Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This does not mean that balance sheets are markets. Also, banks will stop lending before they sell assets at fire sell pricing. That is exactly what they are doing now.
i am well aware what the difference is between a balance sheet and an equity market. if you strolled into your bank today to withdraw $50 and they didn't have the money, they'd have to sell some of their assets. that would mean real estate assets, stocks, bonds, mortgages. do you now understand?
if you strolled into your bank today to withdraw $50 and they didn't have the money, they'd have to sell some of their assets. that would mean real estate assets, stocks, bonds, mortgages. do you now understand?
Again, Banks will stop lending before they have to sell assets at prices they deem unattractive. That $50 will come from money they would have otherwise lent Joe Six Pack.
It is only once lending to individuals, businesses and other banks largely halts that they will look to liquid assets on unattractive terms. But once this happens the general economy will start to deflate rapidly. The FED/government has to step in before institutions start liquidating their assets. Of course by preventing depression you will prop up the markets in some sense, but that isn't exactly an interesting claim.
Also, how do you know what homes are about to become foreclosures? Gossip on the street and predictions by rumor?
Well ... you just lost a lot of credibility and obviously don't know what you're talking about.
It's called notices of default ... which are filed when people fall behind in their payments. It's the first part of the foreclosure process many months before a home actually becomes a foreclosure and ... a very important indicator of future inventory to come.
I track those also ... both in the newspapers and databases ... and the NOD's haven't gone down either. When they do that's when I think the market will turn.
If you were knowledgeable about the market in general ... you would know this but, obviously, you don't.
It's called notices of default ... which are filed when people fall behind in their payments. It's the first part of the foreclosure process many months before a home becomes a foreclosure and ... a very important indicator of future inventory to come.
Wait, you mean there's actual data about the real estate market? Those people who've been (successfully) predicting price drops are going on more than hunches and their inherent negativity about the world in general? No wai - that's unpossible !!1!!1!!
Quote:
I track those also ... both in the newspapers and databases ... and the NOD's haven't gone down either.
More media doom and gloom from an obviously biased left-wing press. Why don't they print everyone who's not in foreclosure in the paper as well, to be balanced? All they are doing is giving greedy, horrible lower class people the information they need to buy properties in upper class neighborhoods. There's no need for that - poor people should know their place ... houses with "cheap looking aluminum or vinyl", "the bare basics", and showers with "cheap acrylic liners. Hopefully, your getting my point as far as products."
Quote:
If you were knowledgeable about the market in general ... you would know this but, obviously, you don't.
I love the irony. If FMV thinks that everyone gets their information from "Gossip on the street and predictions by rumor", is he/she just projecting their shallow level of research onto others in this discussion?
More media doom and gloom from an obviously biased left-wing press. Why don't they print everyone who's not in foreclosure in the paper as well, to be balanced? All they are doing is giving greedy, horrible lower class people the information they need to buy properties in upper class neighborhoods. There's no need for that - poor people should know their place ... houses with "cheap looking aluminum or vinyl", "the bare basics", and showers with "cheap acrylic liners. Hopefully, your getting my point as far as products."
Just FYI ... Notices of Default are published in the legal notices section ... which usually isn't read by many people, btw. It's part of the legal process of taking back the property.
[quote=sheri257;5713733]Well ... you just lost a lot of credibility and obviously don't know what you're talking about.
It's called notices of default ... which are filed when people fall behind in their payments. It's the first part of the foreclosure process many months before a home actually becomes a foreclosure and ... a very important indicator of future inventory to come.
I track those also ... both in the newspapers and databases ... and the NOD's haven't gone down either. When they do that's when I think the market will turn.
If you were knowledgeable about the market in general ... you would know this but, obviously, you don't.
Notices of default mean ABSOLUTELY nothing in retrospect. You are the one that has lost credibility if you are tracking that type of info. There are MANY reasons why a "notice of default" take status and I know exactly what it means. They have existed FOREVER, there just is more of them than usual, especially in your area. MOST of them come to terms of agreement for whatever they were "in default for" in the first place. And if not, it takes sometimes well over a year or even 2 before the "foreclosure" actually takes place. The ones under foreclosure right now were from long ago and are weeding out as we speak, even in your state. It's quite a legal process that drags on and on. It does no good to try and discredit my knowledge to help your cause. I am merely suggesting that you make it sound quite simple as if there are just 100's that will be available to you in the next short term timeframe. And again, out of those, do you honestly want a home that's gone through this process? Just curious. Now that the government has stepped in, this process will take EVEN longer as a plan is put in place that will take a long time to do. Until then, what it has done is secure the "slow down" of an already "slow process". So keep waiting, no problem, California. The rest of the Nation is NOT with ya! California created it's own mess and it goes without saying. Your Governor knows as much about politics as his character in the "terminator". And I like Arnold, believe me, a great familiy man and thank GOD he has Maria at his side who does know a little something. But you are in your own little world over there, especially where "default notices" and foreclosures are concerned. We all read the LEGAL NOTICES, even in our own area! I know I do and always have. They have a WIDE VARIETY of reasons. In our area, it's a large problem for "tax default" but 99.9% of the time, taxes get paid and it's settled. Oh, wait, gotta go. I have CNN on my other computer in office and they are talking about the real estate market. Let's see what "doom they spread" today............ Nevermind, another analysis of the debate last night and where the candidates stand. Old news.
And KCfromNC, If you honestly interpreted my last post as to think I think people get there info from gossip? Please, grow up. I'm quite "schooled" in the financial "ways" of our economy, I just don't need to spew statisitcs I read or repeat reports given. We all analyize things differently and your way is no more correct than you think mine is. It's all what becomes revelent for each individual. But the big picture of real estate is absorbed by closed minded folk who just "want things to get worse" because then they can have the opportunity to "buy" something they can't afford right now. I doubt any logical person out there that is looking to buy for long term is worried about whether it will lose value in the shorterm. And most are NOT shopping foreclosures in hopes of getting a good deal. Most buy a home for long term purposes, including living in them, and are shopping in the "regular inventory" available.
And KCfromNC, If you honestly interpreted my last post as to think I think people get there info from gossip? Please, grow up. I'm quite "schooled" in the financial "ways" of our economy, I just don't need to spew statisitcs I read or repeat reports given.
Yeah, uh, I meant to do that. I just wanted to see if you were paying attention. Yeah, that's the ticket!
Quote:
We all analyize things differently and your way is no more correct than you think mine is. It's all what becomes revelent for each individual.
No sometimes the data does point one way or another. If you actually discussed the data and why it supports your view, I'd be more sympathetic to your claim. But you've done the opposite, which leads me to think you're just trying to distract people.
Quote:
But the big picture of real estate is absorbed by closed minded folk who just "want things to get worse" because then they can have the opportunity to "buy" something they can't afford right now. I doubt any logical person out there that is looking to buy for long term is worried about whether it will lose value in the shorterm.
Are you saying sheri's approach of looking at the data, following NODs, foreclosures, and comps is illogical? Or is it only OK to do this if you have a certain amount of money and aren't buying out of your predetermined range?
Also, did you pay peak bubble prices for your new house? If you paid anything less, it seems a bit hypocritical to rant at other people for trying to do the same.
Quote:
And most are NOT shopping foreclosures in hopes of getting a good deal. Most buy a home for long term purposes, including living in them, and are shopping in the "regular inventory" available.
I doubt you have any data to support this claim, but that's par for the course.
This post isn't the first time I've seen you attempt to hint that there's some sort of absolute dividing line that separates some houses from another, as if what they were worth at a given point made them totally unavailable to anyone who couldn't afford them at that instant in time. That no matter how much the market changes in the mean time, those other people should stop trying to buy them. I'm not sure why you think that way, but it's not like there's some neo-Platonic ideal price for a house that transcends market forces. I wouldn't think the free market is that difficult for an MBA grad to understand, but oh well, that's life.
Yeah, uh, I meant to do that. I just wanted to see if you were paying attention. Yeah, that's the ticket!
No sometimes the data does point one way or another. If you actually discussed the data and why it supports your view, I'd be more sympathetic to your claim. But you've done the opposite, which leads me to think you're just trying to distract people.
Are you saying sheri's approach of looking at the data, following NODs, foreclosures, and comps is illogical? Or is it only OK to do this if you have a certain amount of money and aren't buying out of your predetermined range?
Also, did you pay peak bubble prices for your new house? If you paid anything less, it seems a bit hypocritical to rant at other people for trying to do the same.
I doubt you have any data to support this claim, but that's par for the course.
This post isn't the first time I've seen you attempt to hint that there's some sort of absolute dividing line that separates some houses from another, as if what they were worth at a given point made them totally unavailable to anyone who couldn't afford them at that instant in time. That no matter how much the market changes in the mean time, those other people should stop trying to buy them. I'm not sure why you think that way, but it's not like there's some neo-Platonic ideal price for a house that transcends market forces. I wouldn't think the free market is that difficult for an MBA grad to understand, but oh well, that's life.
Oh, but on the contrary, I do. The fact is, I couldn't afford a home costing $300,000 just 15 years ago. So We bought for $215,000- what we could afford. Then, as we prospered and saved, could afford nearly $400,000 9 years ago and bought at that price range. Now, as we continued to work hard, save $, and prosper, we afforded a home of $650,000. So it doesn't take an MBA to know that MANY were and still are trying to buy that $650,000 dollar home for the $400,000 they can afford! And this type of scenario is playing out at ALL price levels. Affordable has different meaning to everyone and national income/to home ratios have ALWAYS been way below what the actual is! And downpayment plays in to affordability as well. If one makes 60,000 per year (which is nothing these days) but has a downpayment of 50,000 on a 300,000 home, then their "affordability is well within their means to buy a house that's 300,000 and a mortgage of 250,000. That's well within "affordability" range for this person with a monthly of $1,560. For that, one could get a very decent home with 3-4 bds, 2 bths in a nice community.
And hypocritcal or not, yes it was a good deal, but because it was a teardown and we got a great deal on the empty lot. We are also the first on the street so a bit of a gamble as to whether the "tear down" trend will follow but in the 6 block radius, at least 2 on every street so far and others under construction. So, we did not get a "good deal" because of the "market", but rather from careful consumer "savvy" homework and lots of time spent shopping for the best prices on our upgrades and contents of the home itself. Additionally, if we had built the same exact home just down the road where a "subdivision" of homes is building on a parcel of land owned by a builder, we would have easily paid at least 200,000 more because the land was more expensive and all the homes are of the same caliber. So we compromised on location, per say, as the other 7 homes on our street are much smaller, older, and will probably be teardowns some day too. Hence, why ours was $650,000 and not $850,000.
MOST of them come to terms of agreement for whatever they were "in default for" in the first place. And if not, it takes sometimes well over a year or even 2 before the "foreclosure" actually takes place.
Some NOD's are resolved but definitely not most of them. From what I'm seeing about 70-80 percent go into foreclosure so, that's why it's an excellent indicator of whether the market is going to turn, or not ... and when.
Maybe you've heard of the credit crunch and, also, the severe recession ... which is why most of these NOD's do go into foreclosure. And I've seen it take up to one year but, not typically two years in most cases.
I have been watching a condo complex in my zip for 5 months. One just reduced from 89K to 67K...older 2/1 but rents go for $1200.00/mo. Seems pretty low for San Diego, but maybe I am missing something.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
