Replying to:

Posted by Trooper on 10/03/07 at 05:16 PM

Did anyone see Barney Frank on Kudlow and Company today ?  He said he wanted to appoint Jack Kemp as “Mortgage Czar”.  When pressed if this would be a permanent position, Frank said, “No, it’s temporary, more like Queen for a Day”.  smile  Mortgage Czar indeed. 

Kudlow is going to try and get Kemp on the show tomorrow for reaction.

Posted by Don from the Tanning Salon on 10/03/07 at 05:19 AM

Trudging up those front stairs to get to the front door is symbolic of climbing the mountain of debt you have to take on to “own,” the place.  At least when you get inside, it’s nice enough.  But it’s still a condo, and that’s an awful lot of money for a condo, three bedrooms or no. 

Lindsey Buckingham is underrated as a guitarist.  Listen to his work on “The Chain,” right after the quiet part when the bass line comes back in and just repeats.  Right around 3.17 on this youtube clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csatmi34YEk   Oh, and I never realized how short John McVie was.
——-

Posted by doug r on 10/03/07 at 05:32 AM

How does that plastic playground equipment stand up to the UV light after years in the Southern California sun?

Posted by NanoWest on 10/03/07 at 05:56 AM

Its nice to see units in the “nice” neighborhoods going for less than $400 per square foot. I would guess that this place would sell within 90 days if it was priced at $320 per square foot. Most likely these owners will get to that price with $20K price reductions every month or two over the next year or two.

As prices start to erode, it is interesting to see people price their homes “aggressively” only to find out they need to be even more aggressive with pricing. More in more places are showing up for less than $300 per square foot in Irvine.

Posted by Diana K on 10/03/07 at 06:02 AM

This one actually looks nice.

I’d think about buying it if I lived in Irvine.

For a much lower price.

Posted by James G on 10/03/07 at 07:26 AM

Your financial breakdown of what either would be required to get into this house seems a little unrealistic.  The first loan amount of $359K seems reasonable enough, and is probably what the condo should be selling for, but the downpayment of $253K works out to 42%!! 

Unless a buyer was able to sell another house (where/when they were actually able to sell), and make that kind of profit to put it into new home, that’s pretty unrealistic.  If so, they probably wouldn’t be looking at a 3/3 condo.

Just my opinion wink

Posted by IrvineRenter on 10/03/07 at 07:37 AM

That is the actual loan and downpayment the owner used to purchase this condo.

Posted by Dylpar on 10/03/07 at 07:48 AM

Just wanted to add that the builder is actually John Laing.  Not sure where they got William Lyon.  My brother lives a few doors down.

Posted by Anon on 10/03/07 at 08:06 AM

Dylpar, you are correct.  The builder is John Laing.  The seller of record is WL Homes LLC.  I assumed (you know what happens when I do that) that those initials stood for William Lyon.  It actually comes from Watt and Laing, when there was a merger between the two.  My bad…

James G, the only debt on the property is the 1st TD for $359K, leaving the balance as a downpayment.  I don’t find this unusual at all….except for this blog, which has “selection bias”.

Posted by IrvineRenter on 10/03/07 at 08:31 AM

Anon,

Thanks for the contribution.

“selection bias”—LOL smile

Posted by Stupid on 10/03/07 at 08:52 AM

This price is interesting, as the seller actually has enough equity to give them the flexibility to lower the price. 

Having looked at various Quail Hill places still asking too much, makes me wonder if many if the sellers just don’t have enough equity to drop the price further - all they can do is put a wishing price on it and wait for foreclosure.

Posted by hoover on 10/03/07 at 08:57 AM

Just a thought, but the loss isn’t so significant if you consider what the cost of rental housing would be for 3 years.  At 1K per month, which I am sure is less than the going rate for a 3 bedroom unit in a decent area of Orange County,  that is 36K over 3 years.  Shouldn’t it be rational to subtract housing costs, at least for properties which appear to be owner-occupied rather than flipper-owned?

Posted by Stupid on 10/03/07 at 09:08 AM

Depends on what their montly mortgage payment was compared to equivalent rent.

Posted by Larrygg on 10/03/07 at 09:17 AM

Say you have the $260K to put down on this property. For a 30 year fixed mortgage the P & I would be $2400 per month. Plus the $550 in property tax plus the $450 in association fees. Does this place really deserve to cost someone $3300 a month for 30 years? And after they put down a quarter of a million dollars to get in? This demonstrates how ridiculous this housing market has been and still is.

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 09:25 AM

Help for Homeowners Facing High Mortgage-Rate Resets

http://www.realestatejournal.com/buysell/mortgages/20071003-lavine.html

Posted by eric on 10/03/07 at 09:27 AM

In that case you would have to add interest expense (next of taxes) as that money is “thrown away” just as surely as rent is

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 09:28 AM

How to Sell in a Down Market And Get a Deal on a New Home

http://www.realestatejournal.com/buysell/openhouse/20071003-kim.html

Going, Going, Even Auctions Aren’t Moving Homes

Builders and real-estate agents are turning to auctions to get rid of excess homes on the market, with mixed success. The Orlando Sentinel reports on an auction held at the DeBary Golf & Country Club that was called off because the builder, Lakeside Homes of DeBary, was losing too much money.

“The bidding was sluggish. One unit originally priced at $355,000 sold for $165,000. And so with just a few town homes gone, auctioneer Eddie Haynes called off the sale,” the Sentinel reports

Posted by MMG on 10/03/07 at 09:29 AM

I would not be shocked if in a few years it would be worth the first mtg. tongue laugh

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 09:30 AM

Countrywide Tells Workers, ‘Protect Our House’
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119137467698747210.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news

For those who don’t have a subscription, there is an excerpt on Calculated Risk here
http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/2007/10/go-big-orange.html


Reminds me of the Terry Tate - Office Linebacker commercials
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=terry+tate+office+linebacker

Posted by lendingmaestro on 10/03/07 at 09:35 AM

Woah!

Orangzillo made bookoo bucks in 2006

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/fortune/0709/gallery.women_men_highest_pay.fortune/13.html

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 09:37 AM

Real estate is 1-in-6 U.S. job cuts

http://lansner.freedomblogging.com/2007/10/03/real-estate-is-1-in-6-us-job-cuts/

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 09:38 AM

Impac Mortgage looks for tenants

http://mortgage.freedomblogging.com/2007/10/03/impac-mortgage-looks-for-tenants/

Impac moved into its 200,000-square-foot headquarters at 19500 Jamboree Road last year, consolidating operations from other Orange County sites.

The company pays close to $7 million in rent at Impac Center annually. Its lease runs through 2016.

Impac’s building, the largest at the Impac Center complex, is designed to hold close to 800 workers. Following several rounds of layoffs by Impac—including some 500 workers in the past two months—the building is believed to be about a third full.

The company leased the space in early 2005 in one of the larger OC lease deals of that year. The deal was signed when the company’s market value was close to $1.4 billion, compared to about $120 million now.

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 09:46 AM

IrvineRenter - perhaps this is behind the housing price not indexing perfectly to increase in wages pattern you noticed for a fairly long time peroid (ex. last 15 years)

Here’s an interesting quote from Greenspan’s “The Age of Turbulence”
(great read BTW - I am enjoying it).

“As a consequence of the decline in long-term nominal and real interset rates since 1981, asset prices worldwide have risen faster than nominal world CGP every year, with the exceptions of 1987 and 2001-2 (the years of the dot-com bubble collapse).  This surge in the value of stocks, real estate deeds, and other claims on income-earning assets—that is, direct and indirect claims on assets, whether physical or intellectual—is what I designate an increase in liquidity.  These paper claims represnting purchasing poqwe that can quite readily be used to buy a car, say, or a company.”

Also, Irvine Renter, if you guys go get yourself an Amazon Associates account (http://affiliate-program.amazon.com/gp/associates/join) you can link this and other books you might think people find interesting, and collect commisions if people click though and buy them.

Posted by ipoplaya on 10/03/07 at 09:47 AM

No way they get asking, so the loss will be more like $75-100K over three years…

The 3/3 around the corner from this place on Stepping Stone will probably sell before this one does.  They are the same size and Stepping Stone is sitting at $545K right now.

If Passage was smart, they’d take the next offer at $550K they got and run for the hills!  Or maybe in their case, run for the flatlands smile

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 09:50 AM

sorry, correcting typos
“interset” should be “interest”
“poqwe” should be “power”

Posted by Stupid on 10/03/07 at 09:54 AM

Passage is a lot nice location than Stepping Stone.  Stepping Stone is all packed in like sardines, all lanes and garages.  Passage feels a lot nicer when you walk though that area.

Posted by IrvineRenter on 10/03/07 at 09:56 AM

I talked about those same issues here:

http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/2007/04/30/appreciation-is-dead/

I agree with Greenspan that one of the main reasons house prices have gone up faster than wages is due to the steadily decreasing interest rates over the last 25 years.

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 09:58 AM

Sources: Feds probing American Home collapse

http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzahm1003,0,29578.story

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 10:01 AM

U.S. Economy: Pending Home Sales Slide to Record (Update3)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=axggQJRw0oTU&refer=home

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 10:04 AM

Is the credit crisis over? Not so fast

http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSN0222862220071002?sp=true

That’s frightening news for banks that already have absorbed losses on their balance sheets due to delinquent subprime borrowers. The losses so far amount to about 10 percent of the forecast of $100 billion in losses.

“The disturbing number here isn’t 10 percent ... but the $100 billion,” Pomboy said.

With nearly $700 billion in ARMs in negative equity facing interest-rate resets, “depending on how much lenders can ultimately recover, this implies (bank) losses will be more like $210 billion to $346 billion,” she said.

“And that’s assuming the situation doesn’t get worse.”

Posted by IrvineRenter on 10/03/07 at 10:42 AM

This is probably why banks are hoarding cash reserves right now.

Posted by carl on 10/03/07 at 10:46 AM

Wow these poor sellers.  The opportunity cost over three years on the 250k downpayment alone is close to 40k.  Ouch!

Posted by Silly's Mom on 10/03/07 at 11:15 AM

Just FYI, yesterday I received a mailing from a realtor saying that 23 New Dawn was in escrow for 1.875 million.  List price was 1,999,999.  There are still fools out there, and homeowners who are jumping for joy!

Posted by awgee on 10/03/07 at 11:18 AM

The credit crisis over?  It cracks me up the way the MSM is proclaiming that the banks are taking their pain and reporting their losses.  The banks are valueing their paper using computer programs and saying they are marking to “fair value”.  What in the world is “fair value”?  There is marking to market and there is marking to BS.  That is it.  Either an asset is valued for what it will sell for or the listed value is horse hooey.  And the losses they are showing, even with fantasy values, are only a fraction of their actual losses which are off balance sheet.  Yea, the credit crisis is over?  I am betting we just got to the first inning.

Posted by Lost Cause on 10/03/07 at 11:21 AM

Fleetwood Mac used to be so good, with Peter Green.

Posted by carl on 10/03/07 at 11:23 AM

Come now Awgee… “marking to BS” is so crass… its “market to model”... of course the model was made by a 7 year old boy with ADHD and Elmer’s glue, but hey!  It’s our model.

Posted by Genius on 10/03/07 at 11:41 AM

What are their options to “losing too much money?”  Wait until the market erodes further to try and sell?  I guess they could carry their assets for another 5 years or so, but that costs money as well.

Sellers holding onto properties longer than they should for fear of loss will only compound the depreciation; I don’t see how the scenario could play out any other way.

Posted by IrvineRenter on 10/03/07 at 11:42 AM

Let us know if this actually closes. It would be amazing if someone actually spent that much money for one of those houses in this market. It is not surprising that the realtor would be touting the escrow, even a phantom escrow.

Posted by Genius on 10/03/07 at 11:47 AM

Maybe the bottom of the first inning, with the first at bat on deck.

Posted by Major Schadenfreude on 10/03/07 at 11:50 AM

Dumb Question Alert…

What does it mean to “have equity to absorb the blow…”?

The way I see it, these folks will lose $48,500 if they sell the house at their asking price.  Or does the bank absorb part of the loss?

(Thanks).

Posted by MMG on 10/03/07 at 12:09 PM

MS

they put 253k down, so they can afford to go down all the way to 359k (morg balance) which would bring to about how much it really is worth.  LOL

Posted by Shere Khan on 10/03/07 at 12:12 PM

“have equity to absorb the blow…”?

I believe IR is referring to the $253,100 which was a down payment rather than a (usual) second mortgage . If ***cough*** the seller gets the price they are looking for they will at least walk away with 204, 600 quid.

Posted by Jane on 10/03/07 at 12:26 PM

If today’s seller gets their asking price, they stand to lose $48,500 (after 6% commission) after three years of ownership.

How about this, for $253,100 down, if they put into CD with 4% avg. interest rates in last 3 years, it generates additional $30K lost.  Also if they just rent same place, it may only take $25K per month, so $0.8K * 36 month = $28K.  So the total lost possible around $48K + $30K + $28K = $106K

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 12:34 PM

It means they aren’t hamstrung like the people in the link below

Here’s a new one: Being too broke to sell
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/chi-mary_re_09-30sep30,0,40543.column

Posted by Silly's Mom on 10/03/07 at 12:42 PM

I pulled the flyer out of the recycling, and it actually says “Just Closed Escrow”  and “Closed at 1,875,000” So I guess it did. 

For that kind of money, I’d rather have a new house in Woodbury than an 11 year old one in Rosegate!  But people are crazy, and I really have to wonder if it’s because thet can walk to Northwood High.

Posted by IrvineRenter on 10/03/07 at 01:37 PM

That must be one happy seller. Funny that Zillow thinks the place is worth $1.35M based on comps. This sale will put an interesting spike in the neighborhood values.

I wonder if the other neighbors are angry because they dropped their price?

Posted by sandy on 10/03/07 at 01:59 PM

AND factor in interest income on the $253,100 that would be invested.

Posted by OC Saver on 10/03/07 at 02:16 PM

I must agree with you on both of your points.

If you’ve ever heard Lindsey’s version of “Big Love” on FM’s “The Dance” album… well, it’s pretty amazing.

Big Love Video.

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 02:26 PM

Home appraisers pushed to inflate values
EXAGGERATED NUMBERS SOUGHT TO HELP DESPERATE HOMEOWNERS

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_7059842?nclick_check=1

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 02:30 PM

Mortgage lenders in subprime ‘traffic jam’

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b7b4d912-71d5-11dc-8960-0000779fd2ac.html

“Servicers have failed because there’s a huge resourcing issue,” said Barefoot Bankhead, managing director at Navigant Consulting. “As lenders have gone out of business, the servicing arms have been in transition without the resources to handle the enormous number of requests for loan modifications and restructuring.”

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 02:31 PM

Fitch Downgrades $18.4 Billion of 2006 Subprime Bonds (Update2)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=avgXQydHRqtY&refer=home

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 02:33 PM

Bear Stearns to merge Irvine unit, cut 310 jobs

http://mortgage.freedomblogging.com/2007/10/03/bear-stearns-to-merge-irvine-unit-cut-310-jobs/

Bear Stearns said today it will merge Irvine-based Encore Credit with Bear Stearns Residential Mortgage, eliminating 310 jobs, to reflect current market conditions. It’s unclear how many of the cuts are in Irvine.

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 02:46 PM

Schwarzenegger to sign home sales legislation

http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=6548

With California an epicenter of the mortgage meltdown and housing slump, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says he will sign three bills that he says will increase protections for Californians who own or plan to purchase homes and to expand affordable housing opportunities.

“It is critical that we continue to take steps to protect Californians against unscrupulous lending practices and to ensure that consumers can make informed decisions,” says Mr. Schwarzenegger in a written statement released by his office Wednesday morning.


The bills are:


• SB 223 by Sen. Mike Machado, D-Linden, which will make it a crime for licensed appraisers to engage in any appraisal activity that is connected to the purchase, sale, transfer, financing or development of property if their compensation is impacted by the final price generated by the appraisal.

• SB 385, also by Mr. Machado, which permits state agencies involved with residential mortgage lending and brokering to adopt emergency measures and new policies to ensure that all mortgage lenders and brokers are subject to federal guidelines on non-traditional mortgages. This law impacts the Department of Financial Institutions, the Department of Corporations and the Department of Real Estate.

• AB 929, by Assemblywoman Sharon Runner, R-Lancaster, which increases the amount of affordable housing in California by raising the total debt that the California Housing Finance Agency can carry by $2 billion. CalHFA issues bonds to finance housing for low and moderate-income families.

Posted by house on legs on 10/03/07 at 03:43 PM

23 New Dawn did sell on 9/13 for 1,875,000 per public records. Lien amounts were N/A? Wow, you would think that people who could afford that price would actually be intelligent enough to know what’s going on in the housing sector? The sellers made a whole lot of money, original buyers of 1998 and only owed 430k.

Posted by ipoplaya on 10/03/07 at 04:02 PM

Looks like a spike down to me, at least in terms of current list prices.  23 New Dawn was 5,000sf right?  $370 per sf seems means that 1 New Dawn better be prepared to drop from $2M down to $1.5-1.6M to get that puppy sold…  47 New Dawn went for $2.4M back in July.  Was that much more of a house than 23?  $370 per sf does seem exorbitantly high in this market though as that would suggest per sf prices still north of $400 on smaller houses in the area.

I’d take Rosegate over Woodbury any day all other things being equal.  Walk to Canyon View, walk to Northwood High, Sierra Vista is close…  Being nestled up against the hills at Portola is better than being nestled up against the 133 and old military base.

Posted by sunsetbeachguy on 10/03/07 at 04:08 PM

What is the best way to learn who the original developer is for existing homes?

Specifically, I like John Laing tracts that I have visited.

There was one in Tustin and Aliso Viejo that had some nice neo-traditional touches.  Specifically hiding the garages in a motor court.

Posted by sunsetbeachguy on 10/03/07 at 04:12 PM

2 out of 3 ain’t bad.

More debt for CalHFA is a bad idea.

That is quintessential hair of the dog that bit you behavior.

Posted by FamilyGuy on 10/03/07 at 05:11 PM

Just for the record, are we going to classify this buyer as a “greater fool” or “bagholder”?

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 06:17 PM

Congress calls for “mortgage czar”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071003/bs_nm/economy_credit_dc

Here’s a quote from Greenspan’s book (p.489) which obviously isn’t about mortgages per say, but is interesting to consider in the mortgage czar debate.

“Markets have become too huge, complex, and fast-moving to be subject to twentieth-century supervision and regulation.  No wonder this globalized financial behemoth stretches beyond the full comprehension of even the most sophisticated market participants.  Financial regulators are required to oversee a system far more complex than what existed when the regulations still governing financial markets were originally written.  Today, oversight of these transacitons is essentially by means of individual-market-participant counterparty surveillance.  Each lender, to protect its shareholders, keeps a tab on its customers’ investment positions.  Regulators can still pretend to provide oversight, but their capabilities are much dimished and declining.”

which seems to be occuring (ex. I think I read somewhere that for some mortgages, bank wants it’s own property appraisal at closing, and the investors buying the mortgage from the bank also want their own independent property appraisal at closing)

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 07:28 PM

Remarks of John M. Reich, Director
Office of Thrift Supervision
To the British Bankers’ Association, London, England
October 3, 2007

http://www.ots.treas.gov/docs/8/87148.pdf

Posted by IrvineRenter on 10/03/07 at 07:53 PM

I suppose we could call them a happy homeowner, but we will need to wait and see if the comps hold up.

I am guessing either name you gave would work though. wink

Posted by Sue on 10/03/07 at 08:59 PM

Mortgages For Those Who Lack Credit Data
Funds Set Aside For Low-Risk Loans

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/03/AR2007100302457.html

Posted by Gray on 10/04/07 at 12:43 AM

Breaking news - Equity of Californian homeowners is swept away. But no price bubble involved:
“Mt. Soledad landslide destroys home, damages several others”
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20071003-1134-bn03slide.html

Posted by tonye on 10/04/07 at 06:14 AM

How they cut Lindsey’s guitar at the end of The Chain is one of rock’s most frustrating moments…. Just as the fellow hits his stride and starts to lay out his riffs and his guitar starts to wail, they turn the volume down and Poof!... End of the Song.

Just as the bong was still halfway the first round, DAMN!  The song’s over???

AM Radio sucks.

It’s obvious this cut was meant to be a “hit” so they had to chop it for AM Radio.

OTOH, if this had been cut for FM ( remember that in the 70s, FM often would play an ENTIRE record ) they would have made that into a 7 minute cut and the bong would have done a full round the room.  wink

You know they NEVER did this with Clapton, Pink Floyd, Burning Spear…..  FM ruled the day.

Hmm.. I think the RE market has gone from an FM kind of thing to an AM screw up, eh?

Posted by tonye on 10/04/07 at 04:54 PM

I have that record.  Still sounds good in my Linn LP12.  wink

Your reply:

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.