Yeah, Bailey, that's a hoot, isn't it? The question of whether states' attempt to protect consumers can trump the federal government's attempts to protect shareholders has so many ideological knickers in a knot you've got Stevens and Scalia joining on a 5-3.
Man, I love the mortgage business. It's like one big "Confundus Charm" on the political landscape. (You have to be a Harry Potter fan to get that.)
Anyone have any idea what's causing this massive boom in the Midwest?
Usually stuff like that is a result of seasonal adjustments etc. I think all of March is going to be an "upward biased" month for economic data... partly because of wamrer weather and partly because of the earlier time change.
All I can say is that what inflamed my poor sparse hair a while ago, reading about the Coast Bank construction loan fiasco, was that those dolts were making construction loans, and actually disbursing funds, before they got the building permit.
So I no longer assume, necessarily, that permits are "forward-looking" issues.
I'm not sure if this had been commented on yet, but there was a Morningside commentary I first read on housingpanic on the state of some banks that did Alt-A and the problems they were having.
What I thought was interesting was the conundrum they were having selling into a flat MBS market, if they could not make costs in the sale they will probably hold them on the books. I guess we're going to find out who's the best capitalized when the tide goes out.
"Most of the $400 billion in Alt-A loans originated in 2006 were sold into the secondary market. However, the recent subprime mortgage blowup has scared investors away from mortgages, including Alt-A mortgages. Banks, which have continued to originate loans, are faced with two choices. They can sell the mortgages for unattractive prices, taking an immediate loss on the loans, or they can write them down to fair market value and hold them in their loan portfolios.
If a bank chooses to sell the mortgages, we estimate, in a worst-case scenario, that the loans will sell for just 98.64% of their value. Add the cost of making the loan and selling it for a 1.36% discount, and a bank will take a real and immediate hit to its income statement. For instance, SunTrust STI originated $10.1 billion of Alt-A mortgages in 2006. Selling at a 1.36% discount would cost the bank a whopping $137 million, or $0.38 per share. This might seem like a major problem, but we estimate that the loss would have lowered SunTrust's 2006 earnings by only 7%. The largest impact would be at Indymac NDE , where writing Alt-A mortgages to sell into the secondary market is its primary business. We estimate that Indymac would lose almost 3 times what it made in 2006. Investors should note that this is just an exercise; in reality, Indymac would stop writing loans if all it could do is sell them at a loss.
...
We do not believe that selling the Alt-A loans at current market prices is the best action the banks could take for their shareholders. Most banks, and all of the major banks, have enough capital to hold the mortgages in their loan portfolios for the short or long run. The only exception from the nine listed above might be Indymac. As long as the underwriting on the Alt-A mortgages is sound, the banks will be able to make money, not lose it, by holding the mortgages. It would simply take time, as the bank can either collect interest income over several years by holding the mortgage, or wait for the market to recover before selling.
Consequently, we believe that banks will write down the Alt-A mortgages they currently have for sale and hold them in their portfolios at fair market value. Because of accounting rules, banks would record the same type of loss as if they sold the mortgages (see prior table). However, this would be only an accounting loss; while it would hit earnings, it does not destroy any economic value. Assuming that underwr
"Completely Manageable", isn't that what the captain of the Titanic said?
Why must they be managed anyway the talking heads have been saying since January that Sub-prime problems would NOT happen in Alt-A or higher quality loans.
Anyone have any idea what's causing this massive boom in the Midwest?
Maybe because it's the only place left where there's affordable housing?
(of course there's not much in the way of income there, either, so it's still puzzling).
We do not believe that selling the Alt-A loans at current market prices is the best action the banks could take for their shareholders. Most banks, and all of the major banks, have enough capital to hold the mortgages in their loan portfolios for the short or long run.
Which does kind of make you wonder why they were so busy selling them in the first place, if they've got the capital to invest and there's such "manageable" risk there . . .
In my part of Indiana, home permits were down 40% from last year. It would be nice to see more detailed data. The weather was really cold in Feb, so maybe somewhere, much of the Feb starts were shifted to March.
Ethanol is money for farmers, but that would not so quickly translate into local prosperity.
I would just point out that the regional numbers for starts are very unreliable. Just look at the confidence intervials. Even the 44.5% gain falls far short of any measure of statistical significance. If the number were up 68.4%, you could be at least 90% sure that they were indeed up at all. I would also note that not only was the midwest region the weakest in the NAHB index relesed yesterday at 22, it also fell 5 points, the biggest decline of any region. If starts are up so much in the region, shouldn't the builders in the area have some inkling that they are going up?
Thank you for contacting me about subprime mortgages, which are loans that are marketed to borrowers with weak or imperfect credit. I appreciate hearing from you.
In order to purchase a home during the recent housing boom, millions of Americans turned to lenders offering alternative mortgage products such as interest-only and adjustable-rate mortgages. Lured by low interest rates and easy access to credit from predatory subprime lenders, millions of Americans purchased homes they cannot afford.
Though subprime loans have initial monthly payments lower than standard mortgage loans, the payments are structured to increase either suddenly or slowly over time. As a result of recent interest rate hikes coupled with abusive loan terms, payments often grow beyond what borrowers can afford to pay, forcing many families into delinquency or even foreclosure.
The Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs is currently holding hearings on this matter in an effort to gain more information about unscrupulous lending practices and the current crash of the subprime mortgage market.
Please know that I am monitoring this situation closely and will
keep your views in mind should pertinent legislation come before the Senate.
Again thank you for writing to me.
Barbara Boxer
United States Senator
GRRRRRR! I received the above from Boxer's office. If this is her honest-to-goodness level of understanding of what has gone on- I am truly frightened of the fixes she might help dream up.
CA r.e. bubble hasn't been limited to the residential sector. This is incomprehensible!
"April 12 PRNewswire: New Pacific Realty Corp. announced yesterday the sale of 9900 Wilshire to an affiliate of The CPC Group for $500 million. The half-billion-dollar price tag for the 7.95 acre site, which is adjacent to the Beverly Hilton Hotel and overlooks the prestigious Los Angeles Country Club, is one of the last remaining major development parcels in the City of Beverly Hills, and believed to be largest price ever paid in North America for a development site in the entitlement phase. New Pacific Realty acquired the site just three years ago for $33.5 million.
"April 12 PRNewswire: New Pacific Realty Corp. announced yesterday the sale of 9900 Wilshire to an affiliate of The CPC Group for $500 million. .... New Pacific Realty acquired the site just three years ago for $33.5 million.
That makes hitting the lottery seem like hard work.
daisycolorado, I agree with you if we are talking about a well capitalized bank with other business lines and ONLY considering the temporary loss of the forward looking income stream from Alt-A's. However, it might be the surge of losses (from having to keep new Alt-A's on the books combined with the bad Alt-A loan repurchases from previously sold loans) that could well cause problems even for well capitalized banks. If you looked further down in the article where they run the numbers on the estimated worst case bad loan repurchases by these companies, SunTrust was listed as possibly have a 11% loss of 2006 earnings ($225 Million) from bad Alt-A loans. Combine that with a 7% hit for having to keep the new Alt-A's and that's a 18% hit for Alt-A's alone by my math. Not many institutions can take that sort of hit and not wobble. The really fun one was the worst-case repurchase scenario for Alt-A specialist IndyMac, up to 455% of 2006 earnings (a $1.56 Billion loss for a company with a market cap of 2.2 Billion) for bad Alt-A's, and then having to keep all new Alt-A's on the books. Yikes.
Estimated Worst-Case Scenario for Alt-A Mortgage Repurchases
2006 Alt-A Originations
\tBad Loans \tEstimated Loss \t% of 2006 Earnings
Indymac NDE \t
$70.2 billion
\t$6.243 billion \t$1.561 billion \t455%
Washington Mutual WM \t
$25.3 billion
\t$2.252 billion \t$563 million \t16%
Capital One COF \t
$18.3 billion
\t$1.629 billion \t$407 million \t17%
SunTrust STI \t
$10.1 billion
\t$898 million \t$225 million \t11%
Err.. Whoops. Sorry Daisy, I thought you were commenting on the Morningstar article I had posted. My comments still are valid, just a little less direct.
I wrote Boxer about how these "problem" loans are part of what caused prices become so over-inflated, that's why it's so frustrating to get a response like this one back.
Not to mention, she puts ALL the blame on the lenders, as if there weren't a boatload of get-rich-quick investors (and regular folk entranced by the possibility of instant riches) out there utilizing these loans for their own purposes.
Suntrust is up because Coca Cola is up. I am not sure how many shares of coke stock Suntrust has but when Coke went public in the early 1900's SunTrust, "Trust Company Bank" of Atlanta, accepted shares worth $100,000 as their fee for underwriting Coke. The Fed allowed them to keep these shares after the new banking regulations came in to effect in the 30's. Coke, has as you can imagine, been a nice contributor to earnings and to capital. I do have one major concern about liquity. They are offering 5.2% for 10 month CD's. But only to new money. They mention it to their high end customers every time you walk into the bank. Last month it was Air Tran Tickets for new deposits of 25K.
Anyone have any idea what's causing this massive boom in the Midwest?
No but I've seen some of it... north of Kansas City there is a lot of fresh building going on... around growing medium sized cities like Rochester MN (home of the Mayo Clinic), Iowa City (U of Iowa), Madison WI (UW & state capitol)... etc.
These aren't huge additions by So Cal standards but ENORMOUS considering the size of these cities... add to that the regular growth outside Minneapolis, Chicago, etc. and considering the baseline activity has been very low for so long... I can see an increase of 44%.
That 44% increase is still probably 'slower' than the anywhere else in the country in absolute numbers... too lazy to drill down into it though.
I can't speak to the rest of the country, but the market in Milwaukee is booming...some of the manufacturers here (making giant mining equipment, for instance) are seeing some of the best business conditions they have seen in four decades.
dryfly, an article on CNN/Money claimed that the Midwest surge was also due to a tamp-down effect from the bad weather we had in February, all the starts were supposedly delayed until March. The article also noted that YOY the starts were actually down from last spring.
I'll see if I can find it again.. Ugh.
Anyways, I've seen enough other arguments elsewhere (i.e., the data is notoriously noisy and prone to adjustments) to believe that at least some of the unexpected surge was due to noise. However, I also agree that there has been a building boom recently in the Midwest. I'm just not sure whether it was supported by demand/underlying economics or if it was just a speculative bubble, I personally don't see much evidence of peoples' base pay improving or overall increased job demand out here. I guess we're about to find out.
Tanta, Check out this Creditslips story on a Supreme Court decision (Watters v. Wachovia) just released.
Credit Slips
So, how about those building permits increasing 0.8%
Just what we need, more inventory!!!
Yeah, Bailey, that's a hoot, isn't it? The question of whether states' attempt to protect consumers can trump the federal government's attempts to protect shareholders has so many ideological knickers in a knot you've got Stevens and Scalia joining on a 5-3.
Man, I love the mortgage business. It's like one big "Confundus Charm" on the political landscape. (You have to be a Harry Potter fan to get that.)
Housing start is the best way to get rid of empty land. Definitely better than just sell this land.
Starts in the Midwest surged 44% last month, marking the biggest gain in 16 years. Starts in other regions fell between 3% and 6%.
Housing starts, building permits both rise 0.8% in March - MarketWatch
Anyone have any idea what's causing this massive boom in the Midwest?
Thanks.
Anyone have any idea what's causing this massive boom in the Midwest?
Usually stuff like that is a result of seasonal adjustments etc. I think all of March is going to be an "upward biased" month for economic data... partly because of wamrer weather and partly because of the earlier time change.
All I can say is that what inflamed my poor sparse hair a while ago, reading about the Coast Bank construction loan fiasco, was that those dolts were making construction loans, and actually disbursing funds, before they got the building permit.
So I no longer assume, necessarily, that permits are "forward-looking" issues.
I'm not sure if this had been commented on yet, but there was a Morningside commentary I first read on housingpanic on the state of some banks that did Alt-A and the problems they were having.
The resource cannot be found.
What I thought was interesting was the conundrum they were having selling into a flat MBS market, if they could not make costs in the sale they will probably hold them on the books. I guess we're going to find out who's the best capitalized when the tide goes out.
"Most of the $400 billion in Alt-A loans originated in 2006 were sold into the secondary market. However, the recent subprime mortgage blowup has scared investors away from mortgages, including Alt-A mortgages. Banks, which have continued to originate loans, are faced with two choices. They can sell the mortgages for unattractive prices, taking an immediate loss on the loans, or they can write them down to fair market value and hold them in their loan portfolios.
If a bank chooses to sell the mortgages, we estimate, in a worst-case scenario, that the loans will sell for just 98.64% of their value. Add the cost of making the loan and selling it for a 1.36% discount, and a bank will take a real and immediate hit to its income statement. For instance, SunTrust STI originated $10.1 billion of Alt-A mortgages in 2006. Selling at a 1.36% discount would cost the bank a whopping $137 million, or $0.38 per share. This might seem like a major problem, but we estimate that the loss would have lowered SunTrust's 2006 earnings by only 7%. The largest impact would be at Indymac NDE , where writing Alt-A mortgages to sell into the secondary market is its primary business. We estimate that Indymac would lose almost 3 times what it made in 2006. Investors should note that this is just an exercise; in reality, Indymac would stop writing loans if all it could do is sell them at a loss.
...
We do not believe that selling the Alt-A loans at current market prices is the best action the banks could take for their shareholders. Most banks, and all of the major banks, have enough capital to hold the mortgages in their loan portfolios for the short or long run. The only exception from the nine listed above might be Indymac. As long as the underwriting on the Alt-A mortgages is sound, the banks will be able to make money, not lose it, by holding the mortgages. It would simply take time, as the bank can either collect interest income over several years by holding the mortgage, or wait for the market to recover before selling.
Consequently, we believe that banks will write down the Alt-A mortgages they currently have for sale and hold them in their portfolios at fair market value. Because of accounting rules, banks would record the same type of loss as if they sold the mortgages (see prior table). However, this would be only an accounting loss; while it would hit earnings, it does not destroy any economic value. Assuming that underwr
...which often go to borrowers who cannot provide full documentation of income or assets...
"Cannot"? More like "did not want to".
Assuming that underwriting remains sound, banks should recognize enough income in the long run to more than offset this loss.
In other words, banks would earn a long-run profit on the Alt-A mortgages in this scenario. ..."
"Completely Manageable", isn't that what the captain of the Titanic said?
Why must they be managed anyway the talking heads have been saying since January that Sub-prime problems would NOT happen in Alt-A or higher quality loans.
Anyone have any idea what's causing this massive boom in the Midwest?
Maybe because it's the only place left where there's affordable housing?
(of course there's not much in the way of income there, either, so it's still puzzling).
OT, but the inflation numbers are starting to look like deja vu all over again:
Internet Bubble
Housing Bubble
I suspect the ethanol boom is helping the MidWest. Ag prices are high
We do not believe that selling the Alt-A loans at current market prices is the best action the banks could take for their shareholders. Most banks, and all of the major banks, have enough capital to hold the mortgages in their loan portfolios for the short or long run.
Which does kind of make you wonder why they were so busy selling them in the first place, if they've got the capital to invest and there's such "manageable" risk there . . .
In my part of Indiana, home permits were down 40% from last year. It would be nice to see more detailed data. The weather was really cold in Feb, so maybe somewhere, much of the Feb starts were shifted to March.
Ethanol is money for farmers, but that would not so quickly translate into local prosperity.
I would just point out that the regional numbers for starts are very unreliable. Just look at the confidence intervials. Even the 44.5% gain falls far short of any measure of statistical significance. If the number were up 68.4%, you could be at least 90% sure that they were indeed up at all. I would also note that not only was the midwest region the weakest in the NAHB index relesed yesterday at 22, it also fell 5 points, the biggest decline of any region. If starts are up so much in the region, shouldn't the builders in the area have some inkling that they are going up?
Dear Friend:
Thank you for contacting me about subprime mortgages, which are loans that are marketed to borrowers with weak or imperfect credit. I appreciate hearing from you.
In order to purchase a home during the recent housing boom, millions of Americans turned to lenders offering alternative mortgage products such as interest-only and adjustable-rate mortgages. Lured by low interest rates and easy access to credit from predatory subprime lenders, millions of Americans purchased homes they cannot afford.
Though subprime loans have initial monthly payments lower than standard mortgage loans, the payments are structured to increase either suddenly or slowly over time. As a result of recent interest rate hikes coupled with abusive loan terms, payments often grow beyond what borrowers can afford to pay, forcing many families into delinquency or even foreclosure.
The Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs is currently holding hearings on this matter in an effort to gain more information about unscrupulous lending practices and the current crash of the subprime mortgage market.
Please know that I am monitoring this situation closely and will
keep your views in mind should pertinent legislation come before the Senate.
Again thank you for writing to me.
Barbara Boxer
United States Senator
GRRRRRR! I received the above from Boxer's office. If this is her honest-to-goodness level of understanding of what has gone on- I am truly frightened of the fixes she might help dream up.
Since when is a 5 cent hit on $1.44 in earnings like the Titanic hitting an iceberg? Surely there must be more bad news than just this out there.
Sometimes, minor problems like this really are manageable. Even by bumbling bank management teams.
Not that I would look to the stock market for guidance, but Suntrusts stock is up $1.82 or 2.24% on this news....
CA r.e. bubble hasn't been limited to the residential sector. This is incomprehensible!
"April 12 PRNewswire: New Pacific Realty Corp. announced yesterday the sale of 9900 Wilshire to an affiliate of The CPC Group for $500 million. The half-billion-dollar price tag for the 7.95 acre site, which is adjacent to the Beverly Hilton Hotel and overlooks the prestigious Los Angeles Country Club, is one of the last remaining major development parcels in the City of Beverly Hills, and believed to be largest price ever paid in North America for a development site in the entitlement phase. New Pacific Realty acquired the site just three years ago for $33.5 million.
"April 12 PRNewswire: New Pacific Realty Corp. announced yesterday the sale of 9900 Wilshire to an affiliate of The CPC Group for $500 million. .... New Pacific Realty acquired the site just three years ago for $33.5 million.
That makes hitting the lottery seem like hard work.
It all continues until it doesn't. My contacts in large framing contractors laughs at the 44%. A few starts, but nothing like that.
I got an update from my ohio real estate friend today....at first i got the idea absolutely nothing gloomy was happening, But......
The market is buying and selling very well but prices are down 10%
If you write a Sentor write about Real-estate prices and affordability not the loans.
daisycolorado, I agree with you if we are talking about a well capitalized bank with other business lines and ONLY considering the temporary loss of the forward looking income stream from Alt-A's. However, it might be the surge of losses (from having to keep new Alt-A's on the books combined with the bad Alt-A loan repurchases from previously sold loans) that could well cause problems even for well capitalized banks. If you looked further down in the article where they run the numbers on the estimated worst case bad loan repurchases by these companies, SunTrust was listed as possibly have a 11% loss of 2006 earnings ($225 Million) from bad Alt-A loans. Combine that with a 7% hit for having to keep the new Alt-A's and that's a 18% hit for Alt-A's alone by my math. Not many institutions can take that sort of hit and not wobble. The really fun one was the worst-case repurchase scenario for Alt-A specialist IndyMac, up to 455% of 2006 earnings (a $1.56 Billion loss for a company with a market cap of 2.2 Billion) for bad Alt-A's, and then having to keep all new Alt-A's on the books. Yikes.
The resource cannot be found.
Estimated Worst-Case Scenario for Alt-A Mortgage Repurchases
2006 Alt-A Originations
\tBad Loans \tEstimated Loss \t% of 2006 Earnings
Indymac NDE \t
$70.2 billion
\t$6.243 billion \t$1.561 billion \t455%
Washington Mutual WM \t
$25.3 billion
\t$2.252 billion \t$563 million \t16%
Capital One COF \t
$18.3 billion
\t$1.629 billion \t$407 million \t17%
SunTrust STI \t
$10.1 billion
\t$898 million \t$225 million \t11%
Err.. Whoops. Sorry Daisy, I thought you were commenting on the Morningstar article I had posted. My comments still are valid, just a little less direct.
Yal,
I wrote Boxer about how these "problem" loans are part of what caused prices become so over-inflated, that's why it's so frustrating to get a response like this one back.
Not to mention, she puts ALL the blame on the lenders, as if there weren't a boatload of get-rich-quick investors (and regular folk entranced by the possibility of instant riches) out there utilizing these loans for their own purposes.
Suntrust is up because Coca Cola is up. I am not sure how many shares of coke stock Suntrust has but when Coke went public in the early 1900's SunTrust, "Trust Company Bank" of Atlanta, accepted shares worth $100,000 as their fee for underwriting Coke. The Fed allowed them to keep these shares after the new banking regulations came in to effect in the 30's. Coke, has as you can imagine, been a nice contributor to earnings and to capital. I do have one major concern about liquity. They are offering 5.2% for 10 month CD's. But only to new money. They mention it to their high end customers every time you walk into the bank. Last month it was Air Tran Tickets for new deposits of 25K.
I wonder where Bank of America falls on the Morningstar list...
Anyone have any idea what's causing this massive boom in the Midwest?
No but I've seen some of it... north of Kansas City there is a lot of fresh building going on... around growing medium sized cities like Rochester MN (home of the Mayo Clinic), Iowa City (U of Iowa), Madison WI (UW & state capitol)... etc.
These aren't huge additions by So Cal standards but ENORMOUS considering the size of these cities... add to that the regular growth outside Minneapolis, Chicago, etc. and considering the baseline activity has been very low for so long... I can see an increase of 44%.
That 44% increase is still probably 'slower' than the anywhere else in the country in absolute numbers... too lazy to drill down into it though.
Last Anonymous was me...
I can't speak to the rest of the country, but the market in Milwaukee is booming...some of the manufacturers here (making giant mining equipment, for instance) are seeing some of the best business conditions they have seen in four decades.
Dirk van Dijk,
The articel claims the margin of error is 11%.
dryfly, an article on CNN/Money claimed that the Midwest surge was also due to a tamp-down effect from the bad weather we had in February, all the starts were supposedly delayed until March. The article also noted that YOY the starts were actually down from last spring.
I'll see if I can find it again.. Ugh.
Anyways, I've seen enough other arguments elsewhere (i.e., the data is notoriously noisy and prone to adjustments) to believe that at least some of the unexpected surge was due to noise. However, I also agree that there has been a building boom recently in the Midwest. I'm just not sure whether it was supported by demand/underlying economics or if it was just a speculative bubble, I personally don't see much evidence of peoples' base pay improving or overall increased job demand out here. I guess we're about to find out.