Housing Analysis
- Thread starter eyephone
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
This is a small percentage of owners (Redfin survey was like 1/10) and the percentage is even smaller for those who would lose... and if they are losing, they have other options than to sell.
Remember... the TI tenets of homebuying is financial capable and not short term. If you're selling within 2 years...the possibility of a loss is high.
How about those people who bought in 2018?
Fed thinks they got things under control but lo and behold nope........ large wage gains ------> price increases (inflation) ------> rising rates higher than the last go round (maybe after lowering them first because of a recession or just because we thought we won the war) ------> recession and if it's not deep enough another go round or two of that.
Houses can continue to go up (rising inflation) but jobs are lost and it's hard to actually sell a house (and where are you going to go anyway?)
What is eventually required to break that increasing wage cycle is a DEEP lasting recession as we had in 1981 (it was the third recession). Unemployment was higher than 2008 and the government was not there to bail us out and it didn't last just a few months. Instead they were also cutting spending and jobs. In that circumstance, by the time you're done with that deep recession no one is complaining they want more money....... they are just freaking happy to even have a job.
The 70's/80's were like now, except the mortgages people hung onto were 7% mortgages. 70's into 1980 is when labor unions were all the rage and what eventually happened after all was said and done manufacturers moved those union jobs overseas. Prices came down because we imported cheap stuff from China. Personal computers/software/semiconductors provided us with a new "boom" domestically. We didn't get out of our mess by government spending and bailing out everyone and their brother and maintaining a "dual mandate" which is counterproductive, imo.
I use to think our military spending is too high, not anymore. So this is good at least for people with savings, buy some short term treasury and get at least a real yield minus the inflation. But then again, the official inflation is cooked.
Shadow stats https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data has a more true number and graphs.
If rates and prices remain the same, then we won't see increase in inventory. If rates remain high and prices come down, then we'll see even FEWER inventory. The biggest factor is, what do the current homeowners do IF they sold their current home. Renting is the only option since buying a new home means paying A LOT more interest. That's why we won't see any current homeowners upgrading to a bigger home even if they wanted to. The only way we'll see an increase in inventory is if rates go down A LOT, but prices don't come down or only come down slightly. So, I would expect inventory to be low in the next 2 years.
I read some article where it was saying the Mortgage Banker Association's baseline forecast is for mortgage rates to end 2024 at 6.1 percent and reach 5.5 percent at the end of 2025, as Treasury rates decline and as the spread narrows.
Liar Loan
Well-known member
That's a conservative strategy that works for a lot of people.
usctrojancpa
Well-known member
That chart shows that the cost to own was about 2x of renting when the Fed last significantly raised rates in the 70s/80s so if that holds true the cost to own will go up a little more because we are only at 150%.
Liar Loan
Well-known member
Peak bubble buyers losing $100k in less than two years!! How is this even possible with the shortage of homes and people refusing to give up 3% mortgages that I keep hearing about?
Then of course, this poor couple will be stuck either renting an apartment in Seattle or purchasing another home with a 7% mortgage. A double whammy of a loss.
She has clients selling their home after purchasing it just a year ago near the housing market peak because they have to move back to Seattle for in-person work.
"My sellers both work at the same company, which told them they have to be in the office three days a week or they'll lose their jobs. They have six months to make the move. They'll probably have to take a $100,000 loss on their home," Pendleton said.
finance.yahoo.com
Then of course, this poor couple will be stuck either renting an apartment in Seattle or purchasing another home with a 7% mortgage. A double whammy of a loss.
Return-to-office policies are driving people to sell their homes - even at a loss
Redfin highlighted an anecdote from real estate agent Shauna Pendleton in Boise, Idaho, which was a popular destination for big city remote workers during the pandemic.She has clients selling their home after purchasing it just a year ago near the housing market peak because they have to move back to Seattle for in-person work.
"My sellers both work at the same company, which told them they have to be in the office three days a week or they'll lose their jobs. They have six months to make the move. They'll probably have to take a $100,000 loss on their home," Pendleton said.
Return-to-office policies are driving people to sell their homes - even at a loss
Other reasons that are driving people to move include wanting more space, being closer to family, and lowering costs, according to a survey.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
Fear monger much? I already posted about this on the WFH thread and it was discussed.
This is a small percentage of owners (Redfin survey was like 1/10) and the percentage is even smaller for those who would lose... and if they are losing, they have other options than to sell.
Remember... the TI tenets of homebuying is financial capable and not short term. If you're selling within 2 years...the possibility of a loss is high.
How about those people who bought in 2018?
Liar Loan
Well-known member
If they sold within two years, they lost as well.How about those people who bought in 2018?
Harvesting cap gains in RE is totally dependent on when you buy, temporarily distorted by Fed policy for the past couple decades. Current buyers will be the first generation in a loong time to really have to consider that. With structural workforce and trade issues driving an inflationary undercurrent the Fed won't be cutting rates unless unemployment suddenly spikes or we get another pandemic or black swan, which means jobs will get hit hard and inventory will balloon. Hard to tell the future however possibility thinking is an important component of one's long term financial health.
irvinebullhousing
Well-known member
Buy, refi-extract equity, hold until you die. Before you die, setup trust to pass-through to your heirs, tax free.
Repeat,
Buy, refi-extract equity, hold until you die. Before you die, setup trust to pass-through to your heirs, tax free.
Repeat,
Buy, refi-extract equity, hold until you die. Before you die, setup trust to pass-through to your heirs, tax free.
Yes, this will create a somewhat tight inventory such as what we are wittneessing today.
In the meantime, hire a property management company to do the works for you.
Repeat,
Buy, refi-extract equity, hold until you die. Before you die, setup trust to pass-through to your heirs, tax free.
Repeat,
Buy, refi-extract equity, hold until you die. Before you die, setup trust to pass-through to your heirs, tax free.
Yes, this will create a somewhat tight inventory such as what we are wittneessing today.
In the meantime, hire a property management company to do the works for you.
Such a simpleton - the refi-extract faucets are OFF. That game is over.Buy, refi-extract equity, hold until you die. Before you die, setup trust to pass-through to your heirs, tax free.
Repeat,
Buy, refi-extract equity, hold until you die. Before you die, setup trust to pass-through to your heirs, tax free.
Repeat,
Buy, refi-extract equity, hold until you die. Before you die, setup trust to pass-through to your heirs, tax free.
Yes, this will create a somewhat tight inventory such as what we are wittneessing today.
In the meantime, hire a property management company to do the works for you.
Liar Loan
Well-known member
Homebuyers canceling purchases at highest rate in 10 months
Home purchases across the US are getting canceled at the highest rate in almost a year as rising borrowing costs weigh on buyers.
Nearly 60,000 deals to purchase homes fell through in August, according to a report released Friday by Redfin Corp. That’s equal to roughly 16% of homes that went under contract last month, the biggest share of cancellations since October.
“I’ve seen more homebuyers cancel deals in the last six months than I’ve seen at any point during my 24 years of working in real estate,” Jaime Moore, a Redfin agent, said in the report. “They’re getting cold feet.”
www.ocregister.com
Home purchases across the US are getting canceled at the highest rate in almost a year as rising borrowing costs weigh on buyers.
Nearly 60,000 deals to purchase homes fell through in August, according to a report released Friday by Redfin Corp. That’s equal to roughly 16% of homes that went under contract last month, the biggest share of cancellations since October.
“I’ve seen more homebuyers cancel deals in the last six months than I’ve seen at any point during my 24 years of working in real estate,” Jaime Moore, a Redfin agent, said in the report. “They’re getting cold feet.”
Homebuyers canceling purchases at highest rate in 10 months
“They’re getting cold feet,” says one Redfin agent.
www.ocregister.com
Last edited:
irvinebullhousing
Well-known member
It is that simple. Not difficult to be well, when you can planned for the opportunities. The difficult here is to see what will come and plan accordingly. Certainly, if you refi today is dumb. Too late for that. Zub had good timing. He almost pulled 1Million or close to it. Now, just sit back and chill on the 5.5% short term treasury. Opportunities will arise once again for the planned and prepare.
Ready2Downsize
Well-known member
I can give a future people may not like and probably will think cannot happen but it sure did in the 70's/80's.
Fed thinks they got things under control but lo and behold nope........ large wage gains ------> price increases (inflation) ------> rising rates higher than the last go round (maybe after lowering them first because of a recession or just because we thought we won the war) ------> recession and if it's not deep enough another go round or two of that.
Houses can continue to go up (rising inflation) but jobs are lost and it's hard to actually sell a house (and where are you going to go anyway?)
What is eventually required to break that increasing wage cycle is a DEEP lasting recession as we had in 1981 (it was the third recession). Unemployment was higher than 2008 and the government was not there to bail us out and it didn't last just a few months. Instead they were also cutting spending and jobs. In that circumstance, by the time you're done with that deep recession no one is complaining they want more money....... they are just freaking happy to even have a job.
The 70's/80's were like now, except the mortgages people hung onto were 7% mortgages. 70's into 1980 is when labor unions were all the rage and what eventually happened after all was said and done manufacturers moved those union jobs overseas. Prices came down because we imported cheap stuff from China. Personal computers/software/semiconductors provided us with a new "boom" domestically. We didn't get out of our mess by government spending and bailing out everyone and their brother and maintaining a "dual mandate" which is counterproductive, imo.
irvinebullhousing
Well-known member
History indeed very valuable. I would argue that, the FED and government would prefer higher prices, thus government tax receipts is higher. Except, our government is spending even higher. At 33 Trillions deficit and over a trillion in interest this year alone for borrowing. This interest expense is now higher than we budgeted for military spending.
I use to think our military spending is too high, not anymore. So this is good at least for people with savings, buy some short term treasury and get at least a real yield minus the inflation. But then again, the official inflation is cooked.
Shadow stats https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data has a more true number and graphs.
morekaos
Well-known member
Ouch!….
Home sales plunge to 2008 levels as record mortgage rates take their toll
'Now sellers are offering a lot of incentives to get buyers to buy their house'
The U.S. real estate market is on track to sell the least number of homes since 2008, when Americans were engulfed in the subprime mortgage crisis and the Great Recession. In an indicator that home sales will stay low for the coming months, purchase mortgages dropped to their lowest point since 1995 in September.
https://www.wsj.com/economy/housing/home-sales-on-track-for-slowest-year-since-housing-bust-202453ab
Home sales plunge to 2008 levels as record mortgage rates take their toll
'Now sellers are offering a lot of incentives to get buyers to buy their house'
The U.S. real estate market is on track to sell the least number of homes since 2008, when Americans were engulfed in the subprime mortgage crisis and the Great Recession. In an indicator that home sales will stay low for the coming months, purchase mortgages dropped to their lowest point since 1995 in September.
https://www.wsj.com/economy/housing/home-sales-on-track-for-slowest-year-since-housing-bust-202453ab
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
Sales volume is lower because less people can buy (due to high rates and prices) but not so sure if it's a buyer's market as your quote is implying.
Need prices to go lower... but again... who will sell their sub-3% financed and lower priced home?
Need prices to go lower... but again... who will sell their sub-3% financed and lower priced home?
qwerty
Well-known member
The government is always talking about how people need to pay their fair share, I wish just this once the government would take their fair share of accountability and tell Americans how they f’d up housing for the foreseeable future for all homeowners. It’s too expensive for new homeowners and probably too expensive for a lot of existing homeowners even if they sell their homes and use the proceeds on the new house since any mortgage they get will still be pretty expensive due to the rates. Not to mention the extra property taxes on the new place due to the inflated home prices.
I’m sure in trying to fix this issue they will manage to actually make it worse and probably will screw other things up along the way.
I’m sure in trying to fix this issue they will manage to actually make it worse and probably will screw other things up along the way.
CalBears96
Well-known member
Yeah, there are fewer buyers due to high interest rates and prices, but there are also fewer sellers due to refinancing at sub 3%. That creates a stalemate in the housing market. Prices aren't going down due to low inventory.
If rates and prices remain the same, then we won't see increase in inventory. If rates remain high and prices come down, then we'll see even FEWER inventory. The biggest factor is, what do the current homeowners do IF they sold their current home. Renting is the only option since buying a new home means paying A LOT more interest. That's why we won't see any current homeowners upgrading to a bigger home even if they wanted to. The only way we'll see an increase in inventory is if rates go down A LOT, but prices don't come down or only come down slightly. So, I would expect inventory to be low in the next 2 years.
I read some article where it was saying the Mortgage Banker Association's baseline forecast is for mortgage rates to end 2024 at 6.1 percent and reach 5.5 percent at the end of 2025, as Treasury rates decline and as the spread narrows.
As I pointed out above, the current situation is really sticky, where BOTH the mortgage interest rates and housing prices are high. Supposedly, mortgages interest rates and housing prices are inverse, but that's not the case right now. I think the only way to fix the current situation is for the interest rates to drop a lot without housing prices following. That's the only way to increase inventory. The other option is a deep recession which causes a lot of homeowners to default, but that would be worst case scenario. But I would have to emphasize again that a deep recession would only affect the states and cities where homeowners are living paycheck to paycheck. It won't affect most of California, particularly SV and OC.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
Yep. People always forget the other factors, especially in Irvine.
The detractors will say that Irvine doesn't have anything special but it does that surrounding cities don't have:
1. Larger FCB demographic
2. New homes still under construction
3. "Perception" of schools and value retention
For housing in general, as CB said, people always say that when rates go up, prices go down. But when so many people bought at the lowest rates in history (which has not happened before), we are seeing that's not necessarily true. And it has never been proportionate.
So the "slowdowners" can post as many "rates are rising" posts as they want... it will just incentivize people to not move more keeping inventory low and preventing significant price drops.
The detractors will say that Irvine doesn't have anything special but it does that surrounding cities don't have:
1. Larger FCB demographic
2. New homes still under construction
3. "Perception" of schools and value retention
For housing in general, as CB said, people always say that when rates go up, prices go down. But when so many people bought at the lowest rates in history (which has not happened before), we are seeing that's not necessarily true. And it has never been proportionate.
So the "slowdowners" can post as many "rates are rising" posts as they want... it will just incentivize people to not move more keeping inventory low and preventing significant price drops.
qwerty
Well-known member
Another approach would be to limit investors of homes to individuals only and not corporations (PE firms etc). That would be against my capitalist views but homes should be more affordable to the average American and they are not. Not sure what kind of impact this would have though but it may be worth a try. They could also limit individual investors to 2-5 rental homes perhaps. That way individuals can still try to accumulate wealth through real estate but not create unaffordabilty for homebuyers. They could limit foreigners purchases as well which may be an easier sell since lobbyists would probably try to stop any type of investors from being limited