Money-market bank run last week

by John Wake on September 21, 2008

WSJ.com

Fed staff discovered that one reason the federal-funds rate was behaving so abnormally was because money-market funds were building up cash in preparation for redemptions, leaving hoards of cash at their banks that the banks wouldn’t invest.

U.S. depositary institutions on average held excess reserves of $90 billion each day this week, estimates Lou Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson ICAP. This is cash the banks hold on the sidelines that does not earn any interest. That compares with an average of $2 billion, he says, noting he estimates banks held $190 billion in excess cash on Thursday, as they feared they’d have to meet many obligations at the same time.

Through Wednesday, money-market fund investors — including institutional investors such as corporate treasurers, pension funds and sovereign wealth funds — pulled out a record $144.5 billion, according to AMG Data Services. The industry had $7.1 billion in redemptions the week before.

Gosh, I wonder what the crisis next weekend will be!

{ 3 comments }

Is there any other good news out there?

by John Wake on September 21, 2008

WSJ.com

Q: Is there any other good news out there?

A: Yes. The recent collapse of energy and commodity prices will make it easier for consumers to fill up their gas tanks and heat their homes. It also will reduce pressures on many companies.

At the same time, inflation fears are subsiding, as the consumer price index fell 0.1% in August, the first monthly fall in almost two years. That all makes it virtually certain that the Federal Reserve won’t raise interest rates any time soon, and might even cut them.

Moreover, hard as it is, investors should work to see the bright side of low stock prices. “Only those who will be sellers of equities in the near future should be happy at seeing stocks rise,” famed investor Warren Buffett noted in 1997. “Prospective purchasers should much prefer sinking prices.”

The good news;

  • Gas down
  • Inflation down
  • Interest rates likely won’t increase
  • Stocks cheap

{ 2 comments }

Arizona economic outlook

by John Wake on September 20, 2008

Here’s a nice state of the Arizona economy audio podcast of Lee McPheters from ASU.

Like many others, he says the downturn will start to turn around when Arizona home prices bottom out.

You’ll see it first right here at Arizona Real Estate Notebook.

{ 7 comments }

Greater Phoenix home sales

Here is Professor Jay Butler’s latest press release on home sales in Greater Phoenix.

Many reporters use the information as the basis of their reports on home sales. For years I graphed Butler’s home sale data. The graphs tell a much clearer story than just listing prices.

If you are a real estate agent, investor or homeowner and you would like to see what all those stories are based on, click the first link in this post.

In August 2008, there were a total of 7,505 recorded resale home transactions. Foreclosure activity represented 44 percent

ASU Repeat Sales Index

The other ASU housing report that comes out monthly is the newish Repeat Sales Index for Phoenix. It is similar to the Case-Shiller Housing Index but with more detailed breakouts of data.

Guntermann used median housing prices from 1989 to 2003, and that produced a trend line in a graph that sloped upward at moderate angle. The trend was then projected, as if conditions had been ‘normal,’ through 2009. For example, if the median price for a home was $75,000 in 1989 then it should have risen to about $200,000 by 2009.

Guntermann overlaid the trend line with one showing actual Phoenix house prices over the period 1989 through June 2008. In comparison, the two lines more or less overlapped until 2004 when actual home prices diverged dramatically, accelerating into higher prices ranges at a steep angle. Median home prices for the Phoenix metro peaked in June 2006 at approximately $262,000.

By mid-2007, actual Phoenix home prices began slipping. On the graph this shows up as a steep slope equal to the one illustrating home price rises in 2004 and 2005. In June 2008, median home prices dropped to approximately $210,000, still above the trend line, which was at $190,000 for the same month.

Guntermann expects the median home price trend line and actual Phoenix house price movement to graphically intersect late in 2008 or early 2009, which, he says is approximately where house prices would have been without the big run-up in 2004 and 2005.

The drop in actual home prices won’t necessarily stop when it hits the median home price trend line, but could overshoot it, Guntermann cautions. Even if that happens, home prices would eventually get back close to the long-term trend.

“If the economy is weak and if financing remains a problem,” Guntermann adds, “that could cause actual home prices to fall below the median home price trend line, at least temporarily.” [Emphasis is mine.]

However, the new best-performing city is now Tempe, which was off just 13.2 percent from June 2007 to June 2008 — better than Scottsdale/Paradise Valley. In addition, it was the only Phoenix metro city that did better than the month before, when Tempe home prices shifted down 14.7 percent from May 2007 to May 2008.

{ 0 comments }

Here is a long piece that does a great job of clearly explaining what the heck is going on in the financial markets.

This episode started when the Treasury nationalized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on September 8. Their combined assets are over $5 trillion. These firms help guarantee most of the mortgages in the United States. The Treasury only got authority from Congress to take this action in July, and in seeking the authority had insisted that no intervention would be needed.

The Treasury has replaced the management of both companies and will presumably oversee their operation. This decision marked an acknowledgment by the government that the mortgage market and the institutions to make it operate in the U.S. are broken.

On Monday, the largest bankruptcy filing in U.S. history was made by Lehman Brothers. Lehman had over $600 billion in assets and 25,000 employees. (The largest previous filing was WorldCom, whose assets just prior to bankruptcy were just over $100 billion.)

On Tuesday, the Federal Reserve made a bridge loan to A.I.G., the largest insurance company in the world…

The trigger in each case was the inability to get financing, although the reasons differed in each case.

The Fannie and Freddie situation was a result of their unique roles in the economy. They had been set up to support the housing market. They helped guarantee mortgages (provided they met certain standards), and were able to fund these guarantees by issuing their own debt, which was in turn tacitly backed by the government. The government guarantees allowed Fannie and Freddie to take on far more debt than a normal company. In principle, they were also supposed to use the government guarantee to reduce the mortgage cost to the homeowners, but the Fed and others have argued that this hardly occurred. Instead, they appear to have used the funding advantage to rack up huge profits and squeeze the private sector out of the “conforming” mortgage market. Regardless, many firms and foreign governments considered the debt of Fannie and Freddie as a substitute for U.S. Treasury securities and snapped it up eagerly.

Fannie and Freddie were weakly supervised and strayed from the core mission. They began using their subsidized financing to buy mortgage-backed securities which were backed by pools of mortgages that did not meet their usual standards. Over the last year, it became clear that their thin capital was not enough to cover the losses on these subprime mortgages. The massive amount of diffusely held debt would have caused collapses everywhere if it was defaulted upon; so the Treasury announced that it would explicitly guarantee the debt.

But once the debt was guaranteed to be secure (and the government would wipe out shareholders if it carried through with the guarantee), no self-interested investor was willing to supply more equity to help buffer the losses. Hence, the Treasury ended up taking them over.

The concern for the man on Main Street is not the bankruptcy of Lehman, per se. Rather, it is the collective inability of major financial institutions to find funding.

As their own funding dries up, the remaining financial firms will be much more cautious in extending credit to normal firms and individuals. So even for people whose own circumstances have not much changed, the cost of the credit is going to rise. For an individual or business that falls behind on payments or needs an increase in short-term credit because of the slowing economy, credit will be much harder to obtain than in recent years.

This is going to slow growth. We have not seen this much stress in the financial system since the Great Depression, so we do not have any recent history to rely upon in quantifying the magnitude of the slowdown. A recent educated guess by Jan Hatzius of Goldman Sachs suggests that G.D.P. growth will be just about 2 percentage points lower in 2008 and 2009. But as he explains, extrapolations of this sort are highly uncertain.

[All emphasis is mine.]

{ 9 comments }

Were Fannie and Freddie just nationalized?

by John Wake on September 19, 2008

I studied a lot about international economic development in my college days. In fact, my M.S. degree focused on international agricultural development.

Just the word “nationalization” scares me.

In those days, third world countries would often nationalize a company for the “good of the people.” Usually, the real reasons were politics and money; to silence a political rival (the company management) and milk the company for personal and political cash.

Companies usually tanked following nationalization, becoming a drag on the economy instead of an engine of economic growth.

After nationalization, the company’s goals became political, not economic.

My worry is that our political geniuses in Washington D.C. will soon figure out that they now control a company that controls 44% (?) of the mortgages in the United States. The politicos could soon use that power to their political advantage, for example by stopping foreclosures by Fannie and Freddie on their constituents, or some other shenanigans.

I’m leaning tonight towards the idea that in the future we should not allow companies to become so big that they become “too big to fail.”

The sooner the government denationalizes Fannie and Freddie the better.

We saw how just being a “government sponsored entity” led evenually to private and political corruption.

I fear the speed and depth of corruption we could see with a government controlled Fannie and Freddie.

{ 2 comments }

Check any of the 124 zip codes in the right-hand column and you’ll see the most up-to-date graphs available for free on Arizona home prices, home sales, inventory of homes for sale and much more.

Home sales usually tapper off in August (and especially September). Nevertheless, a few zip codes in metro Phoenix had strong sales in August. That shows that at least in some zip codes that lower home prices are leading to increase demand for homes.

Like last month, even in zip codes with strong numbers of home sales (relatively speaking), the median home price continued to fall.

While the inventory of homes for sale is falling in several zip codes… the inventory of homes for sale is still increasing in many other zip codes.

Here are some areas discussed in the video below;

  • El Mirage
  • Sun City
  • Phoenix - Anthem area
  • Glendale - Arrowhead Ranch
  • East Mesa
  • Queen Creek

The video below gives you a quick tour of the current real estate market in several Phoenix area zip codes;

Arizona Real Estate Market Video

If this information is valuable to you, please tell your friends. I want more visitors to this website.

{ 0 comments }

Arizona foreclosures

by John Wake on September 17, 2008

Tom Ruff of The Information Market is THE guru for Arizona housing foreclosure data.

Tom thinks that residential foreclosures in Maricopa County peaked in August, although foreclosures will remain high for months.

Notice of Trustee Sale recordings hit their all time high in August, there were 7,271 notices recorded… We had thought that Notices would peak in August, we based this on median home prices peaking in the summer of 2006, and the greatest number of foreclosures occurring within two years of their loan origination. We have identified what we refer to as the foreclosure window, the 2nd quarter of 2005 through the first quarter of 2007. If you remember, it was March 2007 when the real easy money went away. If we look at the number of Trustee Deeds recorded based on loan origination dates, we see the following: 2004=1026, 2005=11,606, 2006=19,791 and 2007=4,574.

Let’s just assume for a moment I’m right, notices just peaked, what does this mean? Think of it as ground hog day, the next six months will be very much like the last six. Monthly notices will stay in the 6000 range, Trustee Deeds will be between 3,500 and 4,000, unless of course, someone shoots the damn ground hog.

Tom also found;

  • Nearly 46% of all resale homes sold in August were sold by banks.
  • The median sale price for non-REO’s was $229,900 and for REO’s was $156,000.
  • Over 10% of all properties sold in 2006 have already been foreclosed upon.

You can subscribe to Tom’s Arizona foreclosure data at TheInformationMarket.com.

Obviously, foreclosures have been the driving force behind the rapidly falling real estate prices in Arizona. If Tom is right and August 2008 turns out to be the peak month for foreclosures, then we should see the inventory of lender owned properties listed for sale to start to taper off in several months. After that, home prices could stop falling… in some areas anyway.

{ 9 comments }

San Diego - Most home sellers losing big bucks

by John Wake on September 16, 2008

Well, at least we aren’t San Diego.

Almost two-thirds of property owners who sold homes in San Diego County this summer lost money on the deal, according to an analysis by MDA DataQuick, a San Diego real estate research firm.

Those who lost money were down an average of $161,000, or 35.5 percent less than the home had sold for previously.

{ 0 comments }

Has California housing market hit bottom?

by John Wake on September 16, 2008

Some knowledgeable folks are buying homes in San Diego.

Ratcliff, a University of San Diego economist who makes his living forecasting the housing market, hopes to close escrow next week on a three-bedroom house in a northern San Diego neighborhood known for its good schools.

“I may not have exactly timed the bottom,” said Ratcliff, who paid 25% less than what the foreclosed house sold for in 2006, “but I think we’re close enough that I’m comfortable.”

Los Angeles Times

{ 0 comments }

U.S. stock market falls hard

by John Wake on September 16, 2008

What does it mean for Arizona real estate?

Here’s my speculation;

  1. Interest rates will go lower as investors move from stocks to bonds and the Fed may make a rate cut.
  2. Housing prices will continue their sharp decline even though previously the declines were starting to lose some momentum.

Sweet Spot for Arizona Real Estate?

We may be looking at an unusually good scenario for home buyers in coming months with both low home prices (at least in some areas) and low interest rates.

However, only those who have good credit and a large down payment will be able to borrow money to buy a home.

Stock Market Report Video

{ 0 comments }

Real estate geeks should read this whole long interview with mortgage fund manager Jeffrey Gundlach.

Could you elaborate on the subsidy these agencies are providing?

If Fannie Mae [ticker: FNM] and Freddie Mac [FRE] stopped all of their activity — for a moment, forget about shutting them down and being insolvent — in order to sell off mortgages as normal loans without this guarantee, the interest rate would have to be around 9% or 10%.

So the government, by buying Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac securities, is essentially providing money for the market at about 5%. They are subsidizing the interest rate that the private-capital markets would require by about 400 or 500 basis points [four or five percentage points]. That helps finance the housing market. Loans will be available at a subsidized rate, and that will help to cushion the blow, over the medium term, for the housing market.

Who benefits and who loses out from this bailout?

It is a moderate positive for the housing market over the intermediate term, and it is a modest positive for the consumer economy over the short term. But none of these is a major positive. It is not going to reverse the consumer’s distress entirely, and it is not going to stop housing prices from falling between now and year end.

What other negatives do you see?

Inflation risk down the line. [The federal government is] going to probably overstimulate and over support in an attempt to stem these deflationary forces. We are looking at a longer-term inflationary force that is pretty substantial. This has been my view for a long time. Interest rates went into a very long decline from the late ’70s and early ’80s until earlier this decade, when first we saw rates bottom out. Then rates went up a couple of times.

Basically, we are getting back down toward those low levels again. The multiyear bottom in interest rates that started around 2002 will probably last into 2009. Then we are going to see the inflationary aftermath of these government policies, and you might be surprised at how high interest rates go.

Another explanation of a possible upcoming “sweet spot” for home buyers, that point when home prices AND interest rates are both low.

Where else does this rescue effort come up short?

The government can subsidize the interest rate for mortgages, and I suppose that is going to help some. But it is not going to change the person who basically doesn’t want to pay the loan back because since the loan now exceeds the value of the house, they are going to own this big loss if they pay the loan back. So the only solution for those people would be a big modification in which some of the principal gets written down. Then maybe they wouldn’t default.

But let’s face it: A lot of people don’t know about modifying the terms of their mortgage or don’t know how to pursue it, and the system is log-jammed anyway.

So homeowners tend to bail out when the mortgage is higher than the home value and government programs can’t do much about that.

How much more pain are we going to feel in the housing market before things start to stabilize?

I think we are about half way through. There is high momentum in terms of home-price declines, so it is pretty clear they are going lower. It always looks a lot like the hills on a roller coaster. It starts out with a flattish period. Then it starts to go down, and then it really starts to drop, and we are clearly in that period. That period is going to be with us for about another year before it flattens out and bumps along in 2010.

The S&P/Case-Shiller Index is down a little more than 15% from its peak in 2006, and I’ve believed for some time that the index will have dropped 30% from its peak. That means some markets are going to drop by 50%. That includes Miami, Las Vegas and Phoenix, all of which were fueled by subprime lending. The foreclosure overhang is so big in those areas.

I don’t know if Phoenix overall will see a 50% decline, although we’ll see some zip codes hit that.

What else has to happen? More housing inventory has to get worked off?

Exactly. Everything is supply and demand. Unfortunately, the fundamentals of supply, with the foreclosure overhang being a very important part of that, are really discouraging. Supply is at its highs. This bailout by the feds helps liquidity, but it is on the margin. And the fundamental problem of liquidity is not getting any better.

Could you elaborate?

First it was hedge funds that couldn’t use any more leverage. And now the banks are taking write-downs, so there is less money that can be lent. Now, I hear over and over from the largest investment pools in the world that they are cash-constrained. I just had a meeting with one of the biggest endowments in the United States. They said that for them to invest in something they have to sell something. I often hear people saying, ‘We love thinking about distressed-mortgage opportunities because they sure are cheap, but we don’t have any money to invest.’

Since lenders don’t have a lot of money to lend, they tighten their lending criteria and only make very safe mortgages which leads to an excellent return on their money.

What’s ahead for mortgages?

The agency-guaranteed mortgages have been spectacular, performing strongly this year. Most people wouldn’t believe that, because you think anything but that would have to be true.

Does that include mortgages backed by Fannie and Freddie?

Yes, it does. Fannie, Freddie and Ginnie Mae mortgages altogether are up more than 5% year to date. The stock market is down 15%, and these securities are up 5%; Treasuries are up even less.

Mortgages that are guaranteed are the top performer, mainly because they have paid all of their interest and they have a guaranteed principal payback, thanks to Uncle Sam.

“Spectacular” Wow!

How much difficulty will we have to go through, with mortgage rates resetting?

Very little. One of the greatest misconceptions now is reset risk. Reset risk was very real on subprime, because the teaser rates were very low compared to what the ultimate rate is, usually like 600 or 800 basis points over Libor [the London interbank offered rate]. With today’s Libor at 2.50%, the reset rates can go to 8% or 9%. But most of the subprime mortgages reset after two years, and all of the subprime resets are going to be over by the end of this year.

Good to know! “… all of the subprime resets are going to be over by the end of this year.”

Of course, it will take months for those last resets to work their way through until they hit the foreclosure market but at least the real estate market will be looking at a tapering off of the reset effect on the supply of bank owned homes.

What about for prime loans and Alt-A loans, which are between prime and subprime?

The reset problem really isn’t a problem, thanks to the Fed having engineered the fed-funds rate down to 2%. These loans typically reset off of Libor or T-bills, plus no more than 3%. So when they do reset, it’s going to be at a lower rate, or at about the same rate that the homeowner is paying now, in many cases.

This is good news. I suspect the prices in some areas of metro Phoenix will start bottoming out at the end of the year. However, I was worried about the impact of the upcoming Alt-A resets, especially that graph showing the huge size of future Alt-A resets.

At the Morningstar conference in June of last year, you called subprime “an unmitigated disaster” that would get worse. What’s your assessment today?

It is unmitigated disaster times 10; subprime continues to get worse in terms of delinquencies and defaults, which are worse every month.

Will delinquencies and defaults from this point forward surprise on the upside? I doubt it, because the market has accepted the idea that subprime defaults are going to be up at about 50% of the original volume.

When you look at subprime lending patterns, the defaults really spike for loans underwritten in 2006.

It is like somebody flipped a switch right around the second half of ‘05, and the world went crazy. You can see it all in the volume of structured-finance vehicles, including CDOs [collateralized debt obligations] and SIVs [structured investment vehicles], and in the underwriting standards, which went to hell. The gap between the origination point and risk-taker point, where the loans were actually held, got wider and wider.

It was clear in the summer of 2005 that the market had peaked. I never quite figured out why prices continued to climb for another year.

It turns out it was because the mortgage world “went crazy” and they continued to pump more and more money into residential real estate.

{ 5 comments }

… on the other hand his counterpart, Robert Shiller of Case-Shiller fame, does not see the real estate market near bottom.

Wellesley College economist Karl Case, the “Case” in the widely followed S&P/Case-Shiller index of U.S. housing prices, says he thinks that the housing market may be near a bottom. If he is right, financial firms may be able to breathe a sigh of relief.

At its most recent reading for June, the Case-Shiller index was 19% below its July 2006 peak, and many analysts say the decline is far from over. The inventory of unsold homes on the market is still very high, they point out, and until that excess is absorbed, it is a buyers’ market. Moreover, financial firms, hobbled by mortgage debt gone bad, are trying to rebuild cash reserves, making the firms less willing to extend loans to would-be buyers.

And the combined effects of the housing and credit crises have damaged the balance sheets and credit-worthiness of many households, leaving them a high hurdle to buying a new home. Yale University professor Robert Shiller, the co-creator of the Case/Shiller index, is among those who think it will be some time before prices stabilize.

But in a paper presented before the Brookings Institution in Washington yesterday, Mr. Case argues there is cause for optimism. He notes that of the 20 metropolitan areas covered by the Case/Shiller index, nine have shown prices slightly improving in recent months. He also says that the relationship between incomes and home prices has neared a level seen at the end of past housing slumps.

That last sentence is particularly intriguing.

“He also says that the relationship between incomes and home prices has neared a level seen at the end of past housing slumps.”

That means to me, if true, that when home prices do indeed bottom out that home prices may return more quickly than I expected to “normal” appreciation and that it’s less likely that home prices will troll along the bottom for a few years after bottoming out.

That is, we may see home prices move more like a “V” instead of an “L” after home prices bottom out.

{ 1 comment }

“When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.”

P. J. O’Rourke

{ 1 comment }

Las Vegas real estate prices plummet

by John Wake on September 14, 2008

I like to follow what is happening in the real estate market in Las Vegas to see what may be coming our way.

No city has been hit harder than North Las Vegas, which has been ground zero for many foreclosures in the valley. ZIP code 89030, which includes downtown and the older part of the city, saw prices fall 42 percent to $115,500 in the past year. That was followed by 89086, which includes the northeast part of the city, where prices fell 40 percent to $213,328.

In all, six of seven of North Las Vegas’ ZIP codes fell 20 percent or more. The part of the city affected the least was 89084, where prices fell 16 percent to $242,245.

Overall, prices in Southern Nevada, when factoring in Laughlin and Mesquite, fell 20.4 percent in the past year.

Henderson homes lost the least amount of value, even though 89052 (Anthem) and 89002 (southeast Henderson) saw prices drop 25.6 percent. Four of eight Henderson ZIP codes reported price drops of less than 10 percent. The smallest was 89012, where prices fell 8.2 percent.

In Las Vegas, nine of 42 ZIP codes reported price drops of 30 percent or more. Among them: 89104, down 33 percent; 89107, down 33 percent; 89108, down 31 percent; 89115, down 34 percent; 89124, down 60 percent; 89138, down 31 percent; 89142, down 32 percent; 89156, down 34 percent; 89169, down 31 percent.

Boulder City prices fell nearly 15 percent to $272,500.

Only two Las Vegas ZIP codes reported increases because sales of new condos bolstered the numbers. ZIP code 89013 prices increased 112 percent to $519,750, while 89109 prices increased 1 percent to $650,700.

The real estate boom hit Las Vegas a year or more before it hit Arizona although we may now be in sync on the down swing.

{ 2 comments }