Housing: 2007 Thread.

[Vic]

Originally posted by: mshan
I believe the no closing cost loan you referred to typically adds an additional 0.25% (I forgot if rate bump is 0.25% or 0.5%) to the rate, above and beyond the legally allowed to be hidden service release premium.

If you don't have cash on hand and plan in staying on the loan only for a couple years, yes, the 0.25% rate bump in exchange for the lender paying closing costs may make sense. If you plan on keeping the mortgage for a long time, interest on interest will make that 0.25% rate bump much more expensive than just paying the closing costs up front at closing.

I don't have a problem with yield spread premium, or even bank service release premium, as long as it is explicitly and clearly revealed to the borrower when applying for a loan. Why did the banking lobby see it necessary to have laws to pass that allows lenders to hide this service release premium, while any mortgage originator who doesn't (at least temporarily) have the funds for your loan in house, have to reveal the same rate bump, and have it artifically called something else (yield spread premium)?

I believe mortgage brokers had like over 60% market share before savings and loan debacle, and Congress (banking lobby) used the savings and loan debacle to try and destroy low cost mortgage brokers and maintain the high profit margins the banks need (read 3% per loan -> 1% loan origination fee, 2% additional profit via 0.5% bank service release premium rate bump over what you should qualify from; closing costs still additional and no idea how much junk profit is added here) to cover employees, all of those brick and mortar branches, and stock holders who expect ever increasing profits.

With this RESPA law, bank loan officer (unknowing kid who, like salesman at car store, really doesn't know true cost of funds, just numbers on the supposed "wholesale" rate sheet they are given, and has to go to manager who is only one who knows what each vehicle really costs) who only gets $400 commission for completing loan (bank keeps thousands and thousands of extra profit from jacking your rate 0.5% themselves) can legally point blank lie to you (probably doesn't even know it) that they are giving you wholesale rate and show you their rate sheets, which already have bank service release premium built into them.

I suspect this new legislation is designed to kill off the low cost competition (independent mortgage brokers), so banks can later jack rates further, because there is no where else t go except one bank or another (kind of like Lending Tree telling you win when banks compete with each other, you supposedly win. I read that what DiTech supposedly used to do is charge you an upfront, NON-REFUNDABLE (non-charge backable) fee after they quoted you a certain set of fees and rate, but when you get actual documents, terms are higher than what you were lead to believe they would be - except you can't get your credit card to charge back their fee to your account).

Overall, buyer beware irrespective of who you get a mortgage from, but if you don't know what true wholesale rates are, and what reasonable profit margins should be, and generally speaking how much premium you have to pay because you are a blemished borrower, you can really ripped off badly (we're talking thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars of mortgage interest / profits to lender that you probably didn't need to pay):

http://www.askcarolynwarren.com

You have absolutely no clue whatsoever what you are talking about. None at all.
For example, with no SRP, there is no 0.25% "legally allowable bump."
0.25% to rate translates as 1% in fee (or "1 point") on most conforming mortgage programs. ROI on 1 point is 5 years, not a couple. The average American homeowner, however, refinances or trades his house every 2 years. Your agenda seems to be to have them pay excess upfront fees in order to protect them from the evils of lender-paid fees.
The SRP is not "hidden." If every lender in town is offering one rate, but another lender has a higher rate, exactly what is hidden?
If a loan officer tells you that he can do one program for you at a low rate but with upfront fees, and another program at a slightly higher rate but with no fees, what is being hidden?
"Unknowing kids" in the mortgage industry are quickly being done away with through stricter licensing requirements. Good riddance.


BTW, the website you spammed offered some great advice, but for some strange reason had nothing to say about the clueless drivel you posted here.

 

[mshan]

Sounds like you work for a bank, Vic.

I believe RESPA basically allows a bank to point blank lie to you that their rates sheets offer wholesale rates, when those rates are typically 0.5% higher than what could be offered, given your credit score, downpayment, etc.

This link says the rate bump for the no closing option is an additional 0.5%!!! above and beyond standard 0.5% yield spread premium / bank service release premium:
http://themortgageinsider.net/...lat-fee-mortgage-lies/
http://themortgageinsider.net/...y-about-closing-costs/
http://themortgageinsider.net/...tecom-and-lendingtree/


From the comments in the second link above:
"Banks, brokers with a line of credit that close in their own name, the so-called ?direct? lender?all have ?special? treatment when it comes to disclosing all the income derived from your mortgage?the most important of which we call overage income or rate bump income.
In the ?direct? lender world the actual term is SRP or Service Release Premium. In the broker world overage is called YSP or Yield Spread Premium. The Federal RESPA Law covering disclosure of mortgage fees and income?was changed in 1999 to force the broker world to disclose YSP compensation?but left alone the SRP income disclosure rules.
Prior to 1999, neither ?direct? lenders or brokers had to disclose to clients on any document the compensation / income they made form rate manipulations?none.
Post 1999 only brokers must disclose?.not that disclose in and of itself will assure you get the better loan?you?ll still need to find an ethical broker and impress upon him you new found knowledge and safeguard yourself from broker charged YSP?most still charge it?since the public is unaware how to decipher mortgage disclosures."

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: mshan
Sounds like you work for a bank, Vic.

I believe RESPA basically allows a bank to point blank lie to you that their rates sheets offer wholesale rates, when those rates are typically 0.5% higher than what could be offered, given your credit score, downpayment, etc.

Which is your way of trying to distract from the fact that you know absolutely jack while attempting to discredit me as some kind of "industry insider." :roll:

That bank could point blank lie all they want, but it's not going to do them much good if every other bank in town is 0.5% cheaper.

And FFS quit trying to make yourself look smart by name-dropping legislation.
The reason why RESPA doesn't require banks and institutional lenders to disclose SRP is because, completely unlike with brokers, the precise amount of SRP is not known at time of loan funding. This because it usually takes weeks (and sometimes months) before an individual loan is sold to secondary, by which time pricing may have changed considerably (for better or worse). Lenders do usually protect themselves from the potential negatives of this through hedging, but trying to pretend that YSP and SRP work identically is disingenuous at best.


edit to your edit:

This link says the rate bump for the no closing option is an additional 0.5%!!! above and beyond standard 0.5% yield spread premium / bank service release premium:
http://themortgageinsider.net/...lat-fee-mortgage-lies/
http://themortgageinsider.net/...y-about-closing-costs/
http://themortgageinsider.net/...tecom-and-lendingtree/

From second link:
"The ?normal? Yield Spread Premium equals one half percent (0.5%) higher for you and 2% of your loan amount or thousands of extra kickback dollars for the company. No Cost and Flat Fee companies plan on raising the rate not the ?normal? 0.5%, but by an extra amount to cover all the third party closing costs as well. This ?super? increased rate will add another .5% for a total of 1% above what you deserved."

As with your earlier link, there is nothing wrong with what those articles are saying, except that you are grossly misinterpreting them.
For example, from the first link:

They plan on raising the rate not the typical .5% to insure their profit, but an additional amount to cover all the third party costs of closing a mortgage as well.

Those 3rd party costs are frequently more than the actual lender costs.
And this:

Remember this:
You will always pay your costs?either by a higher rate, by a higher loan amount, or by writing a check.

I completely agree with.

 

[mshan]

Reason I said that is you are talking like someone who is defensive about legally cloaked banking practices.


My Documentation:
http://themortgageinsider.net/...lat-fee-mortgage-lies/
http://themortgageinsider.net/...y-about-closing-costs/
http://themortgageinsider.net/...tecom-and-lendingtree/


From second link above:
"The ?normal? Yield Spread Premium equals one half percent (0.5%) higher for you and 2% of your loan amount or thousands of extra kickback dollars for the company. No Cost and Flat Fee companies plan on raising the rate not the ?normal? 0.5%, but by an extra amount to cover all the third party closing costs as well. This ?super? increased rate will add another 0.5% for a TOTAL of 1% above what you deserved."

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: mshan
Reason I said that is you are talking like someone who is defensive about legally cloaked banking practices.

No... I'm not being defensive, you are speading blatant FUD.

Remember this:
You will always pay your costs?either by a higher rate, by a higher loan amount, or by writing a check.

 

[mshan]

I am not trying to look smart.

I knew absolutely nothing about mortgages several months ago, but have been educating myself while helping a family member shop for a mortgage.

I am simply providing informative links and info I've found so other newbie mortgage shoppers can have a single thread where they can get a basic education about being an informed shopper for a mortgage.

Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Trianon]

US foreclosure filings up 68 pct in Nov.

U.S. homeowners increasingly failed to keep up with their home loan payments in November, as the number of foreclosure filings surged 68 percent nationwide compared with the same month a year ago, according to a mortgage research company.

In all, 201,950 foreclosure filings were reported last month, compared with 120,334 in November 2006, Irvine-based RealtyTrac Inc. said Wednesday.

Last month's filings fell 10 percent from October's 224,451.

The last time there was a sequential drop in foreclosure filings was between August and September, when they fell 8 percent.

"It's a little bit of good news in the otherwise murky real estate market right now," said Rick Sharga, RealtyTrac's vice president of marketing. "The fact that we're seeing a 10 percent decrease is significant. It's a good thing."

The U.S. had one foreclosure filing for every 617 households in November, RealtyTrac said.

The filings include default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions. Some properties might have received more than one notice if the owners have multiple mortgages.

Forty-three states saw an increase in foreclosure filings over last year.

The decline in filings from October to November likely corresponds with a lull in adjustable-rate mortgage resets, Sharga said.

Such loans typically have a low introductory interest rate, then reset sharply higher after a set period. The number of borrowers who took on adjustable-rate mortgages offering a teaser rate for just two or three years rose sharply in the last couple of years of the housing boom, particularly in high-priced states such as California.

But many borrowers have been unable to afford the increased payments that come with the resets, and falling housing prices have made it harder to refinance or sell.

A flood of rate resets for such loans has helped drive up the number of home loan defaults in the last few months.

"We'll see another fairly big spike in (foreclosure) filings in early '08," Sharga said. "Then there's another group of loans that's due to reset in May and June, so we'll see another wave of defaults probably in the fall."

Experts estimate some 2 million adjustable-rate mortgages are due to reset at higher rates in the next seven months.

Nevada, Florida and Ohio had the highest foreclosure filing rates in the country last month, RealtyTrac said.

Nevada reported one foreclosure filing for every 152 households, earning the state the highest rate in the nation for the 11th month in a row. The state had 6,694 filings in November, up 1 percent from October and up 167 percent from November 2006.

Florida had one foreclosure filing for every 282 households. The state reported 29,238 filings last month, down more 3 percent from October, but up 212 percent from November last year.

Ohio reported one foreclosure filing for every 307 households. The state had 16,308 filings last month, down nearly 6 percent from October and nearly double the number from November 2006.

California had 39,992 foreclosure filings last month, up 108 percent from a year earlier and the most in the nation. Its foreclosure rate was one filing for every 325 households.

The state's filings fell 21 percent from October's total.

Rounding out the states with the top 10 foreclosure filing rates in November were Colorado, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona, Indiana and Illinois.

AP

Snowball effect picking up speed, hopefully we will see some significant price adjustments soon.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: mshan
I am not trying to look smart.

I knew absolutely nothing about mortgages several months ago, but have been educating myself while helping a family member shop for a mortgage.

I am simply providing informative links and info I've found so other newbie mortgage shoppers can have a single thread where they can get a basic education about being an informed shopper for a mortgage.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Did you see Boston Legal last night?

He reminds me of the laughing Bank guy.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: mshan
I am not trying to look smart.

I knew absolutely nothing about mortgages several months ago, but have been educating myself while helping a family member shop for a mortgage.

I am simply providing informative links and info I've found so other newbie mortgage shoppers can have a single thread where they can get a basic education about being an informed shopper for a mortgage.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Did you see Boston Legal last night?

He reminds me of the laughing Bank guy.

Yeah, wow, the bank scored on that deal, huh? :roll:

I did watch that, Dave, and the bank guy wasn't laughing anymore than Clarence was.
Except for the exaggerated circumstances (subprime lenders usually aren't local banks, and the terms of the loan described were not realistic), I thought the episode gave a rather fair view of the situation. It's not like banks profit from foreclosing on deficient collateral. Only you, Dave, could be stupid enough to believe that.
My wife laughed at the end when the banker stormed out in disgust telling his lawyer to "Do the deal!" Now that's a banker, she said (and she's a bank underwriter FYI). Those exact deals are already occurring and I guarantee that they will become more and more common as this continues. You owe more than your home is worth and the lender does not want the house back.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: mshan
I am not trying to look smart.

I knew absolutely nothing about mortgages several months ago, but have been educating myself while helping a family member shop for a mortgage.

I am simply providing informative links and info I've found so other newbie mortgage shoppers can have a single thread where they can get a basic education about being an informed shopper for a mortgage.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Did you see Boston Legal last night?

He reminds me of the laughing Bank guy.

Yeah, wow, the bank scored on that deal, huh? :roll:

I did watch that, Dave, and the bank guy wasn't laughing anymore than Clarence was.
Except for the exaggerated circumstances (subprime lenders usually aren't local banks, and the terms of the loan described were not realistic), I thought the episode gave a rather fair view of the situation.

It's not like banks profit from foreclosing on deficient collateral.

Only you, Dave, could be stupid enough to believe that.

My wife laughed at the end when the banker stormed out in disgust telling his lawyer to "Do the deal!" Now that's a banker, she said (and she's a bank underwriter FYI).

Those exact deals are already occurring and I guarantee that they will become more and more common as this continues.

You owe more than your home is worth and the lender does not want the house back.

That's a bunch of bull.

Tell that to the millions of people that have already lost their houses and many more millions that will.

They get to profit on the real estate all over again after writing it off.

Profit on top of profits.

 

[dmcowen674]

I'm not updating the threads I originated anymore.

I had a thread where I posted back in January of this year that Countrywide and WaMu would be the first two big ones to go down in flames.

Here is more of WaMu's fall in progress:

12-21-2007 SEC probing Washington Mutual

The Securities and Exchange Commission is probing how Washington Mutual Inc., the nation's largest savings and loan, handled mortgages that were possibly based on inflated home appraisals.

Shares of WaMu have dropped about 65 percent since mid-September, following some dismal financial disclosures and a lawsuit filed in November by New York's attorney general against one of its real estate appraisers, alleging the companies colluded to inflate home values.

WaMu also said this month that it was closing offices, laying off more than 3,100 people and that it would no longer issue loans to people with shaky credit histories.

The company's chief legal officer, Fay L. Chapman, this week said she was retiring. Chapman, 61, will serve as a consultant for two years to help with the transition, and a WaMu spokeswoman said then that there was no connection between the company's legal troubles and Chapman's departure.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: mshan
I am not trying to look smart.

I knew absolutely nothing about mortgages several months ago, but have been educating myself while helping a family member shop for a mortgage.

I am simply providing informative links and info I've found so other newbie mortgage shoppers can have a single thread where they can get a basic education about being an informed shopper for a mortgage.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Did you see Boston Legal last night?

He reminds me of the laughing Bank guy.

Yeah, wow, the bank scored on that deal, huh? :roll:

I did watch that, Dave, and the bank guy wasn't laughing anymore than Clarence was.
Except for the exaggerated circumstances (subprime lenders usually aren't local banks, and the terms of the loan described were not realistic), I thought the episode gave a rather fair view of the situation.

It's not like banks profit from foreclosing on deficient collateral.

Only you, Dave, could be stupid enough to believe that.

My wife laughed at the end when the banker stormed out in disgust telling his lawyer to "Do the deal!" Now that's a banker, she said (and she's a bank underwriter FYI).

Those exact deals are already occurring and I guarantee that they will become more and more common as this continues.

You owe more than your home is worth and the lender does not want the house back.

That's a bunch of bull.

Tell that to the millions of people that have already lost their houses and many more millions that will.

They get to profit on the real estate all over again after writing it off.

Profit on top of profits.

Uh huh... ya don't say...

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I'm not updating the threads I originated anymore.

I had a thread where I posted back in January of this year that Countrywide and WaMu would be the first two big ones to go down in flames.

Here is more of WaMu's fall in progress:

12-21-2007 SEC probing Washington Mutual

The Securities and Exchange Commission is probing how Washington Mutual Inc., the nation's largest savings and loan, handled mortgages that were possibly based on inflated home appraisals.

Shares of WaMu have dropped about 65 percent since mid-September, following some dismal financial disclosures and a lawsuit filed in November by New York's attorney general against one of its real estate appraisers, alleging the companies colluded to inflate home values.

WaMu also said this month that it was closing offices, laying off more than 3,100 people and that it would no longer issue loans to people with shaky credit histories.

The company's chief legal officer, Fay L. Chapman, this week said she was retiring. Chapman, 61, will serve as a consultant for two years to help with the transition, and a WaMu spokeswoman said then that there was no connection between the company's legal troubles and Chapman's departure.

O RLY?

Nope, no disconnect here from Dave. Banks profit from foreclosing on deficient collateral which is why Wamu is losing money and laying people off from lending on inflated appraisals. It's all so simple! Why couldn't I see this before!

:roll:

 

[dmcowen674]

This sadly will become the norm as I posted a long time about.

I know most will never admit to my warnings of this happening and they said it never would.

I will bold lines from articles that say exactl what I said nearly 7 years ago on here.

12-21-2007 Tent city in suburbs is cost of home crisis

Between railroad tracks and beneath the roar of departing planes sits "tent city," a terminus for homeless people. It is not, as might be expected, in a blighted city center, but in the once-booming suburbia of Southern California.

The noisy, dusty camp sprang up in July with 20 residents and now numbers 200 people, including several children, growing as this region east of Los Angeles has been hit by the U.S. housing crisis.

The unraveling of the region known as the Inland Empire reads like a 21st century version of "The Grapes of Wrath," John Steinbeck's novel about families driven from their lands by the Great Depression.

While no current residents claim to be victims of foreclosure, all agree that tent city is a symptom of the wider economic downturn. And it's just a matter of time before foreclosed families end up at tent city, local housing experts say.

The pattern is cropping up in communities across the country, like Cleveland, Ohio, where Mark Wiseman, director of the Cuyahoga County Foreclosure Prevention Program, said there are entire blocks of homes in Cleveland where 60 or 70 percent of houses are boarded up.

'TRICKLE-DOWN EFFECT'

But it is not just homeowners who are hit by the foreclosure wave. People who rent now find themselves in a tighter, more expensive market as demand rises from families who lost homes, said Jean Beil, senior vice president for programs and services at Catholic Charities USA.

Ken Sawa, CEO of Catholic Charities in San Bernardino and Riverside counties, said his organization is overwhelmed and ill-equipped to handle the volume of people seeking help.

"Folks who would have been in a house before are now in an apartment and folks that would have been in an apartment, now can't afford it," said Beil. "It has a trickle-down effect."
======================================================
Hey this must be the "Trickle Down Economics" the resident Republicans have been screaming about and so proud about in action.

 

[Slew Foot]

Good, maybe people will stop buying crap they cant afford.

If 70% of the houses are boarded up, sounds like cheap rentals to me.

Apartment construction has been pretty strong lately, in a couple years, there'll be plenty for everyone.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Good, maybe people will stop buying crap they cant afford.

If 70% of the houses are boarded up, sounds like cheap rentals to me.

Apartment construction has been pretty strong lately, in a couple years, there'll be plenty for everyone.

Originally posted by: George Bailey in It's a Wonderful Life
Just a minute ?? just a minute. Now, hold on, Mr. Potter. You're right when you say my father was no business man. I know that. Why he ever started this cheap, penny-ante Building and Loan, I'll never know. But neither you nor anybody else can say anything against his character, because his whole life was . . .
Why, in the twenty-five years since he and Uncle Billy started this thing, he never once thought of himself. Isn't that right, Uncle Billy? He didn't save enough money to send Harry to school, let alone me. But he did help a few people get out of your slums, Mr. Potter.
And what's wrong with that? Why . . . Here, you're all businessmen here. Doesn't it make them better citizens? Doesn't it make them better customers? You . . . you said . . . What'd you say just a minute ago? . . . They had to wait and save their money before they even ought to think of a decent home. Wait! Wait for what?
Until their children grow up and leave them? Until they're so old and broken-down that they . . . Do you know how long it takes a working man to save five thousand dollars? Just remember this, Mr. Potter, that this rabble you're talking about . . . they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath? Anyway, my father didn't think so. People were human beings to him, but to you, a warped, frustrated old man, they're cattle. Well, in my book he died a much richer man than you'll ever be!

 

[gofrugal]

nothing much happening in seattle , WA.
I am waiting for some HOT DEAL, can't find any yet.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Good, maybe people will stop buying crap they cant afford.

If 70% of the houses are boarded up, sounds like cheap rentals to me.

Apartment construction has been pretty strong lately, in a couple years, there'll be plenty for everyone.

I wouldn't be so certain about that. The nation's population explosion is humming along strongly, too.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
The pattern is cropping up in communities across the country, like Cleveland, Ohio, where Mark Wiseman, director of the Cuyahoga County Foreclosure Prevention Program, said there are entire blocks of homes in Cleveland where 60 or 70 percent of houses are boarded up.

I've been wondering what the banks plan to do with all of these empty houses. Perhaps they just can't stand to have to sell them at a loss?

What if a federal law were passed requiring that foreclosed homes be sold to the highest bidder within one month of foreclosure and that only people who intended to live full time in their prospective properties could place bids (to prevent investors from buying up the properties). Might we start to see a decrease in housing prices?

 

[Slew Foot]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Good, maybe people will stop buying crap they cant afford.

If 70% of the houses are boarded up, sounds like cheap rentals to me.

Apartment construction has been pretty strong lately, in a couple years, there'll be plenty for everyone.

Originally posted by: George Bailey in It's a Wonderful Life
Just a minute ?? just a minute. Now, hold on, Mr. Potter. You're right when you say my father was no business man. I know that. Why he ever started this cheap, penny-ante Building and Loan, I'll never know. But neither you nor anybody else can say anything against his character, because his whole life was . . .
Why, in the twenty-five years since he and Uncle Billy started this thing, he never once thought of himself. Isn't that right, Uncle Billy? He didn't save enough money to send Harry to school, let alone me. But he did help a few people get out of your slums, Mr. Potter.
And what's wrong with that? Why . . . Here, you're all businessmen here. Doesn't it make them better citizens? Doesn't it make them better customers? You . . . you said . . . What'd you say just a minute ago? . . . They had to wait and save their money before they even ought to think of a decent home. Wait! Wait for what?
Until their children grow up and leave them? Until they're so old and broken-down that they . . . Do you know how long it takes a working man to save five thousand dollars? Just remember this, Mr. Potter, that this rabble you're talking about . . . they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath? Anyway, my father didn't think so. People were human beings to him, but to you, a warped, frustrated old man, they're cattle. Well, in my book he died a much richer man than you'll ever be!

Nothing wrong with buying a house, just dont buy a mansion on a townhouse salary. You make it seem like anyone without a house is living a sewage filled rat infested box. I make more money than 99.9% of the people in the country and my rental house is a nice 3 bed room new construction house that costs me 1300/mo, which is still much less than the cost to buy (Yahoo estimates 2500/mo after 30yr fixed mortgage, tax, maintainence), despite the fall from 450K to 270K. So the smarter people in this area at least will continue to rent for now, until all the excess inventory gets picked up.


On another note, I heard yesterday that Bush signed into law a bill that would stop that short sale difference from being taxable income. Mixed feelings on this I suppose, someone being short saled probably cant afford the tax hit, but if the government tries to make up for it by raising taxes on people who havent done anything wrong, then well... screw those guys. Im not sure how banks decide whether or not to decide a short sale offer.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Good, maybe people will stop buying crap they cant afford.

If 70% of the houses are boarded up, sounds like cheap rentals to me.

Apartment construction has been pretty strong lately, in a couple years, there'll be plenty for everyone.

I wouldn't be so certain about that. The nation's population explosion is humming along strongly, too.

Americans are not raising the population in this country by 1 person. Our birth rate is stagnant. ANY and all increases in population are foreign immigrants. So if we find there aren?t? enough houses for everyone ? you know where to look.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Good, maybe people will stop buying crap they cant afford.

If 70% of the houses are boarded up, sounds like cheap rentals to me.

Apartment construction has been pretty strong lately, in a couple years, there'll be plenty for everyone.

I wouldn't be so certain about that. The nation's population explosion is humming along strongly, too.

Americans are not raising the population in this country by 1 person. Our birth rate is stagnant. ANY and all increases in population are foreign immigrants. So if we find there aren?t? enough houses for everyone ? you know where to look.

Sorry, that's not true. There's a baby boom in progress right now. Possibly the biggest yet. The original baby boomers are becoming grandparents.

 

[Dr. Detroit]

Huge article in the San Jose Mercury News on November's housing in Santa Clara county. Median home price is still around $800K but its being propped up by very high end home sales.

Novemeber sales were the lowest in 20yrs, as there is no data going back more than 20yrs!

http://www.mercurynews.com//ci_7776871?IADID

At first glance, Santa Clara County's housing market might seem to have entered a kind of twilight zone.
Just 750 existing detached houses were sold in November, down about 42 percent from November 2006, according to DataQuick Information Systems. That's the fewest sales for that month since the research outfit began tracking such statistics in 1988 and the lowest number for any month since February 1995.

Yet despite the apparent anemic demand for housing here, the median price of those 750 houses shot up 9.5 percent from a year ago to $799,000.

 

[Slew Foot]

Originally posted by: Fmr12B
Huge article in the San Jose Mercury News on November's housing in Santa Clara county. Median home price is still around $800K but its being propped up by very high end home sales.

Novemeber sales were the lowest in 20yrs, as there is no data going back more than 20yrs!

http://www.mercurynews.com//ci_7776871?IADID

At first glance, Santa Clara County's housing market might seem to have entered a kind of twilight zone.
Just 750 existing detached houses were sold in November, down about 42 percent from November 2006, according to DataQuick Information Systems. That's the fewest sales for that month since the research outfit began tracking such statistics in 1988 and the lowest number for any month since February 1995.

Yet despite the apparent anemic demand for housing here, the median price of those 750 houses shot up 9.5 percent from a year ago to $799,000.

SJ is sort of an anolmaly invthat you have high end tech CEOs and the like buying expensive houses that prop up median numbers, but the numbers on similar houses that have resold are slightly down. The east bay is taking a tumble in recent months so I guess the spread to the peninsula is imminent.

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
there are entire blocks of homes in Cleveland where 60 or 70 percent of houses are boarded up.

LOL, I've lived in both Ohio and Michigan. So please tell me.. whats new about this statement? It's been this way since the steel plants closed down.

Heck I remember back in the 80's when there was some guy running around burning down abandoned places just to "clean up" the area. Strange thing.. they never caught the guy... I wonder why...

 

[Slew Foot]

"Lenders that make the largest loans and offer the best rates to borrowers seeking jumbo mortgages want borrowers to show not only a good credit score but also enough reserves to cover as much as three years of mortgage payments and carrying costs, says Melissa Cohn, a mortgage broker in New York."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119733436109620199.html


Wow, jumbo loans with good rates are up to 20% down and THREE YEARS of carrying costs? Heh, no ones going to qualify for that one.