Marketers targeted strategic defaulters for their extra disposible income

Aug 10th, 2011  
by IrvineRenter  in Library News

Astute Observations

Astute Observation by winstongator
2011-08-10 05:04 AM

The first people to default were the speculators building real estate empires.  I would imagine that the defaults started in 2008, 3 years ago.  I also imagine that the BMW or MB dealerships would be willing to extend them new credit.

Lenders, especially the credit card companies, don’t want people who pay off their debts.  They want people who accumulate lots of debt and carry large balances.  The people who use their credit cards a lot, but pay them off every month are not the best CC clients.  The ones who keep their balance near the limit all the time, racking up huge interest fees, they’re the best.  $50k in credit card debt, with a 18% rate (substitute a going rate for someone with a high balance), is equivalent to $200k mortgage debt at 4.5%.  That $50k fun debt is a vacation condo you don’t get to visit.  Do you think CC companies are happy with declining equity levels so people don’t do cash-out refis to pay off their cards?

Astute Observation by architectdave
2011-08-10 08:36 AM

And the CC companies are sucking an additional 2-5% per transaction from the merchants or businesses from which these people are racking up continually more and more CC debt.  The responsible guy who pays his bill every month in full still provides them with the 2-5% in fees, but only a fraction of the total transactions each month since he’s not going deep into debt. And yeah, no 18% interest charges!

Sometimes I wish I owned a BMW dealership… so even if the debtor defaults on those payments, I’d send out the Repo Man to get my car back and then re-sell a “pre-owned” marked up vehicle or lease it out to a poser willing to pay more monthly debt service than he can afford. Then when the lease expires, sell it “pre-owned” again. What a deal!

Astute Observation by HydroCabron
2011-08-10 10:29 AM

I have long thought that BMW lease and sales rates - hell, just lease rates, since sales are inconsequential - would be a grand indicator of the health of the higher end of the real estate market, maybe a leading indicator.

Does anyone have any information on this? How are the BMW dealers doing? Audi? Mercedes? Infiniti?

Astute Observation by newbie2008
2011-08-10 08:29 PM

In the cc world, the people who pay off the entire cc balance every month are call deadbeats.  People who carry balance are the good customers, who get more cc offers and raised limits.

A CA BK question:  How often does the court liquidate the house with high equility to pay for non-secured debt (even when the filer applied for Ch.7 instead of Ch.13?  Is it scamer who get the house-owner to file Ch.7 to pick up the house on the cheap?

Astute Observation by octal77
2011-08-10 07:12 AM

...Lenders, especially the credit card companies, don’t want people who pay off their debts…

In other words:

Doesn’t matter what your are buying, whether it be a house, car, vacation or whatever we [lenders] want you to spend the most expensive [interest rate] money possible and die broke.

It appears that an amazing number of people are very successful at doing just that.

And the rest of us get to subsidize such behavior via taxation.

Astute Observation by winstongator
2011-08-10 08:57 AM

It’s not all the same because of the different interest rates that are charged.  Mortgage lenders for the most part want you to pay because it’s just more trouble if you don’t - even when lending standards were better.  If a home is underwater, they need you to keep paying because of the magnitude of the loss.  With responsible lending 10-20% down, and healthy market appreciation rates, homeowners sell if they can’t pay anymore, and if the home does go to foreclosure, the bank will move quickly to save any equity they have in it.

Astute Observation by SantaAnaRenter
2011-08-10 07:19 AM

“Buy-and-bail was common during the 90s, but lenders cracked down on the practice early in this bust by requiring the borrower to qualify to make payments on both properties.”

While not as common this time, you can’t say it’s “fictitious”. I know someone who did this in the summer of 2008 just before the new rules kicked-in. They bought a nice SFR, then dumped a significantly underwater condo thru short-sale.

Good move for them!

Astute Observation by Still waiting
2011-08-10 10:34 AM

My neighbor just did that last May, he dumped the underwater condo in lake forest, after he bought a nice SFR in Costa Mesa…good for him too…so banks still let this happened up until now?

Astute Observation by tazman
2011-08-10 08:22 AM

$232 a square foot may be inexpensive in comparison, but I like to use a baseline sale and calculate what the price SHOULD be based on an assumptive return rate.  In the long run, housing should really only appreciate based on current inflation or real wage growth;  If you assume a long term 3.5% inflation rate (which, in itself is a bit higher than the avg 3%), this house should be selling for about $251k based on its 1993 selling price of $135k.

Astute Observation by architectdave
2011-08-10 08:39 AM

I have a business that would love to have my marketing target strategic defaulters.  Any idea where I can get my hands on that demographic info?
Mwahahahaha…

Astute Observation by irvine_home_owner
2011-08-10 10:26 AM

I was hoping for another Hedonic Wednesday.

Do 3/2s in El Camino really rent for about $2500? Seems high to me but I haven’t been tracking the rental market in other areas of Irvine in the last year or so.

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2011-08-10 12:37 PM

Jaysen and I are meeting this evening. I think he plans to write about rentals next week.

Astute Observation by DarthFerret
2011-08-10 02:06 PM

IR and/or Shevy,

Can one of you please explain to me how you can endorse or allow this blog to be used to endorse a 2/2 condo selling at $521/sf, presumably with a large HOA fee and Mello-Roos on top of that? Has this property reached some sort of sensible, fundamental value? I find that very hard to believe, even in Turtle Ridge. Does this not violate either of your consciences, given the events of the past several years? I know that you’re not forcing anyone to buy this property, but New Century Financial didn’t force anyone to sign any of their loans, either.

Please help me to understand the moral authority that you have on this property while you blast corrupt and greedy loanowners, realtards, and banksters on a daily basis. (Having personal bills to pay and needing a commission/referral will not be sufficient justification, I’m afraid.)

http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/blog/comments/irvine-2bd-2.5ba-turtle-ridge-599900/

-Darth

Astute Observation by zubs
2011-08-10 05:34 PM

It seems kind of funny to be selling real estate on a bear blog.  This blog is essentially saying “don’t buy now, real estate has more to drop, however, I do have this nice house over here you wanna buy it?”

weird man.

It doesn’t mean your advice isn’t appreciated IR.

Astute Observation by Shevy
2011-08-10 06:24 PM

Hi Darth;
  Thanks for the note. That is a great question. Both Larry and I practice what we preach, we both lease. In addition, if a seller asks us we give them fair and honest advise just as we do for buyers and just as the blog has done since 2006, when we see properties selling out of line with rental parity and we feel there is a bubble we advise our clients based upon what’s in their best interest, in some cases they are better of selling than holding a property.

    Most of our clients are buyers and if they asked us if they should buy a property that is not in line with rental parity and does not make sense for them financially we would tell them not to buy it. We do this weekly. On this flip side, many readers follow Irvine real estate because they own properties, some of which are still inflated, if they ask us our advice given their situation and property, it sometimes make more sense for them to sell. This blog helped dozens of people encouraging them not to buy during the bubble and for many people it’s still better to wait, in addition, it showed others that they would likely be better off selling during the bubble, renting, and waiting for prices to come down.

    Many sellers’ wish they would have started reading in 2006 and sold their house(s). If our advice and reach can help one of our clients that contact us for advice and services and give their property more exposure, then we do what is in our clients/readers best interest. Sellers’ recognize the value of the reach of the blog. We have thousands of well educated readers and clients, and hundreds of clients that seek our advice, however, there are also thousands of people that visit the site everyday that have an agent and/or do not want and will not take our advice, and many do not want our advice or do not agree with it. We do not know their financial situation and we may feel that some of our listings are not good purchases for the buyers, however, our duty is to our clients and those that want our advice, listen, and contact us for our services.

  The listings that we post are not on the MLS some will not be on the MLS for a short period of time, others will not be on the MLS for a longer period. Our goal is to provide market insight and value to our clients. If we have a client that wants to sell and can sell for above rental parity it is our duty and obligation to give them the best exposure that we can and help them sell their home faster and for more money, we do not refuse to give them advice or offer them service if we can provide them value, we give them our honest opinion and advice just as we do for buyers that want to work with us.

    The difference between what we do and New Century financial is that we advise buyers not to buy when it does not make financial sense and advise owners of real estate to sell when it does not make sense to hold, New Century, had a duty to their client, in that case the person getting the loan who was getting screwed.

Astute Observation by Chris
2011-08-10 07:51 PM

“If we have a client that wants to sell and can sell for above rental parity it is our duty and obligation to give them the best exposure that we can and help them sell their home faster and for more money…”

Anybody else besides me that finds this phrase a regular “realtorspeak”?

Astute Observation by DarthFerret
2011-08-10 09:24 PM

Shevy,

Thanks for the response. That actually does make a lot of sense, and I do feel a lot better about your involvement and the IHB’s involvement. Being a future first-time buyer, I guess I get kind of fixated on the buyer side of the equation and forget that there are people out there that own inflated properties and would be wise to sell them while they are still inflated.

In all seriousness, thank you for the response. Take care and best of luck.

-Darth

P.S. My apologies if the New Century analogy came across a little harsh. I’m still a bit angry at times about the whole situation (both the obvious mistakes of the past and the corruption and mismanagement that’s continuing to occur in the present).

Astute Observation by awgee
2011-08-11 07:26 AM

The anticipation of future appreciation is not the only reason to buy a home, and the knowledge that home prices will continue to depreciate does not necessarily keep those in the know from buying.  It won’t stop me from buying when I want to buy.

I do not ask real estate agents for their advice on the real estate market.  I may ask IR, but that has nothing to do with his being a broker.

Astute Observation by Shevy
2011-08-11 07:55 AM

Hi Darth;
    Thanks for the note. The question made a lot of sense and I’m glad that you asked.  I’m sure that there were others that were wondering the same thing, moreover, I appreciate that you took the time to review my response and the opportunity to communicate.

      Larry and I have had conversations regarding real estate organizations and the fact that everything/most of what they put out serves owners/sellers and is meant to create a false sense of urgency, keep prices high, and help seller’s to get more for their homes. What is unfortunate about that is that circa 50% of the transactions that the agent’s that belong to these organizations complete is for the buyer (some people represent themselves either when they buy or sell and I’m not sure what the break down is exactly), yet little to no time or effort is put into accurate and truthful information that will help buyer’s to make the right decisions.  Just as listing agents have a duty to help their client sell their home for as much as they can I believe that buyer’s agents have a duty to their client to share information that will help them to see the big picture, assist them make a decision that is smart for them financially, and when they purchase, to negotiate to get the property for the least amount possible. The current marketing put out and legislation that agent organizations lobby for does not reflect this.

        This is a reason why I think it’s really tough for an agent to double end a transaction ethically and I believe that buyer’s that go direct to the listing agent need to be cautious, and ideally experienced in negotiating, market analysis, have the ability to put their emotions aside, and have access to the best comps and market information available.
   
        I believe that the blog and community of readers and dialogue does a good job of showing the bigger picture and counteracting some of the spin. That said, as a result of the market for the past 8+ years or so, the information has been much more useful and appreciated by potential buyers, renters, and those waiting to buy and/or considering selling and leasing.

    We have discussed the value of creating a larger/national organization that strictly puts out information for buyer’s, without the spin, similar to the blog, however a larger network that can create greater influence and counter act a lot of the bad information out there. The current agent organizations and the information that they put out and policies that they lobby for, generally only help sellers that are going to rent and not re-purchase and listing agents. Balance is needed and with the help of our readers we do our best to fill that void.

Astute Observation by Chris
2011-08-10 07:55 PM

Darth, there’s another one for $800/sqft.

The prices are going up, I tell ya!!!

Astute Observation by HydroCabron
2011-08-10 10:19 PM

This is a slight twist on the older practice of targeting those who are just past bankruptcy.

Lenders have - or once had, anyway - a captive audience among the just-bankrupt demographic, because most such borrowers have not only demonstrated a taste for debt, but will be eager to pay whatever fees necessary to rebuild a credit history. Even better, the limitation on how often one can declare bankruptcy means that lenders, for the first few years, are guaranteed most of their money back.

Bankruptcy reform may have changed this dynamic - the debtor is now steered toward something more like Chapter 13, which does not erase all unsecured debt - but the pre-reform bankruptcy market is a template for what lenders will be doing with these post-default homeowners.

There may be an upside to this: those who can’t handle debt will be pulled away from homedebtorship forever, or at least until prices go low enough to allow even flakes to come up with 20%.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

<< Back to main