Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RE: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • RE: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

    he leaves out a few investment 'fun-damentals' (aka RBS)

    A plague on both of your houses. Unless of course, you are buying a few extra homes as investments and then the market is conveniently setup for you. The Fed has created a housing market dominated by a herd of investors. There is no hyperbole in this statement when the latest report shows that for the latest month of home sales, 42 percent of sales went to “all-cash” buyers. Keep in mind this data reflects sales where no loan is recorded at the sales date thus eliminating most traditional home buyers. The all-cash segment of buyers has typically been a tiny portion of the overall sales pool. The fact that so many sales are occurring off the typical radar suggests that the Fed’s easy money eco-system has created a ravenous hunger with investors to buy up real estate. Why? The rentier class is chasing yields in every nook and cranny of the economy. This helps to explain why we have such a twisted system where homeownership is declining yet prices are soaring. What do we expect when nearly half of sales are going to investors? The all-cash locusts flood is still ravaging the housing market.

    A peak in all-cash buying

    Reports vary in the amount of investors buying. Yet the difference ranges from “a lot” to a “ton” of investor activity. The latest data from RealtyTrac shows 42 percent of November sales coming from all-cash buyers, a new record via this dataset:


    Source: RealtyTrac

    According to RealtyTrac an all-cash purchase is labeled as:


    “All-cash purchases
    : sales where no loan is recorded at the time of sale and where RealtyTrac has coverage of loan data.”


    According to this, all-cash purchases went bananas once rates spiked in the summer. Or more to the point, they were the only group not living on a razor’s edge when the interest rate on 30-year fixed rate mortgages soared. Examine the chart above closely. Starting in May, all-cash purchases went from 20 percent to the latest figure of 42 percent. From 2011 all the way to the end of spring 2013 all-cash sales accounted for roughly 20 percent of all sales (a very high amount to begin with). This figure went through the roof with the 100 basis point increase in interest rates:



    There is no coincidence that the share of investor buying shot up through the roof once rates went up. Your typical American household is financially strapped to the max and is once again living in a world of easy debt. Once rates went up (still at historically cheap levels) the number of people buying with mortgages fell through the floor. This is reflected with the collapse of mortgage apps hitting a 13 year low:


    Source: Bloomberg, ZeroHedge

    The problem with all-cash buying dominating the market

    The cash segment of the market is fickle and we started seeing a pullback in California as the year ended.


    “(MarketWatch) While cash buys help explain the surge in home sales over the past year, some experts say it’s an unsustainable trend — and one that should be greeted with caution. “The rise in cash sales is not a good long-term trend for the housing market,” Blomquist says. Although RealtyTrac doesn’t identify who has cash-in-hand, experts say wealthy Americans and downsizing retirees account for some of these all-cash deals. Investors who are keen to make a profit by buying low and renting those properties — or flipping them — also drive up the number of all-cash deals, he says. None of these three groups — flippers, retirees and the wealthy — are big enough to sustain the market in the long run, he says. If it remains dominant in the long run, cash buying “will have a chilling effect on home sales and prices,” Blomquist says.”


    This helps to explain the odd non-market like behavior of falling inventory and booming prices. Typically, when prices rise you would expect to see some subsequent rise in supply (i.e., building, people selling, etc). The recent rise in building permits has been largely driven by multi-family units reflecting a growing renting population. This is the multi-year consequence of the Fed’s favoritism to the banking sector combined with the banking sectors manipulation of inventory and accounting standards. Those in the know are not out building in mass because they read the same reports regarding household wealth and income. They are looking at the impact of a modest 100 basis point increase and how it put the brakes on the housing market. There is now talk of tapering as the Fed’s balance sheet becomes comically massive at over $4 trillion.

    In California, the all-cash segment has also been enormous:



    This California data doesn’t include this year which is the record year. The highest percentage of all-cash buying for SoCal occurred earlier in the year at 36 percent of all sales. In more “normal years” this figure should be around 10 percent. Prices even in hot SoCal have stalled out since June. Again, investors are a fickle group. There is no “setting roots” or “cheering for the community here” but a calculated and cold decision to make a quick buck on an easy interest rate environment. The problem with this eco-system created by the Fed is that it is favoring big money to essentially gobble up properties on the cheap over the last few years while the public is once again late to the table.

    It is fascinating to see people root for higher prices while incomes are stagnant. It goes to show that people are still addicted to debt and leverage even after the deepest recession since the Great Depression. Over the last year, the Case Shiller registered a 13 percent increase nationwide:



    In California home prices are up 23 percent year-over-year. What this means is that a typical home went up $69,000 (more than the median household income of a family living in California). At the same time, per capita income went up 1.5 percent (or $930 for each worker). Many years ago I wrote that there is little need to work when your home is appreciating more than the annual income of a family working in the state. Just sit back and cash in on the equity. There is one caveat however. You need to sell. In California, you have baby boomers hunkering down in their wood floor, granite countertop, and recessed lighting glorious sarcophaguses. I’ve started hearing some people quoting “summer prices” as if this was the true value of their property.

    Easy money is coming from those chasing yields in this distorted Fed economy. Greed still looks the same even though we have different players at hand. It is likely that 2014 is the year we see a slow retreat from investors and get a taste of how well this market can stand on its own two feet.

  • #2
    Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

    Originally posted by don View Post
    ... experts say wealthy Americans and downsizing retirees account for some of these all-cash deals. Investors who are keen to make a profit by buying low and renting those properties...also drive up the number of all-cash deals,...



    We just bought a duplex rental, and will likely buy another. We bought it with cash, and will hold to rent long term.
    Though we are not quite wealthy, and not quite retired, we fit the description close enough.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

      Does Institutional Investors (in the chart above) include hedge funds?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

        Originally posted by don View Post
        Does Institutional Investors (in the chart above) include hedge funds?
        We can explain the problem that the housing bubble and the government's inevitable response to it has created. The market for new product tells the story.

        In 2002 lower income families who had the cash flow to make payments on a home in the $150,00 and under range who wished to own a home and didn't fall for the lies told to them by crooked mortgage brokers still had the option to buy a home they could afford with a valid mortgage. Before and after the dot com bubble home builders were cranking out 85,000 units per quarter or nearly 400,000 units per year. But after the Greenspan Fed reflated the FIRE Economy after the crash of the stock market, which preceding asset bubble did nothing for the $150,000 and lower price range group of home buyers.

        Building such homes became uneconomical as the input costs -- lumber and copper and labor -- were inflated by the Greenspan Fed in response to the recession caused by the collapse of the 1993 - 2000 equity bubble. Incomes for this group, however, did not rise. The result was closing the market for new homes in this price range.

        Subsequently the FIRE Economy thus reflated developed into what we recognized here in 2004 as a housing bubble. Unit sales of homes in $150,000 and under price range did not participate in the bubble. Unit sales fell throughout the housing bubble period and after, and are now now 93% below the 2002 peak in unit sales volume.



        The housing bubble was a middle class and upper middle class affair. New home production between $150,000 and $199,000 peaked at $300,000 per year in mid-2005. New high end homes over $750,000 peaked at a 48,000 per year rate in mid-2006 and are now minted at a 12,000 annual rate, one quarter of the peak rate.

        The housing recovery, such as it is, is in the $300,000 to $400,000 price range that was the $150,000 to $200,000 range before the Fed and FDA and Freddie Mac re-inflated the RE in FIRE, ostensibly to "help" underwater mortgage holders. Unfortunately they neglected to inflate the incomes of the families who could afford the previously $150,000 and under homes that are now $300,000 homes.

        While this analysis focuses on new homes it is the new home market that determines existing home sales prices.

        This sickeningly predictable outcome of the policies that permitted the equity bubble to occur and then the housing bubble and then the reflation policies after each is rising rents as the millions of families that used to be able to afford new homes no longer can and compete for multi-family rental housing or existing homes.

        As I said back in 1998, the equity bubble puts the U.S. on the road to 3rd world wealth disparities in the U.S. paradoxically because of Keynesian policies to smooth the business cycle -- always a political policy construct rather than a matter of sound and sustainable economic policy -- conflict with the use of asset price inflation as a policy tool to smooth the "business cycle" of the FIRE Economy. We are 15 years along since then and have learned a great deal. We have learned that FIRE Economy reflation is "regressive" and that the "progressive" reflation policy of inflating both incomes and all-goods prices to deflate debt against incomes is off the table. In other words, asset prices will increase the balance sheets of high net worth households and those who don't have income from asset price inflation but only income from labor will continue to lose ground.
        Last edited by EJ; December 28, 2013, 11:47 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

          I think the Cash buyers are being exaggerated a bit. Goldman Sachs did an analysis and I have to admit I called the Goldman guys that did the research. What did I learn that Goldman Sachs approach was to look at total residential sales and compare that the the Mortgage Brokerage loans originated, they made the assumption that Delta meant these deals were all cash. But, in my brief conversations with the Goldman Sachs Research team they admitted that because of the Institutional buyers of rental there was no way to know what other borrowed Money or Leverage players like Blackstone were using.

          The Goldman Sachs report was the 60% of the DOLLAR VOLUME of sales of residential property were cash (creating new terms to create a more compelling head line to drive real estate.

          RealtyTrac is trying to fan the embers for real estate professionals.

          BTW- Cash buyers have traditionally represented 30% of US residential real estate transaction in volume (Not dollar volume). So, being at 42% and up from 30% is a big more - but, not as big as Realtytrac presents. Of course - I could be wrong.

          But, I think rents have been driven by foreclosures held off the market, contractors buying rental property to flip (taking advantage of cheap money).

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

            Originally posted by thriftyandboringinohio View Post
            We just bought a duplex rental, and will likely buy another. We bought it with cash, and will hold to rent long term.
            Though we are not quite wealthy, and not quite retired, we fit the description close enough.[/INDENT]
            Good for you! Having the full ownership option, and no mortgage is the optimum rental investment.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

              Originally posted by thriftyandboringinohio View Post
              We just bought a duplex rental, and will likely buy another. We bought it with cash, and will hold to rent long term.
              Though we are not quite wealthy, and not quite retired, we fit the description close enough.[/INDENT]
              Aren't the interest payments on a loan against a revenue property deductible against the rental revenues? If so why would anybody ever own a revenue property that isn't leveraged, to at least some degree? Clearly there is something about the USA revenue property situation I am missing...

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

                Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
                Aren't the interest payments on a loan against a revenue property deductible against the rental revenues? If so why would anybody ever own a revenue property that isn't leveraged, to at least some degree? Clearly there is something about the USA revenue property situation I am missing...
                Yep, the interest on the mortgage is deductable as an expense, which lowers your taxes...by about about a third of the interest deduction. That is more than eaten up by even low mortgage rates.

                Every rental property owner wants his mortgage paid off...all the more income to have to pay taxes on, true, but more money!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

                  Originally posted by Forrest View Post
                  Yep, the interest on the mortgage is deductable as an expense, which lowers your taxes...by about about a third of the interest deduction. That is more than eaten up by even low mortgage rates.

                  Every rental property owner wants his mortgage paid off...all the more income to have to pay taxes on, true, but more money!
                  That's interesting. Up here in Canada it is exactly the opposite. Rental property only makes sense if you leverage it. Outright clear title compromises your equity returns. A LOT.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

                    Thanks Boss.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

                      Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
                      Aren't the interest payments on a loan against a revenue property deductible against the rental revenues? If so why would anybody ever own a revenue property that isn't leveraged, to at least some degree? Clearly there is something about the USA revenue property situation I am missing...

                      We hold the rental in a self-directed IRA, so all the rental income is entirely tax deferred. We do pay the property taxes.
                      I like owning things free and clear.

                      We had opportunities to participate with trusted friends in a highly levered 100 unit deal, but I could not overcome the worry that a rash of vacancies would bleed us dry on that giant mortgage payment. For the record, those folks are doing just fine in that deal, making twice my return.
                      But I sleep well!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

                        Originally posted by thriftyandboringinohio View Post
                        ...But I sleep well!
                        And that is worth a LOT!!!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

                          Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
                          And that is worth a LOT!!!
                          There are these people who can use enormous leverage in their financial deals and sleep like a baby. The System is generally geared to reward them.

                          On the far end of their scale there are people like Bernie Madoff who slept like a baby for more than a decade while leveraging other people's money in a criminal investment scheme, putting not only himself but his investors at risk, many of whom were personal friends.

                          Now he's sleeping the way a baby really sleeps: he wakes up every 3 hours crying.

                          So will the next pack of over-leveraged investors the next time the debt ratchet slips and the whole thing spools out.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

                            Originally posted by EJ View Post
                            There are these people who can use enormous leverage in their financial deals and sleep like a baby. The System is generally geared to reward them.
                            Like the primary dealers for example .... a system of privatized gains and socialized losses makes it for a pretty easy for Jamie D et al to sleep like a baby as the FED has his back. Of course he can't stop buying treasuries; wondered if that keeps him up at night ... maybe not since either the FEd can buy back all the Ts or the gov could always change the ERISA law to require all accounts to hold a certain % of Ts and the PDs can offload some onto the public.

                            On the far end of their scale there are people like Bernie Madoff who slept like a baby for more than a decade while leveraging other people's money in a criminal investment scheme, putting not only himself but his investors at risk, many of whom were personal friends.

                            Now he's sleeping the way a baby really sleeps: he wakes up every 3 hours crying.

                            So will the next pack of over-leveraged investors the next time the debt ratchet slips and the whole thing spools out.
                            Wishful thnking? Madoff is the exception. No one else is in prison, nor been held personally responsible civilly, only corporations have been fined. The abrogation of social contract in failure to enforce the laws against the widespread frauds (as Bill Black describes) that were perpetrated leading up the AFC is a continuing travesty. Why do you think next time will be any different?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Cash Update (or at least a slice)

                              me thinks the term "overleveraged investors" refers to common people rather than chief banksters. The former shall suffer when things unwind while the latter shall be, as always, spared any damage.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X