InvestorCentric
The news and information that matters to real estate, small business and alternative investors.

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Housing Prices Are Not Simply A Function Of Supply And Demand

A recent report issued by Standard and Poor's asserts that the large quantity of delinquent or foreclosed properties on the market will likely undo any potential coming increases in housing prices. However the problem with this argument is that it is based on the assumption that price in the housing market is a function of supply when, in truth, selling price is a function of the amount of income available for borrowers to service their mortgage debt. See the following post by Sean O'Toole from Foreclosure Truth to learn more on this.

While I’ve previously written about the confusion around the term shadow inventory, it is now increasingly used to refer to properties that are delinquent, or in foreclosure, rather than unlisted bank owned homes. Standard & Poors recently posted a well written analysis of shadow inventory, and has jumped to the conclusion it will likely “undo U.S housing price gains”.

They estimate that the current backlog of distressed mortgages will take just under 3 years to clear. They call that estimate conservative… I think it is likely optimistic given that delinquency rates are still climbing. Still it is a reasonable guess. Here in CA we have one million homeowners who are already delinquent, and we seem to be clearing about 25-30k a month based on foreclosures and short sales (which are the only “solutions” that are actually clearing the distress by eliminating negative equity). Divide one million by 30k, and you come to the same 33 month conclusion they reach.

Another interesting part of the report deals with recently cured loans… those no longer delinquent, primarily due to loan modifications. They suggest that these should be included in calculations of shadow inventory, as they have had a nearly 70 percent rate of recidivism – in other words, most become delinquent again because the loan mod failed to address the core problem of negative equity. Seems like a reasonable conclusion to me.

Where I take some issue with Standard & Poors assessment is there conclusion that liquidation will lead to lower housing prices. They come to this conclusion based on the simple idea that an increase in supply will lower prices. There is some truth in that notion. For example we certainly have seen some pricing strength recently due to efforts to slow foreclosures which have clearly constrained supply, while at the same time demand has been stimulated with low interest rates and tax credits.

But this simple supply/demand theory of housing prices fails to adequately consider the fact that housing is highly leveraged, and that price is primarily a function of income and loan terms, and only secondarily supply and demand. Worse, this over-simplistic supply/demand model has led many to believe that foreclosures cause price declines, when in fact it is exactly the opposite… price declines cause foreclosure.

Note that the foreclosure crisis started in earnest in late 2006, however, price declines did not start until lenders removed the ridiculous loan products that enabled people to over pay in August of 2007. At that point we had a precipitous drop in price… not due to foreclosures, but instead due to the fact that people simply couldn’t afford the prices reached during the bubble without those loan products.

Foreclosures and housing supply grew rapidly during the price correction, but those who think the correction was due to either these foreclosures or the growing supply are terribly mistaken. Instead it was simply a correction back to reasonable prices, that buyers could afford based on their incomes and the more traditional loan products that remained available.

Unfortunately the belief that foreclosures and supply caused those declines remains all too common as yet again evidenced by the conclusion of this report. It is a belief that is delaying our recovery as government works to artificially constrain supply by slowing foreclosures, leaving homeowners stranded in prisons of debt, and buyers with little available inventory to choose from.

The reality is that there is a bottom to housing prices. People need a place to live and are willing to spend a certain portion of their income on housing to do so. Investors need to find returns, and there is a point where buying homes as an investment make sense. In many parts of California we’ve returned to those prices levels. And in those areas that have already corrected withholding supply won’t return prices to prior levels… people simply can’t afford it. And contrary to Standard & Poors’ analysis increasing supply is just as unlikely to cause further price declines… people need a place to live, and investors are too desperate for reasonable returns.

This post has been republished from Foreclosure Truth, a foreclosure news and analysis blog.

Labels:



Thursday, January 21, 2010

Putting The Increase In Building Permits Into Perspective

Although housing starts surged in November and new building permits increased in December, if you take a 30,000 foot view it is relatively insignificant. Tim Iacono points out that the current annual rate of permits issued is far below the previous lows in 1975 when adjusted for population. See the following from The Mess That Greenspan Made.

The Census Bureau reported(.pdf) that housing starts declined but permits for new construction surged during the month of December in what continues to be a difficult period for the home building industry as new home construction remains near record lows.



Housing starts fell 4.0 percent after jumping 10.7 percent the month prior while the number of permits issued, a leading indicator for home building activity, jumped 10.9 percent in December after rising 6.9 percent in November.

Anyone interpreting the surge in permits as a sign of recovery should be reminded that this is very much a case of "one is greater than zero" since, for housing starts and permits, the entire year of 2009 was spent in record low territory for a data series that began in 1959.

For example, the current annual rate of 653,000 for permits issued, down 71 percent from the 2005 high, is still below the pre-2008 record low of 709,000 set back in March of 1975. When adjusted for the increase in population over the last 34 years (from about 215 million to 310 million), the current level of permits issued is almost 50 percent below the 1975 low.

This post has been republished from Tim Iacono's blog, The Mess That Greenspan Made.

Labels: ,



Thursday, October 29, 2009

Can Housing Be Fixed Without Jobs?

An end to the first time home-buyer tax credit could result in a decline in the housing market, experts warn. However, can we expect a sustainable recovery in housing by using temporary measures rather than creating more jobs? See the following post from Expected Returns.

From Bloomberg, U.S. Economy: New home sales drop as end of tax credit looms:

Sales of new U.S. homes unexpectedly fell in September as the end of a tax credit for first-time homebuyers approached, highlighting the importance of government aid to the emerging economic recovery.

Purchases dropped 3.6 percent to a 402,000 annual pace that was lower than the most pessimistic economist’s, according to Commerce Department figures issued today in Washington. Other data showed orders fo climbed 1 percent in September, the fourth gain in the last six months.

The drop in sales “does raise some questions about where the housing market is going to be in six months, arguably without any more support,” said Michael Feroli, an economist at JPMorgan Chase & Co. in New York. “Whatever you think about the economy, it’s not going to be a straight line” toward recovery.

Are people still calling a bottom to this market? This is a sneak peek of what is going to happen once the government removes props from housing. Housing sales are still down year over year, and we're supposed to be in recovery mode. The ultimate driver of housing will be jobs, which we're still shedding, and lower housing prices, which the government won't allow to happen.

Tax Credits + MBS Purchases

“Much of the strength in the economy is due to temporary factors such as fiscal stimulus initiatives like the home- buyers credit,” said Dana Saporta, an economist at Stone & McCarthy Research in Skillman, New Jersey.

Fed policy makers meeting next week are likely to repeat their commitment to keeping interest rates low for an “extended period.” The Fed last month decided to slow purchases of $1.25 trillion in mortgage-backed securities while extending the end-date of the program by three months, to March 31.
Fed policy makers are obviously pushing on a string here when it comes to housing. Low interest rates are immaterial when banks refuse to refinance and people are unemployed. It won't be pretty for housing when there are no more buyers of mortgage-related debt, and foreclosures and distressed sales really start to hit the market.

This post has been republished from Moses Kim's blog, Expected Returns.

Labels: ,



Friday, August 28, 2009

Why Fundamentals Of The Housing Market Are Ridiculously Strong

Dr. Steve Sjuggerud from Daily Wealth points out some keen insights about the fundamentals of the current housing market. He suggests that supply hasn't been this low is a long time, and yet housing is very affordable. These are some of the reasons that real estate could be one of the best places to put your money right now. Continue reading to learn more.

$800,000.

That's about what the median home in San Francisco sold for at the height of the boom three years ago. Then the bust came, and prices fell 45%, according to the Case-Shiller home price index.

But a funny thing has been happening lately... something people haven't really noticed...

Home prices in San Francisco actually bottomed in March. According to the Case-Shiller Index, they've been up every month since... up nearly 4% in the latest month.

On my side of the country in Florida, the same thing is happening. Again, people are almost refusing to notice... But for 11 consecutive months, home sales in Florida have INCREASED over the same period last year.

Meanwhile, homes in Florida are now ridiculously affordable.

The median home price in Florida is now $147,600. That's a mortgage payment of about $650 a month (at current mortgage rates with 20% down). The median household income in Florida is about $50,000, roughly $4,000 a month before tax. That's about 16% of your household income – way below any rules of thumb about how much to put toward a house.

From coast to coast, housing affordability is better than it's ever been, getting a big boost from two things: the housing bust and super-low mortgage interest rates. The pile of government incentives has helped, too.

As an investor, I'm seeing what I love... It's an ideal situation that's rare, but incredibly important if you can recognize it. It's when people's emotional opinions are clearly at odds with the reality of the numbers.

The numbers for housing are really great right now. But after three years of losses, people are sour on housing. Perfect!

Three years ago, we had the opposite situation... The numbers for housing were terrible. Housing was completely unaffordable, and builders were building at a frantic rate. But people were incredibly enthusiastic.

Today, the value is there. What will cause prices to climb again? When the supply of homes available for sale shrinks. It's Economics 101. And guess what? We're there...

Right now, fewer homes are available for sale than at any time in the last 40 years (adjusting the supply for the growth in the U.S. population). If I hadn't crunched the numbers myself, I wouldn't believe it. Take a look:

Economics 101: When the Supply Is Low, Prices Go Up



Even better, when you do the simplest, dumbest comparison – the price of homes versus the supply of homes – you get exactly what you'd expect: When the supply of homes gets low, home prices rise.

David Dreman agrees... In 1980, he literally wrote the book. It's called Contrarian Investment Strategies. In it, he recommended going heavily into stocks. In the current issue of Forbes magazine, Dreman recommends U.S. residential real estate:

If inflation hits hard, the chief culprit of the bear market – real estate – is likely to be one of the best investments in the years ahead. Buy a home if you don't already have one or a second home if you can afford one.

Time to buy a house. (Or two!)

This post has been republished from Daily Wealth, a contrarian investment analysis and advice site.

Labels: ,



Finance Blogs - Blog Top Sites
Real Estate
Top Blogs
Top Real Estate blogs
TopOfBlogs
© 2010 NuWire Investor and NuWire, Inc. All Rights Reserved.