The new limits for FHA and the GSEs will be 125 percent of the median area home price, capped at $730,000 in the countrys costliest housing markets much higher than the administration previously supported.
This morning the National Association of Realtors reported that existing home sales in December fell to a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR) of 4.89 million, 2.2% below November, and down 22.0% from a year ago. The report was also below consensus expectations of a SAAR of 4.95 million. Existing home sales are recorded at the close of escrow, so these numbers reflect deals being made for the most part in November. The price of a median house was $208,400, down 6.0% from a year ago. Sales fell in all four regions with the Northeast slowing the most this month, down 4.6% for the month and 22.4% for the year. The West followed with a 2.1% decline for the month and down 24.8% year over year. Sales in the Midwest fell 1.7% for the month and are off 20.5% year over year. The South fared the best with only a 1.0% decline for the month and off 20.9% year over year. In terms of median prices, the more expensive the region, the more prices are falling. The West is the most expensive region with a current median price of $309,800, but that is down 11.1% year over year. The Northeast follows with a median price of $258,600 which is down 8.9% from a year ago. The median price in the South was $173,400, off 4.1% from a year ago and in the Midwest the median price fell 3.9% to $159,800.
The good news is that inventories fell 7.4% to 3.91 million. That reduced the months supply figure to 9.6 months from 10.1 months in November. However, housing inventories almost always fall in December (do you really want the prospective buyers touring your house on Christmas Eve?), so do not read too much into the decline in inventories. The decline was actually smaller than the average decline for December since 2001. We are far from out of the woods in the housing market, and it is very likely that inventories will swell again in the spring. Relative to historical relationships with rent and incomes, housing prices still have about another 15-20% decline to come nationwide (more in bubble areas).
Since the surprise rate cut by the Fed, the homebuilding stocks have had an incredible rally, think of it as not credible. There have been several other sharp rallies in these stocks on the way down. If you are not out of them, get out now. If you have a strong stomach, consider shorting them. The time to buy these is after two of the following stocks have declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy (then buy the rest of them): Beazer (BZH), Lennar (LEN), D.R. Horton (DHI), Toll Brothers (TOL), Standard Pacific (SPF), Hovnanian (HOV), Centex (CTX), KB Homes (KBH), M/I Homes (MHO), Ryland (RYL) and Pulte (PHM).
Just kidding. Thanks for the stats, CR. I would actually like to see RE prices to come down more this year so we can buy for less, but I also think the RE market along with the general economy will surprise to the upside. Certainly, RE will lag though.
GDP growths will be >2% in 2008 with no quarter in negative territory.
But now that we have $725k FHA loans, sales will shoot through the roof! Everyone in California that has been putting off that home purchase will jump at the opportunity. After all, it isn't current prices or future prices or size of mortgage payment that influence home buying decisions but simply the ability to get a loan. Get a loan = "yes"? Buy a house = "yes"! It's that simple. (Apparently to Congress)
The accord includes a provision allowing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the largest U.S. mortgage finance companies, to temporarily buy mortgages of up to $625,000, exceeding a $417,000 federal limit.
Guess we will have to wait until Bush gives his pump the market speech later today.
But I thought any loans backed by Fannie Freddie require income verification. And I thought they have some fairly strict limits on debt to income levels.
Tanta -- am I wrong in assuming this.
If not, then even with higher caps, I cannot see this having much of an impact except to allow some individuals to refinance into lower cost loans.
At 750k I would think one would have to Document 140k in income just to qualify. How many households can document that level of income?
I look at CRs world famous graphs and see:
360,000 sales in December.
3,900,000 inventory in December.
Dividing I get 10.8 months of inventory Dec/Dec. This isn't really true since December sales are recorded off Oct/Nov inventory but I won't quibble. The NAR pulled a fast one to try and claim 9.6 months.
Yeah 2007 was the 5th highest on record, but even if EHS level out at the December SAAR (i.e. no further decline for the rest of the year) then 2008 will be the 12th highest on record.
Cal House Bear,
I was wondering that same thing. This morning I posted a question if this might be Step 1 of 3, in a plan to offload garbage onto the FHA.
Step 2: Lower conforming limits.
Step 3: Allow SISA.
"But I thought any loans backed by Fannie Freddie require income verification. And I thought they have some fairly strict limits on debt to income levels."
Me, too. How much difference will this make in California? Florida? Not a lot, I'd say. Or am I wrong?
Of course in Kentucky, you'll be able to afford an even bigger minimanse with the extra cash. I don't suppose anybody thought about limiting this geographically to high cost areas?
lama has it right. The whole point of raising the limits is to remove a loophole that was preventing the GSE's from buying toxic loans over 417k. Now they can concentrate all the garbage in GSE's.
Then the qustion is does the gov't just let the GSE's fail or do they come up with the trillion or so dollars to bail them out?
I'm tempted to refinance to a GSE with a huge cash out, use the money to buy another house in cash and let my GSE mortgage default. My guess is since it's all part of the plan, they won't do anything to me.
About 8% of US households would qualify for the new conforming mortgage limit. Of course, I wonder what percentage of that 8% live in areas where 700k gets you roughly 700 square feet. Yippee!
(quote)
OK, some may think this is absurd, but I've stumbled over an interesting correlation this weekend. Uranus in the sign it is travelling thru seems to determine the area where an extreme financial boom/bust scenario takes place --- this is to answer CR's question WHY are oil prices going thru the roof.
Uranus in aquarius correlated with the tech boom/bust as aquarius rules technology. Now uranus in pisces brings along a giant oil boom and soon bust, as pisces rules oil. It seems when uranus travels thru the mid of a zodiac sign (15 degrees) that's when the peak comes in. This means oil could top out within a year, followed by a major bust like the Nascrash 2000-2002, or a loss of 80% from the top. Please note I am not talking about causation, only correlation.
If this is true, we'll get the next uber-boom / bust in steel, the meats or defense as these are the topics rules by aries, the next sign uranus will travel thru.
I know this explanation is non-economical and rather astrological. However, it can explain past boom/bust areas in the economy.
There's been several good columns on damage the Fed may have done with the emergency cut, including George Soros' comments to the FT. It may take awhile for all the harm to come out.
The Fed may have blown up several hedge funds yesterday.
Also, they may have thrown off the natural progress of investors on the Market Emotions Cycle.
I think before the cut, people were moving from Denial to Fear. Now, some have moved back to Anxiety, which means they will have to do Denial and Fear all over again.
"at some point next year. That will put the "months of supply" number above 12"
CalculatedRisk at 10:35 AM
Tell me I'm not reading this right. We have to wait until 2009 before months of supply is 12?
The affirmations affect approximately $3.2 billion in outstanding certificates and reflect adequate relationships of credit enhancement (CE) to future loss expectations. The downgrades reflect the deterioration in the relationship of CE to future loss expectations and affect $35.6 million in outstanding certificates.
The underlying collateral for the aforementioned transactions consist primarily of fixed- and adjustable-rate, conventional, fully amortizing, first lien residential mortgage loans extended to prime borrowers. The mortgage loans were either originated or acquired by JP Morgan Chase and Chase Home Finance
I think before the cut, people were moving from Denial to Fear. Now, some have moved back to Anxiety, which means they will have to do Denial and Fear all over again.
If this is true, we'll get the next uber-boom / bust in steel, the meats or defense as these are the topics rules by aries, the next sign uranus will travel thru.
I can understand Aries steel and defense. War, bullets, bombs, etc.
CR said: "...This suggests sales in 2008 will fall significantly from the 2007 level."
Interest rates have now returned to the low levels they were at before the "top" in housing. You honestly don't believe that this is going to make any difference, especially when considering that there's good reason to think they're going to be lower just in time the busiest part of the home-buying season?
A co-worker just spoke with a real estate appraiser. They are still under pressure by lenders to give "generous" appraisals. (This is in depressed W.Pa., never really participated in the bubble.) According to him, not as many lenders willing to lend to overestimated market values as in the past, but they're still out there and they want the appraisal to justify the requested loan amount.
Probably not. If current sales here in this area of SW Fl don't jump by a huge(and I mean huge!) number before the end of this month,we may have finally hit the brick wall. The counties website is showing a whopping 22 sales to this point in January. We had over 450 in December.
I know this will not transfer to the rest of the country but I have talked with friends in other areas and I have a strange feeling January will disappoint...
The best part is we show 36 FC's on the same site...
what surprises me is how seemingly stable inventory was up until 05.
Inventory never got above 2,500,000 until 05. Yet in 2 -3 years it grew by over 80% (eyeballing the numbers on the graph) That's an amazing amout of inventory. I'd love to see inventory number prior to 82 and see if there was ever a similar parcentage growth in inventory and what the repercusions of that was. Truely uncharted territory.
Said a credit trader in Germany: "It kind of begs the question now, did the Fed cut rates courtesy of a rogue trader at SocGen having to close out a massive position and sending the stock market into turmoil?"
This is so sad. All these attempts at "fixing" the market. It's like an ex-boyfriend teasing his ex-girlfriend that this time it will be different. Be a man, break up already, and the heart will heal eventually heal. The longer you give her hope, the more it will hurt. Don't let this go on and on and on. Enough already! Stop the madness.
"VANCOUVER, British Columbia, Jan 24 (Reuters) - Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said on Thursday that subprime mortgages were risky, but they helped broaden home ownership.
ME: So homeownership is an endgame with no risk in itself? Anyway, he's right...subprime increased homeownership....for BANKS!
"During a speech to a financial audience in the Canadian West Coast city of Vancouver, Greenspan said subprime mortgages financed an increase in housing among minorities."
ME: So before subprime mortgages minorities had no housing? Did they live in the bushes for years until subprime was born?
"Subprime mortgages were risky, but they were worth the risk, he said. (Reporting by Nicole Mordant and Allan Dowd; Editing by Peter Galloway)"
ME: I don't recall him calling subprime "risky" before. And risky for whom exactly? And are we now trying to prevent those who took the risk from bearing the cost? Bailouts anyone? I know one thing, those who didn't take risk and saved are getting less for those savings. Perhaps they are the ones who took the risk...hop on the bandwagon or else.
Rob Dawg said: "The return to low interest rates is accompanied by stricter standards of qualification. Low interest rates are not what is driving sales."
Well, that statement supports CR's conclusion, but is it true? If you look at CR's annual existing home sales chart, even the 2001 recession didn't slow housing sales. The Fed was aggressively lowering rates then, too. Were the lending standards as loose then as they were in 2005-2006?
The Fed began tightening in June, 2004 and home sales peaked-out a year later as the effect of the tightening took hold.
Now the Fed is aggressively easing again.
And nobody thinks this makes a difference? Huh. Okay.
Well, that statement supports CR's conclusion, but is it true? If you look at CR's annual existing home sales chart, even the 2001 recession didn't slow housing sales. The Fed was aggressively lowering rates then, too. Were the lending standards as loose then as they were in 2005-2006?
Compared to 2005-2006, houses were relatively cheap in 2001.
So everyone believes this rogue trader BS? One trader in France caused 100's of billions in worldwide market cap to be lost in two days.
Color me skeptical.
we are all screwed
i don't
thinking about the VAR, what was his notional to lose the $7 large?
The other thing... these could not have been plain vanilla futures, on an regulated exchange. Margin call's would have been made, just like with NickL at barings... He would have to mtm daily...
No, I think these were of the variety of variance and vol otc swaps...
No other way...
House price rises beget house price rises. House prices we low and rising in 2001.
House prices are falling now. Big difference.
That's why it's important to not blow up bubbles. It's very costly to have dropping house prices. A slow rise in price correlating with inflation keeps default rates/costs low and allows equity buildup to finance future move-up purchases.
Rob Dawg said: "The return to low interest rates is accompanied by stricter standards of qualification. Low interest rates are not what is driving sales."
Well, that statement supports CR's conclusion, but is it true?
The stricter standards part is true. As to the conclusion, yes, I agree it is only part of the picture. Still part however.
If you look at CR's annual existing home sales chart, even the 2001 recession didn't slow housing sales. The Fed was aggressively lowering rates then, too. Were the lending standards as loose then as they were in 2005-2006?
Exactly. In 2001 we were coming out of a period of low appreciation into one of high appreciation and were in a period of loosening standards.
The Fed began tightening in June, 2004 and home sales peaked-out a year later as the effect of the tightening took hold.
There are interactions for sure but 25bp every few months is not tightening in the face of unprecedented low rates. I would respond that until mid 2005 at least there was only a period of loose credit rather than tightened credit.
Now the Fed is aggressively easing again.
And nobody thinks this makes a difference? Huh. Okay.
If the easing were the only consideration we could all relax and trade the 10 year. Sorry, Sebastian.
On Greenspan's comments about subprime and home ownership: My analysis of one month's homes getting foreclosure notices in our northwest Washington county showed that close to half of these loans were refis. I have read anecdotal accounts of similar situations in urban neighborhoods elsewhere. People ignorant of finance did ruinous refi deals on homes they already owned. Now they are on the verge of becoming renters again.
STATEMENT OF OFHEO DIRECTOR
JAMES B. LOCKHART ON CONFORMING LOAN LIMIT INCREASE
We are very disappointed in the proposal to increase the conforming loan limit as we believe it is a mistake to do so in the absence of comprehensive GSE regulatory reform. To restore confidence in the markets we must ensure that the GSEs regulator has all the necessary safety and soundness tools.
Yesterday Chairman Dodd talked about moving a GSE reform bill early this year. We are ready to work with him and the Senate Banking Committee. We will also be working with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure that any increase in the conforming loan limit moves through their rigorous new product approval process quickly and has appropriate risk management policies and capital in place.
She wants to "freeze" foreclosures for 90-days (does this mean people get to live there for free for 3 months!?)
She wants to "freeze" resets on adjustibles for 5-years.
This smacks completely of socialist-progressive, bail everyone out who made bad decisions. Forget the people who were responsible, saved and want to buy a house during the downturn - now those people have to pay much more because the government is articifically supporting the market. She (now completely socialist) makes me SICK!
Im tired of chosing from Republicans, who bail out business who make bad decisions, and Democrats, who bail out people who make bad decisions.
Does anybody know when conforming loan limits would be raised, if the bill passes? How immediate would it be?
I've read some comments suggesting logistical issues would mean a lag between passage of the bill and actual availability of those raised-limit loans...
To be fair to Sebastian, if interest rates were going higher now (due to inflation fears, for example), a lot of us would be listing that as a reason why housing would be hurt even more this year.
So, Seb does have a point, IMO -- low interest rates will take the sting off (as long as they last).
But Seb, you've got to acknowledge that while lower rates help, the list of elements hurting home sales is significant:
Tighter lending standards
Loan securitization broken
Price depreciation
Larger inventories
Absence of speculators
Increased consumer anxiety
Possible recession
Increasing unemployment and underemployment
That said, the man sums it up more cleanly:
"Sebastian, will lower interest rates make a difference? Sure. Will higher conforming limits make a difference? Yes.
Will sales be significantly lower in '08 than in '07? Yep, all but guaranteed."
That's why it's important to not blow up bubbles. It's very costly to have dropping house prices. A slow rise in price correlating with inflation keeps default rates/costs low and allows equity buildup to finance future move-up purchases.
Average Joe
Average Joe,
Have you ever read some long-term RE price statistics of this country? in the pre-1950s RE prices easily fell 20-30% from a peak within a few years. Only after the FED took over the volatility and particularly the down-swings were smoothed out significantly. You actually made the argument pro-FED here in a long time by the bears. "It's indeed very costly to have falling home prices." === like under the gold standard.
I've read some comments suggesting logistical issues would mean a lag between passage of the bill and actual availability of those raised-limit loans...
ShortCourage
Time seems to be running out fast for bears these days. What a difference a few days can make.
MTHood - I agree - the lower rates will definitely take the sting off but all those negatives remain.
One reason I would add to buy a house would be 'fear of inflation'. If inflation takes off, there may be a lot of people sorry they didn't lock in a low price now with a 30 year mortgage. My parents bought a house in 1974 for 60,000 with a 30 year mortgage at 5% and by 1986 it was sold for 450,000. Efectively a free house, something to think about...
Don't underestimate the low rates though - we know too many people just look at the monthly payment as to whether they can afford to buy. With 30 year rates in the low 5% range, people can afford a lot more house right now.
One thing I always find a little funny is the people here who have been patiently renting waiting for a housing crash... why? ... because they want to buy a house of course!
I do know that many claim the current downturn is the first like it since the great depression and that Greenspan himself said that a national housing downturn was unprecedented and unlikely.
Apparently Greenspan was unaware of your stats as well.
One thing I always find a little funny is the people here who have been patiently renting waiting for a housing crash... why? ... because they want to buy a house of course!
There's a semantics issue. They've been waiting to buy a home because houses are too expensive. Owning or contracting to own a home is not what has been happening recently.
Thanks for posting Lockhart's statement. In a sane world, Congress would listen to him. To what extent does he have the authority to keep the GSEs from doing foolish (or more foolish) things?
Who wants to buy a house and worry about changes in value, not due to reality or the free market, but due to one man, and one institution and politics.
Once again, the Feds favor window dressing over actual solutions
Washington, D.C. - A $145 billion dollar stimulus package called for by President Bush is more for show than solving current economic woes, says the Libertarian Party. "The President's economic stimulus plan fails to address the real mechanisms for economic growth," says Libertarian Party Executive Director Shane Cory.
"The proposed package is nothing but a multi-billion dollar dog and pony show," says Cory. "It's a cash advance on taxes not yet paid, which passes the debt to future taxpayers. It's not good for the economy, and it won't help."
"One thing I always find a little funny is the people here who have been patiently renting waiting for a housing crash... why? ... because they want to buy a house of course!
There's a semantics issue. They've been waiting to buy a home because houses are too expensive. Owning or contracting to own a home is not what has been happening recently."
Remember, even if the price of houses in your area drops 30 or 40 percent, you won't be able to buy one if you lose your job amid the general carnage. A tsunami sinks all boats.
Remember the Calendar,
This is a SOTU mark,
the trade is long into the speech,
and fade away after...
everyone pull out your highlighters and circle 1375 on your charts... fade above.
Ken Lewis told me so.
Thanks , also, Rally monkey, for the up200 on the day call at 1030am when we were down 200.
They would be better to simply give the 145 billion to the monoline insurers in my opinion, would cover maybe half the losses?
Rob Dawg - I know, I was just making a light hearted point - but really it points out there is pent up demand.
stealthwii - I own a house, if I did not own one, I might consider buying one now. The Orlando market is way off its highs and there are some bargains out there. I could be wrong, but I don't think we are going to see home prices in our area selling for less than $100/ sq ft, but I could be wrong - and the bargains now are closer to $120 / sq ft. Now if the 30 year mortage goes over 7% prices will really drop - but I think the fed prefers stealth inflation.
Once again, you might want to change what you say about "normal" inventory changes from November to December. In this post you again note that a "normal" decline in inventory from November to December is around 13%, even though the historical data contradicts that assertion. A "normal" seasonal decline in inventory from Nov to Dec is about 8 3/4% or so.
OT: Banks' $230 Billion Backlog of Debt Isn't Shrinking
Banks' $230 Billion Backlog of Debt Isn't Shrinking (Update3) - Bloomberg.com
The new limits for FHA and the GSEs will be 125 percent of the median area home price, capped at $730,000 in the countrys costliest housing markets much higher than the administration previously supported.
CQ Politics | Mortgage Relief Added to Economic Stimulus Package
As everyone frantically types their comments trying to be first, I quixotically stake my claim...
What do I do if I see "No comments"?
Zacks.com cross post:
This morning the National Association of Realtors reported that existing home sales in December fell to a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR) of 4.89 million, 2.2% below November, and down 22.0% from a year ago. The report was also below consensus expectations of a SAAR of 4.95 million. Existing home sales are recorded at the close of escrow, so these numbers reflect deals being made for the most part in November. The price of a median house was $208,400, down 6.0% from a year ago. Sales fell in all four regions with the Northeast slowing the most this month, down 4.6% for the month and 22.4% for the year. The West followed with a 2.1% decline for the month and down 24.8% year over year. Sales in the Midwest fell 1.7% for the month and are off 20.5% year over year. The South fared the best with only a 1.0% decline for the month and off 20.9% year over year. In terms of median prices, the more expensive the region, the more prices are falling. The West is the most expensive region with a current median price of $309,800, but that is down 11.1% year over year. The Northeast follows with a median price of $258,600 which is down 8.9% from a year ago. The median price in the South was $173,400, off 4.1% from a year ago and in the Midwest the median price fell 3.9% to $159,800.
The good news is that inventories fell 7.4% to 3.91 million. That reduced the months supply figure to 9.6 months from 10.1 months in November. However, housing inventories almost always fall in December (do you really want the prospective buyers touring your house on Christmas Eve?), so do not read too much into the decline in inventories. The decline was actually smaller than the average decline for December since 2001. We are far from out of the woods in the housing market, and it is very likely that inventories will swell again in the spring. Relative to historical relationships with rent and incomes, housing prices still have about another 15-20% decline to come nationwide (more in bubble areas).
Since the surprise rate cut by the Fed, the homebuilding stocks have had an incredible rally, think of it as not credible. There have been several other sharp rallies in these stocks on the way down. If you are not out of them, get out now. If you have a strong stomach, consider shorting them. The time to buy these is after two of the following stocks have declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy (then buy the rest of them): Beazer (BZH), Lennar (LEN), D.R. Horton (DHI), Toll Brothers (TOL), Standard Pacific (SPF), Hovnanian (HOV), Centex (CTX), KB Homes (KBH), M/I Homes (MHO), Ryland (RYL) and Pulte (PHM).
First?
At least first one not to panic here!
Just kidding. Thanks for the stats, CR. I would actually like to see RE prices to come down more this year so we can buy for less, but I also think the RE market along with the general economy will surprise to the upside. Certainly, RE will lag though.
GDP growths will be >2% in 2008 with no quarter in negative territory.
O-Joe
a first first for me
You are piling on, sir, at a trying time for the NAR.
Bully!
Great analysis, and nice prognostication on December.
But now that we have $725k FHA loans, sales will shoot through the roof! Everyone in California that has been putting off that home purchase will jump at the opportunity. After all, it isn't current prices or future prices or size of mortgage payment that influence home buying decisions but simply the ability to get a loan. Get a loan = "yes"? Buy a house = "yes"! It's that simple. (Apparently to Congress)
Man 1982 wasn't any fun either.
Cheers,
Now I read on Bloomberg it is $625k
The accord includes a provision allowing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the largest U.S. mortgage finance companies, to temporarily buy mortgages of up to $625,000, exceeding a $417,000 federal limit.
Guess we will have to wait until Bush gives his pump the market speech later today.
Re: housing prices, check this out:
LoanPerformance—Mortgage Finance and Securities Risk Management
Click map to enlarge.
Groan.
Run away!
But I thought any loans backed by Fannie Freddie require income verification. And I thought they have some fairly strict limits on debt to income levels.
Tanta -- am I wrong in assuming this.
If not, then even with higher caps, I cannot see this having much of an impact except to allow some individuals to refinance into lower cost loans.
At 750k I would think one would have to Document 140k in income just to qualify. How many households can document that level of income?
I look at CRs world famous graphs and see:
360,000 sales in December.
3,900,000 inventory in December.
Dividing I get 10.8 months of inventory Dec/Dec. This isn't really true since December sales are recorded off Oct/Nov inventory but I won't quibble. The NAR pulled a fast one to try and claim 9.6 months.
Please define what the word "SALE" means specifically.
Thanks
.
Yeah 2007 was the 5th highest on record, but even if EHS level out at the December SAAR (i.e. no further decline for the rest of the year) then 2008 will be the 12th highest on record.
gold over $900. Thank you BB. Let's get another rate cut on Tuesday and push it over $1000.
Cal House Bear,
I was wondering that same thing. This morning I posted a question if this might be Step 1 of 3, in a plan to offload garbage onto the FHA.
Step 2: Lower conforming limits.
Step 3: Allow SISA.
..or something like that.
Fed didn't know about SocGen trades on Monday!
Bernanke didn't know about SocGen's loss when it slashed rates - MarketWatch
But they was gonna cut anyway!
In a fallling real estate market, raising the limits for the GSEs is tantamount to giving them more rope to hang themselves.
I guess they didnt listen to the OFHEO on loan caps:
http://www.ofheo.gov/media/research/MMNOTE11108.pdf
I dont think it will make much difference in California, but it still pisses me off.
"But I thought any loans backed by Fannie Freddie require income verification. And I thought they have some fairly strict limits on debt to income levels."
Me, too. How much difference will this make in California? Florida? Not a lot, I'd say. Or am I wrong?
Of course in Kentucky, you'll be able to afford an even bigger minimanse with the extra cash. I don't suppose anybody thought about limiting this geographically to high cost areas?
Stuart, I think that's the point. Let the banks off the hook and hand the ticking bomb to the GSE's (and Uncle Sam).
lama has it right. The whole point of raising the limits is to remove a loophole that was preventing the GSE's from buying toxic loans over 417k. Now they can concentrate all the garbage in GSE's.
Then the qustion is does the gov't just let the GSE's fail or do they come up with the trillion or so dollars to bail them out?
I'm tempted to refinance to a GSE with a huge cash out, use the money to buy another house in cash and let my GSE mortgage default. My guess is since it's all part of the plan, they won't do anything to me.
If there weren't really any qualifications for home loans in the US, what were exactly the qualifications for traders at Societe Generale?
Where can I apply? I think I can do better
O-Joe
About 8% of US households would qualify for the new conforming mortgage limit. Of course, I wonder what percentage of that 8% live in areas where 700k gets you roughly 700 square feet. Yippee!
O-Joe, you think just anybody can lose $7 billion? It takes real skill.
Otherwise, how can we explain why companies reward guys like Chuck Prince, Stan O'Neal, and Angelo Mozillo with such hefty severance package.
The dangers of conducting monetary policy based on capital market gyrations.
Yahoo! 404 - Page Not Found
Is the Fed was creating booms and busts on purpose to help the economy longer term?
OT: New Limits On Fannie, Freddie Conforming Loans (WSJ)
The economic stimulus package raises conforming loan limits to 125% of median for metro area (capped at $725,000).
Also raises FHA loan limits.
Am I alone in thinking that this part of the plan will have the greatest impact? Way more than a few hundred buck rebate...
Some prior analysis from O-Joe
(quote)
OK, some may think this is absurd, but I've stumbled over an interesting correlation this weekend. Uranus in the sign it is travelling thru seems to determine the area where an extreme financial boom/bust scenario takes place --- this is to answer CR's question WHY are oil prices going thru the roof.
Uranus in aquarius correlated with the tech boom/bust as aquarius rules technology. Now uranus in pisces brings along a giant oil boom and soon bust, as pisces rules oil. It seems when uranus travels thru the mid of a zodiac sign (15 degrees) that's when the peak comes in. This means oil could top out within a year, followed by a major bust like the Nascrash 2000-2002, or a loss of 80% from the top. Please note I am not talking about causation, only correlation.
If this is true, we'll get the next uber-boom / bust in steel, the meats or defense as these are the topics rules by aries, the next sign uranus will travel thru.
I know this explanation is non-economical and rather astrological. However, it can explain past boom/bust areas in the economy.
O-Joe
Optimistic Joe | 10.15.07 - 3:52 pm | #
(end quote)
Always consider the source.
There's been several good columns on damage the Fed may have done with the emergency cut, including George Soros' comments to the FT. It may take awhile for all the harm to come out.
The Fed may have blown up several hedge funds yesterday.
Also, they may have thrown off the natural progress of investors on the Market Emotions Cycle.
http://www.mississauga4sale.com/images/Market-Emotions-Cycle2.jpg
I think before the cut, people were moving from Denial to Fear. Now, some have moved back to Anxiety, which means they will have to do Denial and Fear all over again.
What do you think?
So there will a bust when the meats pass through Uranus?
"at some point next year. That will put the "months of supply" number above 12"
CalculatedRisk at 10:35 AM
Tell me I'm not reading this right. We have to wait until 2009 before months of supply is 12?
More ratings changes:
The affirmations affect approximately $3.2 billion in outstanding certificates and reflect adequate relationships of credit enhancement (CE) to future loss expectations. The downgrades reflect the deterioration in the relationship of CE to future loss expectations and affect $35.6 million in outstanding certificates.
The underlying collateral for the aforementioned transactions consist primarily of fixed- and adjustable-rate, conventional, fully amortizing, first lien residential mortgage loans extended to prime borrowers. The mortgage loans were either originated or acquired by JP Morgan Chase and Chase Home Finance
UNTERNEHMENSNACHRICHTEN NEWS
I think before the cut, people were moving from Denial to Fear. Now, some have moved back to Anxiety, which means they will have to do Denial and Fear all over again.
What do you think?
rich
I fully agree.
-K
I was at the point of running around the room screaming and pulling my hair out.
What stage should this have pulled me back to, because I think I might have gone the wrong direction?
Cheers,
BTW,
Thanks BB. Can I have another?
24-hour Spot Chart - Gold
Cheers,
Misean,
Why are you pulling your hair out?
You've got your silver and gold bullion hidden in your house.
Thanks to you, I've got some SLV.
The Fed did us a favor!
I gotta keep my day job; this waiting for the market to tank/bond insurer or FNMA to go TU and my SDS to go up (and stay up!) is killing me.
Maybe I should take up drinking or smoking during the interim.
I can understand Aries steel and defense. War, bullets, bombs, etc.
But meats? Is that a sector?
I'll see if I can find a meat ETF.
YAY! Fed bubble rescue actions working:
CCI
See what I mean?
You're back to the Anxiety stage of the cycle.
Yep, rich.
Well, at least I don't resort to kicking our beagle.
Downgrades, S&P and Moodys!
CR said: "...This suggests sales in 2008 will fall significantly from the 2007 level."
Interest rates have now returned to the low levels they were at before the "top" in housing. You honestly don't believe that this is going to make any difference, especially when considering that there's good reason to think they're going to be lower just in time the busiest part of the home-buying season?
Sebastia
Seb,
"You honestly don't believe that this is going to make any difference,"
Yep, I honestly don't believe it.
rich,
Just clowning.
Cheers,
Sebastian,
The return to low interest rates is accompanied by stricter standards of qualification. Low interest rates are not what is driving sales.
A co-worker just spoke with a real estate appraiser. They are still under pressure by lenders to give "generous" appraisals. (This is in depressed W.Pa., never really participated in the bubble.) According to him, not as many lenders willing to lend to overestimated market values as in the past, but they're still out there and they want the appraisal to justify the requested loan amount.
Rob,
Read what he wrote, carefully.
Cheers,
jg- "Maybe I should take up drinking or smoking during the interim."
Conjure and I suggest Martel XO and Macanudo Duke of Devon Maduros.
Conjure and I have already sacrificed our livers--at least I think he has a liver--upon the altar of French distillers.
So, If you're going to screw up your lungs and liver, do it with style.
psychodave | 01.24.08 - 3:39 pm |
Probably not. If current sales here in this area of SW Fl don't jump by a huge(and I mean huge!) number before the end of this month,we may have finally hit the brick wall. The counties website is showing a whopping 22 sales to this point in January. We had over 450 in December.
I know this will not transfer to the rest of the country but I have talked with friends in other areas and I have a strange feeling January will disappoint...
The best part is we show 36 FC's on the same site...
Chris
Sebastian, will lower interest rates make a difference? Sure. Will higher conforming limits make a difference? Yes.
Will sales be significantly lower in '08 than in '07? Yep, all but guaranteed.
Best Wishes.
what surprises me is how seemingly stable inventory was up until 05.
Inventory never got above 2,500,000 until 05. Yet in 2 -3 years it grew by over 80% (eyeballing the numbers on the graph) That's an amazing amout of inventory. I'd love to see inventory number prior to 82 and see if there was ever a similar parcentage growth in inventory and what the repercusions of that was. Truely uncharted territory.
That's gotta cost two...entities...50 or 60 bucks a day. I hope you have some shorts.
Rich- "That's gotta cost two...entities...50 or 60 bucks a day."
Ah, but good tobacco, good cognac, life, and especially Fed minutes, are meant to be savored and enjoyed.
Said a credit trader in Germany: "It kind of begs the question now, did the Fed cut rates courtesy of a rogue trader at SocGen having to close out a massive position and sending the stock market into turmoil?"
cutting the fed rates hasn't helped out treasuries and mortgages that much at all has it
First!
First!
Cooking ramen in my percolator | 01.24.08 - 4:37 pm |
Your timing is exquisite.
Thank you, it's the first chuckle I've had today.
So everyone believes this rogue trader BS? One trader in France caused 100's of billions in worldwide market cap to be lost in two days.
Color me skeptical.
This is so sad. All these attempts at "fixing" the market. It's like an ex-boyfriend teasing his ex-girlfriend that this time it will be different. Be a man, break up already, and the heart will heal eventually heal. The longer you give her hope, the more it will hurt. Don't let this go on and on and on. Enough already! Stop the madness.
First!
Cooking ramen in my percolator
ROFLMAO!
Cheers,
Analyzing the market is easy compared to waiting for the water to boil.
Congrats to all you winners. ams16 & Curlydan demand a hand count
E-Trade reports quarterly net loss of $1.7 billion
E-Trade reports quarterly net loss of $1.7 billion - MarketWatch
ex-owner,
Take a trip down memory lane.
Market Turmoil Feared After £500 Million Loss At Office in Singapore : U.K. Fails In Bid for Rescue London Bank - The New York Times
Cheers,
"VANCOUVER, British Columbia, Jan 24 (Reuters) - Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said on Thursday that subprime mortgages were risky, but they helped broaden home ownership.
ME: So homeownership is an endgame with no risk in itself? Anyway, he's right...subprime increased homeownership....for BANKS!
"During a speech to a financial audience in the Canadian West Coast city of Vancouver, Greenspan said subprime mortgages financed an increase in housing among minorities."
ME: So before subprime mortgages minorities had no housing? Did they live in the bushes for years until subprime was born?
"Subprime mortgages were risky, but they were worth the risk, he said. (Reporting by Nicole Mordant and Allan Dowd; Editing by Peter Galloway)"
ME: I don't recall him calling subprime "risky" before. And risky for whom exactly? And are we now trying to prevent those who took the risk from bearing the cost? Bailouts anyone? I know one thing, those who didn't take risk and saved are getting less for those savings. Perhaps they are the ones who took the risk...hop on the bandwagon or else.
Rob Dawg said: "The return to low interest rates is accompanied by stricter standards of qualification. Low interest rates are not what is driving sales."
Well, that statement supports CR's conclusion, but is it true? If you look at CR's annual existing home sales chart, even the 2001 recession didn't slow housing sales. The Fed was aggressively lowering rates then, too. Were the lending standards as loose then as they were in 2005-2006?
The Fed began tightening in June, 2004 and home sales peaked-out a year later as the effect of the tightening took hold.
Now the Fed is aggressively easing again.
And nobody thinks this makes a difference? Huh. Okay.
S.
Well, that statement supports CR's conclusion, but is it true? If you look at CR's annual existing home sales chart, even the 2001 recession didn't slow housing sales. The Fed was aggressively lowering rates then, too. Were the lending standards as loose then as they were in 2005-2006?
Compared to 2005-2006, houses were relatively cheap in 2001.
So everyone believes this rogue trader BS? One trader in France caused 100's of billions in worldwide market cap to be lost in two days.
Color me skeptical.
we are all screwed
i don't
thinking about the VAR, what was his notional to lose the $7 large?
The other thing... these could not have been plain vanilla futures, on an regulated exchange. Margin call's would have been made, just like with NickL at barings... He would have to mtm daily...
No, I think these were of the variety of variance and vol otc swaps...
No other way...
i'm tired of hearing how expensive it is in NYC. If you can't afford it--MOVE!
Sebastian,
As discussed many times:
House price rises beget house price rises. House prices we low and rising in 2001.
House prices are falling now. Big difference.
That's why it's important to not blow up bubbles. It's very costly to have dropping house prices. A slow rise in price correlating with inflation keeps default rates/costs low and allows equity buildup to finance future move-up purchases.
Sebastian, is your real name Sancho?
MSFT kicks conjure bag in the gonads.
Oh, two good laughs in one thread!
Rob Dawg said: "The return to low interest rates is accompanied by stricter standards of qualification. Low interest rates are not what is driving sales."
Well, that statement supports CR's conclusion, but is it true?
The stricter standards part is true. As to the conclusion, yes, I agree it is only part of the picture. Still part however.
If you look at CR's annual existing home sales chart, even the 2001 recession didn't slow housing sales. The Fed was aggressively lowering rates then, too. Were the lending standards as loose then as they were in 2005-2006?
Exactly. In 2001 we were coming out of a period of low appreciation into one of high appreciation and were in a period of loosening standards.
The Fed began tightening in June, 2004 and home sales peaked-out a year later as the effect of the tightening took hold.
There are interactions for sure but 25bp every few months is not tightening in the face of unprecedented low rates. I would respond that until mid 2005 at least there was only a period of loose credit rather than tightened credit.
Now the Fed is aggressively easing again.
And nobody thinks this makes a difference? Huh. Okay.
If the easing were the only consideration we could all relax and trade the 10 year. Sorry, Sebastian.
mp,
Ouch.
Cheers,
cutting the fed rates hasn't helped out treasuries and mortgages that much at all has it
A friend of my looking to refinance a loan was getting really excited about the 10-year hitting 3.3%
Now we've tacked on 40 bps.
Does this seem familiar?
Context is very important.
If I walk up to you openly on a noisy street and clap my hands loudly you will not be impressed.
If I sneak up behind you on a dark and quiet street and clap my hands loudly in exactly the same way, your response will be quite different.
Same stimulus, same set of sensory nerves, but different brain state receiving the information; vastly different results.
Same with interest rate cuts.
Those who don't appreciate context will get crushed in their predictions.
Misean,
you gave me hope. Maybe the boyfriend will break up after all. I just hope he realizes he is wasting her time sooner rather than later.
Thanks
One trader in France caused 100's of billions in worldwide market cap to be lost in two days.
In as much as the market cap bears no semblance to reality, this decline is a very good thing.
I can imagine that any politician trying to get re-elected thinks otherwise and will attempt to assert their will in these matters.
Billionaire Wilbur Ross in talks to take over Ambac: report
Seb,
But you said you didn't believe this IS going to make any difference. Oh well...
Try this article on for size.
Cheers,
Now the Fed is aggressively easing again.
And nobody thinks this makes a difference? Huh. Okay.
I don't think it makes any essential difference in housing -- it just incrementally improves the situation at best.
On the other hand, I think it may make a HUGE difference to speculators gearing into commodities and emerging markets.
On Greenspan's comments about subprime and home ownership: My analysis of one month's homes getting foreclosure notices in our northwest Washington county showed that close to half of these loans were refis. I have read anecdotal accounts of similar situations in urban neighborhoods elsewhere. People ignorant of finance did ruinous refi deals on homes they already owned. Now they are on the verge of becoming renters again.
For Immediate Release
January 24, 2008
STATEMENT OF OFHEO DIRECTOR
JAMES B. LOCKHART ON CONFORMING LOAN LIMIT INCREASE
We are very disappointed in the proposal to increase the conforming loan limit as we believe it is a mistake to do so in the absence of comprehensive GSE regulatory reform. To restore confidence in the markets we must ensure that the GSEs regulator has all the necessary safety and soundness tools.
Yesterday Chairman Dodd talked about moving a GSE reform bill early this year. We are ready to work with him and the Senate Banking Committee. We will also be working with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure that any increase in the conforming loan limit moves through their rigorous new product approval process quickly and has appropriate risk management policies and capital in place.
Seb,
It would help if I actually posted the article:
Impact of bold Fed rate cut may be limited - Eye on the Economy- msnbc.com
Hat tip MS
Cheers,
I NOMINATE JAMES LOCKHART FOR THE PAUL VOLCKER MEMORIAL PRIZE IN STEEL BALLS
GUY IS AN AMERICAN HERO.
This rogue trader BS is just a small sample of bigger problems down the pipe.
MSFT
MSFT kicks conjure bag in the gonads.
Yes, a real grinder.
How are MSFTs earnings measured in ounces of gold, barrels of oil or bushels of corn?
I read her "economy" plan today.
She wants to "freeze" foreclosures for 90-days (does this mean people get to live there for free for 3 months!?)
She wants to "freeze" resets on adjustibles for 5-years.
This smacks completely of socialist-progressive, bail everyone out who made bad decisions. Forget the people who were responsible, saved and want to buy a house during the downturn - now those people have to pay much more because the government is articifically supporting the market. She (now completely socialist) makes me SICK!
Im tired of chosing from Republicans, who bail out business who make bad decisions, and Democrats, who bail out people who make bad decisions.
I want the Personal Responsibility Party.
Does anybody know when conforming loan limits would be raised, if the bill passes? How immediate would it be?
I've read some comments suggesting logistical issues would mean a lag between passage of the bill and actual availability of those raised-limit loans...
Sorry - by HER, I mean Hillary
To be fair to Sebastian, if interest rates were going higher now (due to inflation fears, for example), a lot of us would be listing that as a reason why housing would be hurt even more this year.
So, Seb does have a point, IMO -- low interest rates will take the sting off (as long as they last).
But Seb, you've got to acknowledge that while lower rates help, the list of elements hurting home sales is significant:
That said, the man sums it up more cleanly:
"Sebastian, will lower interest rates make a difference? Sure. Will higher conforming limits make a difference? Yes.
Will sales be significantly lower in '08 than in '07? Yep, all but guaranteed."
That's why it's important to not blow up bubbles. It's very costly to have dropping house prices. A slow rise in price correlating with inflation keeps default rates/costs low and allows equity buildup to finance future move-up purchases.
Average Joe
Average Joe,
Have you ever read some long-term RE price statistics of this country? in the pre-1950s RE prices easily fell 20-30% from a peak within a few years. Only after the FED took over the volatility and particularly the down-swings were smoothed out significantly. You actually made the argument pro-FED here in a long time by the bears. "It's indeed very costly to have falling home prices." === like under the gold standard.
O-Joe
I've read some comments suggesting logistical issues would mean a lag between passage of the bill and actual availability of those raised-limit loans...
ShortCourage
Time seems to be running out fast for bears these days. What a difference a few days can make.
O-Joe
MTHood - I agree - the lower rates will definitely take the sting off but all those negatives remain.
One reason I would add to buy a house would be 'fear of inflation'. If inflation takes off, there may be a lot of people sorry they didn't lock in a low price now with a 30 year mortgage. My parents bought a house in 1974 for 60,000 with a 30 year mortgage at 5% and by 1986 it was sold for 450,000. Efectively a free house, something to think about...
Don't underestimate the low rates though - we know too many people just look at the monthly payment as to whether they can afford to buy. With 30 year rates in the low 5% range, people can afford a lot more house right now.
One thing I always find a little funny is the people here who have been patiently renting waiting for a housing crash... why? ... because they want to buy a house of course!
O-Joe,
Not sure where you get your pre 50's stat,
I do know that many claim the current downturn is the first like it since the great depression and that Greenspan himself said that a national housing downturn was unprecedented and unlikely.
Apparently Greenspan was unaware of your stats as well.
One thing I always find a little funny is the people here who have been patiently renting waiting for a housing crash... why? ... because they want to buy a house of course!
There's a semantics issue. They've been waiting to buy a home because houses are too expensive. Owning or contracting to own a home is not what has been happening recently.
Bacon Dreamz:
Thanks for posting Lockhart's statement. In a sane world, Congress would listen to him. To what extent does he have the authority to keep the GSEs from doing foolish (or more foolish) things?
M-F
Who wants to buy a house and worry about changes in value, not due to reality or the free market, but due to one man, and one institution and politics.
Ben Bernanke, The Federal Reserve.
You might as well go gambling.
Too bad nobody votes Libertarian...
Stimulus package fails to stimulate optimism
Once again, the Feds favor window dressing over actual solutions
Washington, D.C. - A $145 billion dollar stimulus package called for by President Bush is more for show than solving current economic woes, says the Libertarian Party. "The President's economic stimulus plan fails to address the real mechanisms for economic growth," says Libertarian Party Executive Director Shane Cory.
"The proposed package is nothing but a multi-billion dollar dog and pony show," says Cory. "It's a cash advance on taxes not yet paid, which passes the debt to future taxpayers. It's not good for the economy, and it won't help."
Page not found | Libertarian Party
"One thing I always find a little funny is the people here who have been patiently renting waiting for a housing crash... why? ... because they want to buy a house of course!
There's a semantics issue. They've been waiting to buy a home because houses are too expensive. Owning or contracting to own a home is not what has been happening recently."
Remember, even if the price of houses in your area drops 30 or 40 percent, you won't be able to buy one if you lose your job amid the general carnage. A tsunami sinks all boats.
mp, you guys on the East Coast live high on the hog. Here on the depressed Left Coast, we go for Swisher Sweets and Thunderbird.
Remember the Calendar,
This is a SOTU mark,
the trade is long into the speech,
and fade away after...
everyone pull out your highlighters and circle 1375 on your charts... fade above.
Ken Lewis told me so.
Thanks , also, Rally monkey, for the up200 on the day call at 1030am when we were down 200.
They would be better to simply give the 145 billion to the monoline insurers in my opinion, would cover maybe half the losses?
Rob Dawg - I know, I was just making a light hearted point - but really it points out there is pent up demand.
stealthwii - I own a house, if I did not own one, I might consider buying one now. The Orlando market is way off its highs and there are some bargains out there. I could be wrong, but I don't think we are going to see home prices in our area selling for less than $100/ sq ft, but I could be wrong - and the bargains now are closer to $120 / sq ft. Now if the 30 year mortage goes over 7% prices will really drop - but I think the fed prefers stealth inflation.
really it points out there is pent up demand
Yes, in the sense that there is "pent-up-demand" for Lamborghinis, Prada fur coats and model girlfriends.
That's not demand. It's desire.
Demand is graphed as a curve, with quantities plotted against--you guessed it--price.
There is no "pent up demand" for homes at these prices.
Once again, you might want to change what you say about "normal" inventory changes from November to December. In this post you again note that a "normal" decline in inventory from November to December is around 13%, even though the historical data contradicts that assertion. A "normal" seasonal decline in inventory from Nov to Dec is about 8 3/4% or so.
Please, stop feeding the trolls.