Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Two-Thirds of Lenders Nationwide Say U.S. in Midst of Real Estate Bubble
Philadelphia -- (Business Wire) ^ | 4/04/2006 | Biz Wire Saff

Posted on 04/05/2006 11:15:28 AM PDT by ex-Texan

Half Say Burst Has Begun or Will Shortly, According to Phoenix Lending Survey Results; 93 Percent of Lenders Predict Housing Prices Will Drop 10 - 20 Percent

Northeast and West Coast Likely to Be Hardest Hit, Say Lenders

Two-thirds of lenders nationwide believe a real estate bubble currently exists in the United States - and half of them believe it has already begun to burst or will burst in the next six months, according to the results of this quarter's Phoenix Management "Lending Climate in America" Survey.

A significant 93 percent of lenders surveyed expect an anticipated housing correction to result in real estate prices declining 10 to 20 percent across the country.

"In the minds of lenders, the housing bubble has moved from 'Loch Ness monster' myth status to an economic reality that could have a significant, negative impact on the lives of many Americans," said Michael E. Jacoby, Managing Director and Shareholder of Phoenix Management Services. "A year ago, 46 percent of lenders believed we were in a housing bubble. Today, that number has climbed to 66 percent - and many of them believe a correction is imminent and could lead to a drop in housing prices of up to 20 percent."

When asked when they believed the housing bubble would burst, thirty percent of lenders said it has already begun to happen. Twenty percent predicted it would occur in the next one to six months, and 27 percent thought it would happen seven to 12 months from now. Nine percent said it would occur in 2007.

Among the 92 lenders who participated in this quarter's survey, only nine percent said they did not believe a housing bubble existed.

When asked which area of the country was likely to be most affected by a housing correction, 30 percent of respondents named the Northeast, followed closely by 27 percent who predicted the West Coast. Fourteen percent named the Southeast, and five percent, each, named: the Mid-Atlantic, the Mid-West, or said all regions will be affected equally.

Half of all lenders believe a housing correction will result in real estate prices dropping up to ten percent. Forty-three percent of lenders said the decline would be as high as 20 percent.

Despite their belief in the existence of a housing bubble, real estate was not the issue that lenders thought posed the greatest threat to the health of the U.S. economy.

When asked to select from a list of six issues that had the most potential to hurt the U.S. economy, 38 percent of lenders named the federal budget deficit. That was followed by the war in Iraq (18 percent), the trade deficit (14 percent), the sluggish job market (12 percent), low household savings rate (9 percent) and the real estate bubble (9 percent).

Overall, lenders remain wary about the future of both the economy and their customers.

For the first time in five years, they believe the short-term outlook for the economy is stronger than its long-term outlook.

"When we asked lenders how they expected the economy to perform over the next six months, they assigned it a high 'C' grade," Jacoby said. "But when we asked them how it would perform in the second half of 2006, they downgraded the economy to a low 'C.'

"Clearly, there are lingering concerns about whether the economy has fully rebounded in a meaningful way."

Lenders also reported lukewarm growth plans by customers. Twenty-two percent said their customers planned to make new capital investments. Sixteen percent, each, said their customers planned to: enter new markets, introduce new products or services; raise additional capital; or make an acquisition.

Only 14 percent of lenders said their customers planned to hire new employees.

Lenders expect loan demand to remain relatively unchanged, although 39 percent predicted international lending would increase in the next six months. They also remain on the alert for loan losses, with 65 percent predicting an increase.

When asked which industries were the most attractive to their lending institution, lenders named the same three that have topped the list for more than three years - Light Manufacturing (75 percent), Service Companies (73 percent), and Industrial Distribution (72 percent).

Start-ups/New Ventures were deemed the least attractive industry to lend to, with 65 percent naming it unattractive.

Roughly 75 percent of lenders reported plans to maintain their existing loan structures in the $1 million to more than $10 million loan size categories.

Two-thirds of lenders plan to maintain their interest rate spread and fee structures on similar credit quality loans. In the under $1 million loan category, 32 percent of respondents said they planned to increase the interest rate spread and fee structure.

Nearly all lenders expect the Fed to raise rates in the coming six months, but they predicted a smaller rate hike of a half-point or less, compared to previous quarters.

About the Survey

The Phoenix Management Services "Lending Climate in America" survey is conducted quarterly to gauge shifts in lenders' attitudes toward the economy. Ninety-two lenders from commercial banks, commercial finance companies and factors across the country were surveyed this quarter. Respondents completed a written questionnaire during January and February.

About Phoenix Management Services

Phoenix Management Services (www.phoenixmanagement.com) is an operationally-focused advisory firm, providing turnaround, crisis and interim management and investment banking services to middle market companies in transition. Since 1985, Phoenix has aggressively advocated on behalf of its clients in over 700 assignments nationwide across a variety of situations and industries.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: blogpimpinfool; bomag; bubbles; chickenlittle; fearmonger; housing; housingbubble; mortgages; realestate; wereallgonnadie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last
To: thoughtomator

"Maybe the half-million I can afford will get me a mansion instead of a middle-of-the-road townhome!"

It will right now, in the vast majority of the country.


41 posted on 04/05/2006 2:08:29 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

Not in any place I can maintain a similar income level as in the DC area, I'm afraid. I'd have to take a big pay cut unless I went to one of a handful of areas that pay on a similar scale, such as NYC, Boston, or San Francisco, all of which are far more expensive in terms of cost of living. I still like an urban, cosmopolitan lifestyle, or at least easy access to it, so this area is the best compromise for me. I acknowledge that getting less house for my dollar is part of the compromise, but then again, the resellability for a house of that value is much higher here than in the places where it would be a mansion.


42 posted on 04/05/2006 2:18:06 PM PDT by thoughtomator (Since all politicians understand is money, I donate ONLY to those who oppose illegal immigration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven

Just out of curiosity, how high do you believe the deficit can go before it becomes a serious problem?


43 posted on 04/05/2006 2:19:32 PM PDT by thoughtomator (Since all politicians understand is money, I donate ONLY to those who oppose illegal immigration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven
These same wankers made the lending decisions that enabled speculators to scr@w innocent home buyers. They are responsible for the popularity 'income stated' loans used by real estate fraud artists, hucksters and greedy shills. Some of these wankers will eventually face prosecution. What goes around comes around and vice versa.
44 posted on 04/05/2006 2:20:37 PM PDT by ex-Texan (Matthew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Notforprophet

Ping for later


45 posted on 04/05/2006 2:39:04 PM PDT by Notforprophet (Democrats have stood their own arguments on their heads so often that they now stand for nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

Well north of 5% of GDP. The <5% we've been running since Johnson (give or take) seems quite sustainable.

In a macroeconomic sense, deficit spending is like the government printing money: they don't have the cash, so they create it from thin air (as debt instruments). Deficit spending contributes to overall money supply. The impact of too much money is inflation. We don't have inflation, to speak of. Even when we get bouts of inflation, it is usually driven by excessively loose monetary supply by the Fed.

"Inflation is everywhere and always a monetary phenomenon." - Milton Friedman.

The budget deficit pales in comparison to the velocity of money (see Macro Econ 202) managed by the Fed Funds rate.

Further, even if we ran a 3% of GDP budget deficit as a way of creating cash money, that is just about a perfect match for the increase in productivity annually. Ceteris Paribus, that match should cause no inflation or deflation. Indeed, if money supply were not increased to match productivity increases, you would have deflation.

So, I'm pretty sanguine. I haven't been bit by deficits, and I'm a pretty involved participant in the economy. Nobody has been bit that I can see.

Other structural problems in the budget are real: Social Security and Medicare / Medicade will consume most of the budget shortly. But that is a programmatic structural / total spending problem to me, not strictly a "deficit" problem.

I stand to be corrected. My Econ degree is 22 years old next month. If I have ignorance on the subject, it hasn't stood in the way of wealth building!


46 posted on 04/05/2006 2:49:08 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (Why did Allah create free will and then demand submission? Wouldn't robots have been easier?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
People who manage to keep their homes will wake up one day and find a demand letter from their lender(s). The letter will give them about 90 days to pay the difference between what they owe and the most recent value of the house.

I've seen this posted many times, and nobody has provided a reason why mortgage banks would do this. Why would they intentionally throw people into foreclosure, especially on performing loans? They have absolutely no economic incentive to do this.

Secondly, what is to stop people whose loans are repricing from simply refinancing to another option ARM?
47 posted on 04/05/2006 2:57:07 PM PDT by VegasCowboy ("...he wore his gun outside his pants, for all the honest world to feel.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

The bubble areas like Kali and NYC areas are most vulnerable.

The unrealistic markets there have ripple effects here....folks move here house rich having sold there and buy a home beyond their income because they have huge downpayments or pay cash.

and that in turn inflates the market here


48 posted on 04/05/2006 5:27:04 PM PDT by wardaddy (Beautify America ....Deport a RINO today!....somewhere so bad they can't screw it up..Haiti?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: VegasCowboy
You may Gooogle the info yourself using terms like "forecloure of upside down properties" or variations thereof.

Right now some banks are training their personel with seminars teaching them how to properly price foreclosed homes. For Example: May 10, 2006 Regardless of your personal beliefs, banks do take back properties when the loan exceeds the value of the property.

49 posted on 04/05/2006 5:27:21 PM PDT by ex-Texan (Matthew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
As long as they are receiving their monthly payments on time, a bank will have no incentive to foreclose on a house simply because the value of that house falls below what the loan value is. For example, I have a 200K loan on a house worth 180K. If the bank forecloses on me, they instantly lose >20K because they will be unable to sell the home for greater than 180K. On the other hand, if they keep the loan, they will continue to receive monthly mortgage checks and will fully recover their 200K + interest.

Obviously if somebody is failing to make payments they bank is more inclined to foreclose.

Can you please tell me why it is in the banks best interest to foreclose in the above scenario?

50 posted on 04/05/2006 5:52:01 PM PDT by listingright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: VegasCowboy
Why would they intentionally throw people into foreclosure, especially on performing loans? They have absolutely no economic incentive to do this.

True story to illustrate the mentality of banks. A former business associate of mine ran an art gallery in a nice area of a large city. They were making loan payments regularly. The real estate bubble burst and they found themselves owing more on the loan than on the value of the property. Even though business had slowed, they were still managing the payments. The bank, however, would have none of it. They sent in a 26 year old suit to demand payment of the difference or they'd foreclose. My associate told them to go ahead and foreclose as vacancies were rising in the neighborhood and there were attractive lease opportunities available just a few doors down.

Well, the debt to equity ratio told the bank they had to foreclose, so they did. My associate asked them what they were going to do with the vacant building. The 26 year old suit shrugged and said he supposed they would try to rent it. The bank was called and their leasing agent was sent over. Before a thing had been moved out of the gallery, my friend negotiated and signed a three year lease with the bank. The lease was about 60% of what the payment had been. He socked the 40% savings away and at the end of the three years (just before real estate prices in the area turned north), made a down payment on the building and negotiated a fixed term payment for about the same as the lease.

The bank met their "paper" obligations on debt to equity ratios and my friend ended up owning a building at a substantial discount over the sum for which he had initially purchased it.

51 posted on 04/05/2006 7:16:21 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (crime would drop like a sprung trapdoor if we brought back good old-fashioned hangings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: listingright

Not in your described scenario. But consider owing $ 200k on a property worth only $ 130k (i.e. bubble bursts causing 35% downturn in values). Also see # 51.


52 posted on 04/05/2006 7:31:00 PM PDT by ex-Texan (Matthew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican

You'd be better of renting and waiting for the bubble to pop. It will pop in the next 3 years.


53 posted on 04/05/2006 8:04:09 PM PDT by proudpapa (of three.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

No biggie. The chinese with family and relatives all pooling their money together will swoop in like locusts and buy up all that foreclosed property in California like they have done to large sections of SF and northern california already.


54 posted on 04/05/2006 8:14:21 PM PDT by Proud_USA_Republican (We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good. - Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: proudpapa

Seattle isn't SF, SD, or NYC.

While real estate did move up at quick pace the past couple years, it nowhere near being a bubble.
Demand is still there.

There are still a lot of people moving up here and the major companies that are here, Microsoft, Boeing, Starbucks, Washington Mutual, Amazon.com, etc... are all doing good business and hiring.

People who leave from California to move up here look like they are having an orgasm when they look at what 500 thousand buys you here compared to CA.


55 posted on 04/05/2006 8:29:25 PM PDT by Proud_USA_Republican (We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good. - Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

When I see ranch homes going for $160,000.00 in a suburban area that is 30-40 miles away from a major city I know the bubble is going to burst.


56 posted on 04/05/2006 8:34:25 PM PDT by LukeL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

I'm not saying it never happens, but no bank would want to do this on a large scale. Their losses would be astronomical.


57 posted on 04/06/2006 7:28:23 AM PDT by VegasCowboy ("...he wore his gun outside his pants, for all the honest world to feel.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: VegasCowboy
They did so in Los Angeles during the last crisis. Rampant fraud in appraisals driven in part by organized crime infecting the banking industry. It's even worse today. (Identity theft is the #1 Crime in America). Federal regulators put their heavy foot down. They required lenders to foreclose. Saving and loans were driven out of business across the U.S. Don't you remember the saving and loan crisis and the federal bailout? That scandal cost U.S. taxpayers a fortune. What is about to happen will be even worse.

Did you know that second homes were 40% of the home buying market in 2005? ( report on USA Today). Many of these second homes were bought with debt tied to the first family home. In other words, people are pyramiding property using a debt pyramid scenario. Did you know that 45% of all jobs created since 9-11 were related to real estate, construction and/or mortgage industries? Americans went on an unprecedented spending spree over the last four years. All fueled by mortgage borrowing.

The house of cards is going to fall with a resounding thud heard that will be heard worldwide. Get ready for the ride of the century!

58 posted on 04/06/2006 8:47:47 AM PDT by ex-Texan (Matthew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican
So the plan is to own the condo for about 3 to 5 years, build up some equity, and save up more for a bigger downpayment, and then step up to a house.

Too soon, IMO. It may well be true that the bubble doesn't "pop". But assuming a long term average increase of about 5%, it will take about 10 years to catch up to current prices because we are so far ahead of the trend. Without declines now and barring hyperinflationary scenarios, the best case outcome is a decade of price stagnation.

59 posted on 04/06/2006 8:59:07 AM PDT by palmer (Money problems do not come from a lack of money, but from living an excessive, unrealistic lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

My advice for you is get a small cheap condo in a convenient area and save your half million in buying power for better market conditions (possibly as long as 10 years). My colleague just picked up a very nice but small condo in a convenient area in Arlington for 180k. He will live a slightly cramped life, but be able to save and diversify his investments instead of having it all in one speculative market.


60 posted on 04/06/2006 9:04:19 AM PDT by palmer (Money problems do not come from a lack of money, but from living an excessive, unrealistic lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson