[olecapt]

Originally Posted by tony soprano

Your first paragraph references "lender owned homes". Your second paragraph references REOs. Please explain to us the differences when you first state that lenders controlled very little inventory, and then a paragraph later state that banks controlled 90% of the sales. You are completely lost.

YOu really don't understand this stuff. A lender owned home is just that. It is a home owned by the lender that may or may not be listed for sale. If it is listed for sale it is a REO.

While the lenders controlled 80% of the sales at peak they never controlled more than a third of the active inventory for sale.

And at no time did the inventory held by the lenders and not listed for sale get past a couple of months of sales.

Understand yet? Don't want you wandering around lost.

[tony soprano]

Originally Posted by olecapt

YOu really don't understand this stuff. A lender owned home is just that. It is a home owned by the lender that may or may not be listed for sale. If it is listed for sale it is a REO.

While the lenders controlled 80% of the sales at peak they never controlled more than a third of the active inventory for sale.

And at no time did the inventory held by the lenders and not listed for sale get past a couple of months of sales.

Understand yet? Don't want you wandering around lost.

More contrived rubbish. There is no magical transformation from "lender owned" to REO when it's listed.
REO Definition
Real Estate Owned (REO) Definition

And it's preposterous to say that banks never controlled a large inventory when REOs where the majority of sales for months and months on end. That they didn't hold the inventory all at the same time is insignificant. JohnG72's point is that you've been completely oblivious to the foreclosures in the pipeline. Your analysis goes no further than looking at a static REO number, dividing it by the current sales rate, and pronouncing "There are only a X months of REOs left". Perhaps that's why you've been yammering about REOs running out for over a year.

Originally Posted by olecapt on 9/13/2008

Nope. Don't work that way.

LV will burn through most of its foreclosures by the middle of next year.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/5255468-post152.html

Another nice call

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by tony soprano

More contrived rubbish. There is no magical transformation from "lender owned" to REO when it's listed.
REO Definition
Real Estate Owned (REO) Definition

REO is a term or art in this context referring to a field in the MLS listing.

And it's preposterous to say that banks never controlled a large inventory when REOs where the majority of sales for months and months on end. That they didn't hold the inventory all at the same time is insignificant. JohnG72's point is that you've been completely oblivious to the foreclosures in the pipeline. Your analysis goes no further than looking at a static REO number, dividing it by the current sales rate, and pronouncing "There are only a X months of REOs left". Perhaps that's why you've been yammering about REOs running out for over a year.Another nice call

The banks controlled vastly more inventory in 2008 and early 2009 than they do now. See my blog chart...you can watch the inventory crash.

And most foreclosures have likely occured by now. They will of course never stop...but they will likely continue to fade particularly when we get improvement in the local economy.

Price has remained low most likely driven by the lousey Las Vegas economy. When that looks up they will start moving up. Note though that they have stayed constant even in the face of an economy that has gotten worse.

[tony soprano]

Originally Posted by olecapt

REO is a term or art in this context referring to a field in the MLS listing.

The banks controlled vastly more inventory in 2008 and early 2009 than they do now. See my blog chart...you can watch the inventory crash.

And most foreclosures have likely occured by now. They will of course never stop...but they will likely continue to fade particularly when we get improvement in the local economy.

Price has remained low most likely driven by the lousey Las Vegas economy. When that looks up they will start moving up. Note though that they have stayed constant even in the face of an economy that has gotten worse.

You have to be kidding me? Who on earth would give any credence to a foreclosure inventory chart prepared by someone that stated most Vegas foreclosures would be sold off by the middle of 2009? Sorry, I'll pass. It's more than a year beyond your stated time frame and foreclosures still accounted for ~49% of sales in July. You are demonstrably clueless on how to forecast coming foreclosure inventory. Making forward looking projections base on current REO inventory amounts to forecasting by the rearview mirror.

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by tony soprano

You have to be kidding me? Who on earth would give any credence to a foreclosure inventory chart prepared by someone that stated most Vegas foreclosures would be sold off by the middle of 2009? Sorry, I'll pass. It's more than a year beyond your stated time frame and foreclosures still accounted for ~49% of sales in July. You are demonstrably clueless on how to forecast coming foreclosure inventory. Making forward looking projections base on current REO inventory amounts to forecasting by the rearview mirror.

Data is data. It is too bad you can't read a simple graphic.

The remark dealt with inventory which was correct. The high inventory of foreclosures was eaten as was projected. It is also correct that we likely are through much of the foreclosures. We have disposed of something in excess of 55,000. At the present rate it will take more than four years to realize that number and the rate of foreclosures is still slowly dropping.

Foreclosures are under 40% of sales and were so in July. They remain an important factor but the rate appears relatively stable and slowly decreasing. Pricing is also relatively stable so REOs are no longer dragging price down.

August numbers also continue to indicate a return to about 140K median and a 169K average indicating that your theories about rebate impact were wrong. Nothing new there.

You just don't understand this stuff Tony. You need a new hobby.

[tony soprano]

Originally Posted by olecapt

Data is data. It is too bad you can't read a simple graphic.

The remark dealt with inventory which was correct. The high inventory of foreclosures was eaten as was projected. It is also correct that we likely are through much of the foreclosures. We have disposed of something in excess of 55,000. At the present rate it will take more than four years to realize that number and the rate of foreclosures is still slowly dropping.

A simple graphic prepared by someone who has no idea how to forecast pending foreclosure inventory. Useless. If you meant that existing foreclosure inventory would be burned off by the middle of 2009, you should have said so. You extrapolate your projections on a fixed number of foreclosures when everyone but you recognizes the number isn't fixed. The pipeline is full of foreclosure inventory. Perhaps that's the root of yet another one of your failed projections that prices would rise when foreclosure inventory dropped. That never happened.

Foreclosures are under 40% of sales and were so in July. They remain an important factor but the rate appears relatively stable and slowly decreasing. Pricing is also relatively stable so REOs are no longer dragging price down.

August numbers also continue to indicate a return to about 140K median and a 169K average indicating that your theories about rebate impact were wrong. Nothing new there.

Foreclosures accounted for 42% sales in July. As for a return to the $140K median, why don't we wait until the actual date is reported? After all, you incorrectly forecast there would be a month-over-month increase in the SFR median from April '09 to May '09. You managed to get that "forecast" wrong with only one day left of May '09 data to be had. In fact, the April '09 SFR median wasn't surpassed until an entire year later in April '10.

You just don't understand this stuff Tony. You need a new hobby.

I'd say the same for you. Clearly, this market forecasting gig is not working out for you.

[airics]

Originally Posted by jfkIII

http://www.city-data.com/forum/15655466-post2837.html

maybe you should wait until Jan 2011.. and as far as i'm concerned those really cheapo condos ($20-30k) have gone up more than 10%....

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by tony soprano

A simple graphic prepared by someone who has no idea how to forecast pending foreclosure inventory. Useless. If you meant that existing foreclosure inventory would be burned off by the middle of 2009, you should have said so.

That is what I said. If you got the hate out of your eyes you would have read it that way too.

You extrapolate your projections on a fixed number of foreclosures when everyone but you recognizes the number isn't fixed. The pipeline is full of foreclosure inventory. Perhaps that's the root of yet another one of your failed projections that prices would rise when foreclosure inventory dropped. That never happened.

Actually forclosure inventory dropped all to heck and back. The most interesting thing is that foreclosures have almost been on a rail since 2Q2009...have not varied more than a few hundred per month since then. I even ran a chart on it. But you don't read charts do you? And the rise will come. It is only a question of when. The economy locally certainly has not helped. But the number has held very well for a year and will begin to move up on economy improvement. I will admit I did not expect Las Vegas to continue downward as long as it has. But it will turn in time.

Foreclosures accounted for 42% sales in July. As for a return to the $140K median, why don't we wait until the actual date is reported? After all, you incorrectly forecast there would be a month-over-month increase in the SFR median from April '09 to May '09. You managed to get that "forecast" wrong with only one day left of May '09 data to be had. In fact, the April '09 SFR median wasn't surpassed until an entire year later in April '10.I'd say the same for you. Clearly, this market forecasting gig is not working out for you.

Nope. Actually just a bit over 40%. As you are aware we keep these numbers on SFRs. That is the standard and for cause. Too much strange stuff in condos and high rises. The forecast was for a very small up which vanished at the end. And the $140 could end up $141 or $139. But it is not going to move much at this point. Why not adimit you were wrong early and avoid the rush?

You need a new hobby Tony. You just don't dig this stuff.

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by airics

maybe you should wait until Jan 2011.. and as far as i'm concerned those really cheapo condos ($20-30k) have gone up more than 10%....

I will run a quintile chart this week. Should be interesting. I think I agree with you but I have found opinion on this stuff often incorrect.

You follow the LA Times thing on teachers? Turns out no one has the faintest idea who the actually good teachers are...and those thought good often are not. Fascinating.

[tony soprano]

Originally Posted by olecapt

That is what I said. If you got the hate out of your eyes you would have read it that way too.

I quoted your post, genius. You said -

Originally Posted by olecapt on 9/13/2008
Nope. Don't work that way.

LV will burn through most of its foreclosures by the middle of next year.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/5255468-post152.html

Wrong.

Actually forclosure inventory dropped all to heck and back. The most interesting thing is that foreclosures have almost been on a rail since 2Q2009...have not varied more than a few hundred per month since then. I even ran a chart on it. But you don't read charts do you? And the rise will come. It is only a question of when. The economy locally certainly has not helped. But the number has held very well for a year and will begin to move up on economy improvement. I will admit I did not expect Las Vegas to continue downward as long as it has. But it will turn in time.

Well, to be more specific, I don't read your charts. You provide no information that can't be found elsewhere. Beyond the rest of your irrelevant chatter the fact remains that you continually harped on that REOs were "running out" and that when the REO inventory dropped that prices would rise. According to your numbers RE0s dipped below a month's inventory and prices didn't budge. Yet another failed forecast.

Nope. Actually just a bit over 40%. As you are aware we keep these numbers on SFRs. That is the standard and for cause. Too much strange stuff in condos and high rises.

I'll use the reported GLVAR date, thanks. GLVAR says 42%

The forecast was for a very small up which vanished at the end. And the $140 could end up $141 or $139. But it is not going to move much at this point. Why not adimit you were wrong early and avoid the rush?

Poof! It just vanished! What was forecasted to be a month-over-month increase turned out to be a year-over-year increase. I don't know that you can really label it a "forecast" as there was only day of data left to collect, yet you still managed to get it a wrong. A big kudos is in order for that one.

You need a new hobby Tony. You just don't dig this stuff.

Trust me, I dig this stuff just fine.