to guess it's readily available to him, yes.
Link for Ohio?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seattle market has stayed relatively strong for a lot longer than most places, but if you look at the local market statistics regularly, there are plenty of indications that all is not well. I would expect the market to roll over on a year-over-year basis in the next month or two.

I looked at some market stats a couple days ago when I listed my home - that day there were (roughly) 350 new listings, 100 pendings, 100 solds, and 400 price reductions.You do the math. :goodposting:
nobody said there would be math.
There will be math
Then I withdraw. Where can I find the discussion that is only based on unsupported assertions and hearsay? I don't do math.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Diego County Detached Closings, October 1-14:Year   # of sales2003 	9642004 	9042005 	8672006 	6122007 	326Updated 10/16/07. There were 407 closings last month between the 1st and 14th.
So sales are ~ 50% off of last years October pace, ~ 20% off of last month's (Sept) pace, and ~67% off of '03, '04, and '05's October pace. Meanwhile, inventory is at a record high.

:wall:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Diego County Detached Closings, October 1-14:Year   # of sales2003 	9642004 	9042005 	8672006 	6122007 	326Updated 10/16/07. There were 407 closings last month between the 1st and 14th.
So sales are ~ 50% off of last years October pace, ~ 20% off of last month's (Sept) pace, and ~67% off of '03, '04, and '05's October pace. Meanwhile, inventory is at a record high. :popcorn:
'02-'05 were record years. What was it before that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Diego County Detached Closings, October 1-14:Year   # of sales2003 	9642004 	9042005 	8672006 	6122007 	326Updated 10/16/07. There were 407 closings last month between the 1st and 14th.
So sales are ~ 50% off of last years October pace, ~ 20% off of last month's (Sept) pace, and ~67% off of '03, '04, and '05's October pace. Meanwhile, inventory is at a record high. :shrug:
'02-'05 were record years. What was it before that?
Wish I knew - I got this data from a realtor in North County San Diego who keeps a blog. At least we know that the feverish hype that led to unsustainable high prices is over. If we can get back to levels of affordability that are supported by fundamentals, we'll all be better off in the long run. Unfortunately that means that folks who bought homes in the past few years will lose record amounts of equity during the correction. Edited by tommyGunZ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Diego County Detached Closings, October 1-14:Year   # of sales2003 	9642004 	9042005 	8672006 	6122007 	326Updated 10/16/07. There were 407 closings last month between the 1st and 14th.
So sales are ~ 50% off of last years October pace, ~ 20% off of last month's (Sept) pace, and ~67% off of '03, '04, and '05's October pace. Meanwhile, inventory is at a record high. :confused:
'02-'05 were record years. What was it before that?
Wish I knew - I got this data from a realtor in North County San Diego who keeps a blog. At least we know that the feverish hype that led to unsustainable high prices is over. If we can get back to levels of affordability that are supported by fundamentals, we'll all be better off in the long run. Unfortunately that means that folks who bought homes in the past few years will lose record amounts of equity during the correction.
not if they don't sell for the next 5-7 years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Diego County Detached Closings, October 1-14:Year   # of sales2003 	9642004 	9042005 	8672006 	6122007 	326Updated 10/16/07. There were 407 closings last month between the 1st and 14th.
So sales are ~ 50% off of last years October pace, ~ 20% off of last month's (Sept) pace, and ~67% off of '03, '04, and '05's October pace. Meanwhile, inventory is at a record high. :shrug:
'02-'05 were record years. What was it before that?
Wish I knew - I got this data from a realtor in North County San Diego who keeps a blog. At least we know that the feverish hype that led to unsustainable high prices is over. If we can get back to levels of affordability that are supported by fundamentals, we'll all be better off in the long run. Unfortunately that means that folks who bought homes in the past few years will lose record amounts of equity during the correction.
not if they don't sell for the next 5-7 years.
That may be the low end of the correction period. I am thinking of 6-10 years of depreciation out here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Diego County Detached Closings, October 1-14:Year   # of sales2003 	9642004 	9042005 	8672006 	6122007 	326Updated 10/16/07. There were 407 closings last month between the 1st and 14th.
So sales are ~ 50% off of last years October pace, ~ 20% off of last month's (Sept) pace, and ~67% off of '03, '04, and '05's October pace. Meanwhile, inventory is at a record high. :goodposting:
'02-'05 were record years. What was it before that?
Wish I knew - I got this data from a realtor in North County San Diego who keeps a blog. At least we know that the feverish hype that led to unsustainable high prices is over. If we can get back to levels of affordability that are supported by fundamentals, we'll all be better off in the long run. Unfortunately that means that folks who bought homes in the past few years will lose record amounts of equity during the correction.
not if they don't sell for the next 5-7 years.
Huh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vancouver is booming and has been for around 5 years. Even the suburbs are doing great. It's a bit of a global market though.

Global markets have not been immune from downturns in the past. They may operate on slightly different cycles, but not immune.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bay Area home sales sank to their lowest level in more than two decades in September, the result of a continuing market slowdown and borrowers' increased difficulties in obtaining "jumbo" mortgages, a real estate information service reported.

A total of 5,014 new and resale houses and condos were sold in the nine-county Bay Area in September. That was down 31.3 percent from 7,299 in August, and down 40.1 percent from 8,374 for September a year ago, DataQuick Information Systems reported.

Sales have decreased on a year-over-year basis the last 32 months. Last month was the slowest September in DataQuick's statistics, which go back to 1988. Until last month, the slowest September was in 1991 when 5,735 homes were sold. The strongest September was in 2004 when sales totaled 12,868. The average for the month is 8,961.

"A lot of escrows just didn't close in September because the buyers couldn't get financing. Some of those sales might close this month or next, but many of the deals are going to be put on hold or die on the vine. Jumbo financing has become more available the last few weeks, but lenders are being more cautious than before, and the loans cost more," said Marshall Prentice, DataQuick president.

The number of Bay Area homes purchased with jumbo mortgages dropped from 3,762 in August to 1,935 in September, a decline of 48.6 percent. A jumbo mortgage is a home loan for $417,000 or more. For loans below that threshold, the sales decline was 14.0 percent, from 2,675 in August to 2,301 in September. Historically, sales drop by about 10 percent from August to September.

The median price paid for a Bay Area home was $625,000 last month, down 4.6 percent from $655,000 in August, and up 0.8 percent from $620,000 for September last year.

...

Foreclosure activity is at record levels.

Area		Sep-06	Sep-07	YoY Chg	Sep-06	Sep-07	YoY ChgAlameda		1,690	948	-44%	587250	556000	-5.3%C Costa		1,784	916	-49%	550000	551250	0.2%Marin		292	197	-33%	797000	810000	1.6%Napa		129	68	-47%	610000	544250	-10.8%SF		567	469	-17%	759000	773500	1.9%S Mateo		738	486	-34%	760000	760000	0.0%S Clara		1,986	1,235	-38%	671500	696500	3.7%Solano		606	321	-47%	460000	410000	-10.9%Sonoma		582	374	-36%	530000	500000	-5.7%BayArea		8,374	5,014	-40%	620000	625000	0.8%

Looking at the hardest hit areas:

Solano County - subprime exposure

Napa County - lots of second homes

Alameda County - subprime exposure

Story from DataQuick

Edited by RedmondLonghorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

California Homes Are Overvalued by as Much as 40%, Goldman Says

By Andrew Blackman

Oct. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Californian homes are overvalued by as much as 40 percent and stricter lending standards will probably contribute to ``material'' price declines, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs.

Prices in the state ``have proven surprisingly resilient, given the severe curtailment of credit availability and rising unemployment,'' the analysts said in a note to investors. ``However, we believe that a downturn is imminent.''

In August, the median price for houses in California was $589,000, though economic conditions only support prices of $350,000 to $380,000, the analysts said. The average U.S. home is 13 percent to 14 percent overvalued, the report estimated.

Home sales in California, as in the rest of the U.S., are being hurt by the collapse of the subprime-mortgage industry. Lenders are requiring higher credit ratings from borrowers seeking mortgages and are demanding larger down payments. Standards are particularly strict for jumbo loans, mortgages higher than $417,000, which are common in California.

The median price for houses and condominiums in California will probably drop 4 percent to $553,000 in 2008, the California Association of Realtors said Oct. 10. That would be the biggest decline in 15 years.

The Goldman note, dated Oct. 21, was written by James Fotheringham, Daniel Zimmerman and Monica Gabel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

California Homes Are Overvalued by as Much as 40%, Goldman Says

By Andrew Blackman

Oct. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Californian homes are overvalued by as much as 40 percent and stricter lending standards will probably contribute to ``material'' price declines, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs.

Prices in the state ``have proven surprisingly resilient, given the severe curtailment of credit availability and rising unemployment,'' the analysts said in a note to investors. ``However, we believe that a downturn is imminent.''

In August, the median price for houses in California was $589,000, though economic conditions only support prices of $350,000 to $380,000, the analysts said. The average U.S. home is 13 percent to 14 percent overvalued, the report estimated.

Home sales in California, as in the rest of the U.S., are being hurt by the collapse of the subprime-mortgage industry. Lenders are requiring higher credit ratings from borrowers seeking mortgages and are demanding larger down payments. Standards are particularly strict for jumbo loans, mortgages higher than $417,000, which are common in California.

The median price for houses and condominiums in California will probably drop 4 percent to $553,000 in 2008, the California Association of Realtors said Oct. 10. That would be the biggest decline in 15 years.

The Goldman note, dated Oct. 21, was written by James Fotheringham, Daniel Zimmerman and Monica Gabel.

about 2k of homes just got taken off the market.

:thumbup:

should help with the supply issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

California Homes Are Overvalued by as Much as 40%, Goldman Says

By Andrew Blackman

Oct. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Californian homes are overvalued by as much as 40 percent and stricter lending standards will probably contribute to ``material'' price declines, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs.

Prices in the state ``have proven surprisingly resilient, given the severe curtailment of credit availability and rising unemployment,'' the analysts said in a note to investors. `However, we believe that a downturn is imminent.''

In August, the median price for houses in California was $589,000, though economic conditions only support prices of $350,000 to $380,000, the analysts said. The average U.S. home is 13 percent to 14 percent overvalued, the report estimated.

Home sales in California, as in the rest of the U.S., are being hurt by the collapse of the subprime-mortgage industry. Lenders are requiring higher credit ratings from borrowers seeking mortgages and are demanding larger down payments. Standards are particularly strict for jumbo loans, mortgages higher than $417,000, which are common in California.

The median price for houses and condominiums in California will probably drop 4 percent to $553,000 in 2008, the California Association of Realtors said Oct. 10. That would be the biggest decline in 15 years.

The Goldman note, dated Oct. 21, was written by James Fotheringham, Daniel Zimmerman and Monica Gabel.

I predict the Indianapolis Colts to win Superbowl XLI. What do I get? Edited by jonessed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

California Homes Are Overvalued by as Much as 40%, Goldman Says

By Andrew Blackman

Oct. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Californian homes are overvalued by as much as 40 percent and stricter lending standards will probably contribute to ``material'' price declines, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs.

Prices in the state ``have proven surprisingly resilient, given the severe curtailment of credit availability and rising unemployment,'' the analysts said in a note to investors. ``However, we believe that a downturn is imminent.''

In August, the median price for houses in California was $589,000, though economic conditions only support prices of $350,000 to $380,000, the analysts said. The average U.S. home is 13 percent to 14 percent overvalued, the report estimated.

Home sales in California, as in the rest of the U.S., are being hurt by the collapse of the subprime-mortgage industry. Lenders are requiring higher credit ratings from borrowers seeking mortgages and are demanding larger down payments. Standards are particularly strict for jumbo loans, mortgages higher than $417,000, which are common in California.

The median price for houses and condominiums in California will probably drop 4 percent to $553,000 in 2008, the California Association of Realtors said Oct. 10. That would be the biggest decline in 15 years.

The Goldman note, dated Oct. 21, was written by James Fotheringham, Daniel Zimmerman and Monica Gabel.

CA RE has always seemed to be a different animal. For the past 10 years, I have lived in some of the highest economic growth areas in the US and I was always amazed at the shows where folks in CA were paying almost a $1million for houses I would not consider nice at all. I know location is a key factor, but it does not surprise me that CA would be so much further overpriced than other areas. Hence the subprime issues being huge in CA and why it seemed like most of the subprime lenders were in CA.

That said, it is nice to see a lot of the doom and gloom out there right now, because the media tends to get in the game late. Joe Public's sentiment is pretty down on housing now, and the media/Joe Public is always behind.

Also, kudos to Goldman Sachs for telling us the obvious. I wonder what their "expert" analysts were saying in 2005. :goodposting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

California Homes Are Overvalued by as Much as 40%, Goldman Says

By Andrew Blackman

Oct. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Californian homes are overvalued by as much as 40 percent and stricter lending standards will probably contribute to ``material'' price declines, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs.

Prices in the state ``have proven surprisingly resilient, given the severe curtailment of credit availability and rising unemployment,'' the analysts said in a note to investors. ``However, we believe that a downturn is imminent.''

In August, the median price for houses in California was $589,000, though economic conditions only support prices of $350,000 to $380,000, the analysts said. The average U.S. home is 13 percent to 14 percent overvalued, the report estimated.

Home sales in California, as in the rest of the U.S., are being hurt by the collapse of the subprime-mortgage industry. Lenders are requiring higher credit ratings from borrowers seeking mortgages and are demanding larger down payments. Standards are particularly strict for jumbo loans, mortgages higher than $417,000, which are common in California.

The median price for houses and condominiums in California will probably drop 4 percent to $553,000 in 2008, the California Association of Realtors said Oct. 10. That would be the biggest decline in 15 years.

The Goldman note, dated Oct. 21, was written by James Fotheringham, Daniel Zimmerman and Monica Gabel.

CA RE has always seemed to be a different animal. For the past 10 years, I have lived in some of the highest economic growth areas in the US and I was always amazed at the shows where folks in CA were paying almost a $1million for houses I would not consider nice at all. I know location is a key factor, but it does not surprise me that CA would be so much further overpriced than other areas. Hence the subprime issues being huge in CA and why it seemed like most of the subprime lenders were in CA.

That said, it is nice to see a lot of the doom and gloom out there right now, because the media tends to get in the game late. Joe Public's sentiment is pretty down on housing now, and the media/Joe Public is always behind.

Also, kudos to Goldman Sachs for telling us the obvious. I wonder what their "expert" analysts were saying in 2005. :unsure:

It's not obvious to most folks. I've been hammered for suggesting that CA RE was vastly overvalued and would correct significantly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

California Homes Are Overvalued by as Much as 40%, Goldman Says

By Andrew Blackman

Oct. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Californian homes are overvalued by as much as 40 percent and stricter lending standards will probably contribute to ``material'' price declines, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs.

Prices in the state ``have proven surprisingly resilient, given the severe curtailment of credit availability and rising unemployment,'' the analysts said in a note to investors. ``However, we believe that a downturn is imminent.''

In August, the median price for houses in California was $589,000, though economic conditions only support prices of $350,000 to $380,000, the analysts said. The average U.S. home is 13 percent to 14 percent overvalued, the report estimated.

Home sales in California, as in the rest of the U.S., are being hurt by the collapse of the subprime-mortgage industry. Lenders are requiring higher credit ratings from borrowers seeking mortgages and are demanding larger down payments. Standards are particularly strict for jumbo loans, mortgages higher than $417,000, which are common in California.

The median price for houses and condominiums in California will probably drop 4 percent to $553,000 in 2008, the California Association of Realtors said Oct. 10. That would be the biggest decline in 15 years.

The Goldman note, dated Oct. 21, was written by James Fotheringham, Daniel Zimmerman and Monica Gabel.

CA RE has always seemed to be a different animal. For the past 10 years, I have lived in some of the highest economic growth areas in the US and I was always amazed at the shows where folks in CA were paying almost a $1million for houses I would not consider nice at all. I know location is a key factor, but it does not surprise me that CA would be so much further overpriced than other areas. Hence the subprime issues being huge in CA and why it seemed like most of the subprime lenders were in CA.

That said, it is nice to see a lot of the doom and gloom out there right now, because the media tends to get in the game late. Joe Public's sentiment is pretty down on housing now, and the media/Joe Public is always behind.

Also, kudos to Goldman Sachs for telling us the obvious. I wonder what their "expert" analysts were saying in 2005. :yes:

It's not obvious to most folks. I've been hammered for suggesting that CA RE was vastly overvalued and would correct significantly.
True. I agree on CA, although it is hard for me to discuss since I don't live there. I just always thought it was ridiculous when I saw a 3 bedroom 2000 sq ft house that hadn't been updated since the 50s go for 900k. From the neighborhood, it looked like the suburbs, not a highrise in Manhattan. Outside of DC, you could find a 900k house in the suburbs close in, but it was a lot nicer than the little bungalow in SF. Maybe I am wrong about that, but CA always seemed just a little higher than most other metro areas.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

No Slowdown in Foreclosure Filings

Hardest-hit cities are on coasts and in Rust Belt, according to a new survey

By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer

Nov. 14, 2007

NEW YORK - California, Florida, and Ohio continue to dominate new foreclosure filings, as most of the nation saw increases in the third quarter, according to a new survey.

During the period ended Sept. 30, 77 out of the nation's 100 largest metropolitan areas reported rises in delinquencies compared with the previous three months, according to the latest report from RealtyTrac, an online marketer of foreclosure properties.

The three most affected states reveal the two main causes of mortgage payment problems: economic weakness, as exemplified by Ohio, and speculative excess that led to high home prices and unaffordable mortgages, as represented by California and Florida.

In the past few months, the foreclosure story has become a tale of two regions. Some of the hardest-hit states have traditionally been in the Midwest, where plant closings and job losses have hit the economy there hard.

The other region is the Sun Belt, which is showing even more significant foreclosure growth as out-sized price increases in the first half of the decade led to virtually unchecked real estate speculation.

According to the Center for Responsible Lending, 7.2 million households have subprime mortgages, and more than 14 percent of those are in default. It projects that one of every five of those loans issued in 2005 and 2006 will end in foreclosure, with 2.2 million families losing their homes.

Not every state has been clobbered, according to James Saccacio, RealtyTrac's CEO. "There continue to be pockets of the country - most noticeably metro areas in the Carolinas, Virginia, and Texas - that have thus far dodged the foreclosure bullet," he said in a statement.

But, nationally, foreclosure filings, which include all three main stages of foreclosure, default, or late payments, auction and real estate owned (properties reacquired by lenders and now being resold), were up 30 percent compared with the previous three months.

Among metro areas, the highest delinquency rate was in Stockton, Calif., which totaled 7,116 filings during the three-month period, one for every 31 households. Second was the Detroit area with one per 33 households and a total of 25,708. Half the cities in the top 10 were in California.

Several Massachusetts cities experienced huge delinquency jumps during the quarter. Boston filings soared 146 percent to one per every 220 households, Springfield's increased 151 percent (one per 172) and Worcester 122 percent (one per 150).

Filings in the Providence, R.I./ New Bedford, Mass. area climbed a whopping 295 percent, albeit from a low base, to one for every 549 households.

The metro areas least affected include Greenville, S.C. (one per 3,289), McAllen, Texas (one per 2,185) and Baton Rouge, La. (one per 2,074).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Slowdown in Foreclosure Filings

Hardest-hit cities are on coasts and in Rust Belt, according to a new survey

By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer

Nov. 14, 2007

NEW YORK - California, Florida, and Ohio continue to dominate new foreclosure filings, as most of the nation saw increases in the third quarter, according to a new survey.

During the period ended Sept. 30, 77 out of the nation's 100 largest metropolitan areas reported rises in delinquencies compared with the previous three months, according to the latest report from RealtyTrac, an online marketer of foreclosure properties.

The three most affected states reveal the two main causes of mortgage payment problems: economic weakness, as exemplified by Ohio, and speculative excess that led to high home prices and unaffordable mortgages, as represented by California and Florida.

In the past few months, the foreclosure story has become a tale of two regions. Some of the hardest-hit states have traditionally been in the Midwest, where plant closings and job losses have hit the economy there hard.

The other region is the Sun Belt, which is showing even more significant foreclosure growth as out-sized price increases in the first half of the decade led to virtually unchecked real estate speculation.

According to the Center for Responsible Lending, 7.2 million households have subprime mortgages, and more than 14 percent of those are in default. It projects that one of every five of those loans issued in 2005 and 2006 will end in foreclosure, with 2.2 million families losing their homes.

Not every state has been clobbered, according to James Saccacio, RealtyTrac's CEO. "There continue to be pockets of the country - most noticeably metro areas in the Carolinas, Virginia, and Texas - that have thus far dodged the foreclosure bullet," he said in a statement.

But, nationally, foreclosure filings, which include all three main stages of foreclosure, default, or late payments, auction and real estate owned (properties reacquired by lenders and now being resold), were up 30 percent compared with the previous three months.

Among metro areas, the highest delinquency rate was in Stockton, Calif., which totaled 7,116 filings during the three-month period, one for every 31 households. Second was the Detroit area with one per 33 households and a total of 25,708. Half the cities in the top 10 were in California.

Several Massachusetts cities experienced huge delinquency jumps during the quarter. Boston filings soared 146 percent to one per every 220 households, Springfield's increased 151 percent (one per 172) and Worcester 122 percent (one per 150).

Filings in the Providence, R.I./ New Bedford, Mass. area climbed a whopping 295 percent, albeit from a low base, to one for every 549 households.

The metro areas least affected include Greenville, S.C. (one per 3,289), McAllen, Texas (one per 2,185) and Baton Rouge, La. (one per 2,074).

Being that I lived in Stockton, Ca for one year a few years back.... I am not surprised it has the highest delinquency rate among 'metro areas'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...