Results 126 to 150 of 24779
Thread: Real Estate Crash thread
-
09-09-2006, 06:04 PM #126
Housing is an investment, just like buying a stock in the stock market.
There are bull markets and bear markets. It's possible to lose money in bull markets, and make money in bear markets, but it's a lot more difficult than swimming with the tide.
There are factors that affect only a local market (such as development policies, existing housing stock, local employment picture, and trendiness of a town or neighborhood) and factors that affect the nationwide market (such as interest rates and inflation).
Right now the national factors, which have been strongly positive over the previous ten years (declining interest rates, low inflation, strong economy) have become less positive. Interest rates are rising, inflation is increasing, and salaries are not keeping pace. However, there are still places where local factors are enough to overcome this.
How bad will the national factors get, and will the local positive factors overcome them? I don't have that answer.
-
09-13-2006, 09:14 AM #127
I haven't followed this thread at all but here's a little data for it:
Foreclosures Up 53% over Aug 05 and 24% over July 06"It is not the result that counts! It is not the result but the spirit! Not what - but how. Not what has been attained - but at what price.
- A. Solzhenitsyn
-
09-13-2006, 10:25 AM #128
Wow.
Mass foreclosed-home auction in Michigan
Homeowners in so-called 'auto-wreck' states have trouble keeping up with payments; region leads nation in foreclosures.
By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer
September 12 2006
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- More than 250 bank-owned single-family homes, condos and duplexes in Michigan are going to hit the auction block en masse in late September, according to Hudson & Marshall, the company handling the auction.
http://www.hudsonandmarshall.com/auc...&auctionID=303
-
09-13-2006, 12:54 PM #129
spats speaks the truth. But for those of you who think RE will never go down b/c "they're not making any more land" (might be the stupidest argument I've heard since "Why wear a condom? I'm never going back to Haiti!"), check out this chart from Yale economist Robert Schiller (you know, the guy who was ringing the alarm bells about the tech bubble in the late 90s):
Edit: Why is it all messed up? The image I linked from is clear as a bell.
-
09-13-2006, 01:04 PM #130
Its like anything else, stocks, whatever. People try to sell you on the idea that you will make some historical average return. Its probably true, but they dont tell you about the volatility inbetween, losing your job etc.. whatever.
add gold and oil stocks to the heap of sucker plays this year.
-
09-13-2006, 01:20 PM #131
Funky But Chic
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- The Cone of Uncertainty
- Posts
- 49,337
Procrastination has been a solid play for me again this year.
-
09-13-2006, 02:35 PM #132
Typhoid Ryan - the Vector
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 2,935
I have a problem with this chart. This chart should start post 1920, because mass-production is a unique event that changed the market for good. Prior to mass-production, the house was worth multiple times more than the land it was built on. Post mass-production, such has not been the case. Land was hardly a function of the market prior to 1920. People weren't moving to the suburbs because there was no room in the city. It looks like 1890 was arbitrarily chosen as a start date because it "works" with Schiller's theory. …and how can you look at a jump that's 5 times bigger than any other jump before it and say it's going to correct like the smaller ones did?
If we look at the period where the index has generally stayed around 100 it's only from 1950 to 1996. That's not a long time. To me, it's an insufficient sample size.
The only way the index returns to 100 is if they start mass-producing land. Haven't seen any talks of that happening. It's that or the major businesses and universities in big cities start moving to South Dakota or we start building supertrains. As the price of oil goes up, there's no way most people can expect to commute more than an hour each way. In 25 years there won't be any place to build a house within an hour of a city center.
-
09-13-2006, 02:38 PM #133
Originally Posted by shmerham
-
09-13-2006, 02:49 PM #134
Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Posts
- 8,887
Originally Posted by rideit
Elvis has left the building
-
09-13-2006, 02:51 PM #135
cripey, look to Holland and Venice for fine, fine examples. New Orleans, on the other hand....not working out so well.
-
09-13-2006, 02:59 PM #136
Typhoid Ryan - the Vector
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 2,935
Originally Posted by cj001f
-
09-13-2006, 03:02 PM #137
For a genuine, full fledged real estate crapout, you need job losses. This has not happened yet. The loss of buying power, as a result of the higher rates, has effected "certain mkts".
When I bought my house in the Bay area, I had a 6.625% morgatge. When I sold it, i had just refied down to 4.625%. Assuming the loan was for 80% of the house value, the added buying power was almost exactly what i sold it for.
Without massive layoffs, or a recession, a big dump is unlikey.
-
09-13-2006, 04:01 PM #138
Bozeman is already outbuilding the demand: supposedly the town has 3x the inventory than the amount of interested buyers. (But the amount of interested buyers has not gone down.) Happened a lot quicker than I (and everyone else) thought. Things are changin'.
-
09-13-2006, 04:14 PM #139
Originally Posted by Cono Este
I've concluded that DJSapp was never DJSapp, and Not DJSapp is also not DJSapp, so that means he's telling the truth now and he was lying before.
-
09-13-2006, 09:47 PM #140
Call me Ishmael
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- Lima, Peru
- Posts
- 1,534
Originally Posted by shmerham
In any case, we are definitely not running out of land. We'll either form new cities (see Vegas, Las) or just increase the density of the ones that we already live in.
-
09-13-2006, 09:54 PM #141
Originally Posted by DJSapp
Whaaa?
They can either stay, and work for the energy industry, or come home, and work in Wyoming.....for haliburton.
-
09-14-2006, 08:25 AM #142
Originally Posted by rideit
I've concluded that DJSapp was never DJSapp, and Not DJSapp is also not DJSapp, so that means he's telling the truth now and he was lying before.
-
09-14-2006, 08:42 AM #143
Re: Postwar recession.
It's different this time.. 160k soldiers is not that many for the workforce to absorb and Military pay is really pretty good. Most of the soldiers will come back flush with cash:
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/...enlbasepay.htm
I'd argue that an end to major involvement in the Iraq war would be a plus for the economy overall.
-
09-14-2006, 08:58 AM #144
Originally Posted by shmerham
Do I believe we will in fact regress all the way to that mean nationwide? Probably not. But it goes to show you how expensive housing is now compared to very long term trends and that there is substantial room to fall before reaching the historical market equilibrium. Schiller "chose" 1890 b/c that's when the reliable data set begins.
-
09-14-2006, 08:59 AM #145
That, and just because the war is (or will be) over doesn't mean the soldiers are out of a job. That's not how it works.
-
09-14-2006, 09:15 AM #146
Originally Posted by 4matic
Now, you're supposing that there's going to be a quick end to this conflict and everything will be peachy keen back here in God's land, but that may be news to even Rumsfeld. We just built a fortress for an embassy in Baghdad that makes Hussein's palace look like a vacation cottage, digging in for a very long haul. And, more important than anything, as every day goes by, this "war" drives our deficit higher by the millions. With that will eventually come higher interest rates, and then, well, you know, look it up, somebody had to pay for our little party in Vietnam. The economy of the 70's was just wonderful for the returning soldiers then. Yeah, they were all flush with cash and rode Caddies down easy street.
-
09-14-2006, 09:51 AM #147
Originally Posted by DJSapp
edit: 4matic beat me to it. Benny, our deficit went down and the amount taken in by the tax man went up.Last edited by mr_gyptian; 09-14-2006 at 09:59 AM.
"The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" --Margaret Thatcher
-
09-14-2006, 10:07 AM #148
Originally Posted by mr_gyptian
Ah, fuckit. I will still need 80k to make my down payment. Thanks for killing my hopes of affordible housing.I've concluded that DJSapp was never DJSapp, and Not DJSapp is also not DJSapp, so that means he's telling the truth now and he was lying before.
-
09-15-2006, 08:29 AM #149
Originally Posted by Benny Profane
Relative to 1970 Millitary pay is up quite a bit and remember that in 1970 it was a conscription army. The draft wasn't eliminated till 1973 (lucky me)
-
09-17-2006, 05:21 AM #150
big week coming up:
On Tuesday, the Commerce Department will report on housing starts and building permits for August. On Monday, the National Association of Home Builders will release its housing market index, a sentiment survey of builders.
"The situation in the housing market is precarious," said Brian Bethune and Nigel Gault, economist for Global Insight. "Emotions could start to play a greater role in builders' decisions, adding downside risk to the numbers."
Economists surveyed by MarketWatch expect housing starts to fall 2.5% in August to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.748 million from 1.795 million in July.
Starts have fallen in five of the past six months to a level that's off about 21% from the peak in January.
"Demand and supply conditions have been deteriorating rapidly," said Jay Feldman, an economist for Credit Suisse.
New home sales are off 22% from the peak, while the inventory of unsold new homes is up 22% in the past year.
Not surprisingly, prices are flat and probably down significantly considering all the extras builders are throwing in for free to sweeten the deal.
"Home builders are reluctant to begin new projects and are reacting to an increase in cancellations," said Drew Matus, an economist for Lehman Bros. Lehman economists expect starts to fall 13% this year and 14% next.
"Speculators, who drove the market for new homes over the past few years, have now fled," Matus said.
A record 1.73 million homes are vacant and awaiting a buyer.
Bookmarks