North Korea towers to Shanghai towers: a tale of two bubbles

Nov 3rd, 2011  
by IrvineRenter  in Library News

Astute Observations

Astute Observation by Perspective
2011-11-03 10:38 AM

More leaks regarding the state AGs’ settlement:

“...As things stand, the settlement, said to total about $25 billion, would cost banks very little in actual cash — $3.5 billion to $5 billion. A dozen or so financial companies would contribute that money. The rest — an estimated $20 billion — would consist of credits to banks that agree to reduce a predetermined dollar amount of principal owed on mortgages that they own or service for private investors. How many credits would accrue to a bank is unclear, but the amount would be based on a formula agreed to by the negotiators. A bank that writes down a second lien, for example, would receive a different amount from one that writes down a first lien…” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/business/a-foreclosure-settlement-that-wouldnt-sting.html?_r=2&ref=your-money&pagewanted=print

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2011-11-03 11:23 AM

Thanks, I will use that in a post next week. At first glance, this settlement is a joke. The banks are going to get credit for losses they would have incurred anyway. It may benefit a few loan owners if they reduce principal and let the loan owners stay in their homes, but it isn’t clear whether or not the principal reductions will be part of short sales or unprompted reductions to keep people in properties they can’t afford.

Astute Observation by Perspective
2011-11-03 11:41 AM

I am eagerly awaiting the details. I don’t need a principal reduction, but I think a rate reduction (to current market rates) would greatly discourage strategic default by borrowers in similar situations to mine.

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2011-11-03 02:48 PM

I think the rate reduction will serve to reduce strategic default at the margins.

It will be interesting to see if they allow it for non-owner occupants. Many landlords who currently have negative cashflow might come closer to breakeven if their rates are lowered.

Astute Observation by just some guy
2011-11-03 10:49 AM

I didn’t you could own real estate in China?  They are still communist, right?

Astute Observation by just some guy
2011-11-03 10:50 AM

Sorry for the omission…...

I didn’t know you could own real estate in China?  They are still communist, right?

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2011-11-03 11:24 AM

Yes, they are communist, but they do allow private property ownership. It’s been part of their tentative embrace of capitalism. These Ponzi viruses may cause them to rethink some of their policies.

Astute Observation by Duran
2011-11-03 11:39 AM

Just some Guy: Mao Tse Tung would turn in his grave.

I guess the only “Communists” in China are inside the Government. They only have one Party..the “Communist Party”. I was shocked to learn they live in the best Parts of Beijing in, wait for it..MANSIONS!! 

Good luck to the Protesters…China doesn’t have freedom of speech or freedom of the press. It doesn’t tolerate dissent. Authorities can arrest and imprison people who threaten stability, as the party defines it. Any group that dares to protest, even against Property Values declining, will be treated brutally. There are no civil liberties, no labor unions, no centers of political power outside the communist party.

I expect the Corporations and Banks will be running the Country in the same way they do in the US before too long..what’s that? They already do? See, I told you!!

The Communist Party won’t last too long it’s only a matter of time because when those in power have to use violence against Citizens who protest, they will sooner or later fall.

It normally goes like this: First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you..then you win.

Astute Observation by Alan
2011-11-03 11:38 AM

A view of surrounding office buildings, and a small storage locker! Well hot-damn, all of my lifelong dreams in one place, I gotta get me a piece of that! Where do I sign up?

I note that the association fees are still at their reduced level. I wonder how they are paying for maintenance and repairs, and building up a contingency account for long-term requirements?

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2011-11-03 02:46 PM

My guess is that they aren’t funding anything properly. I suspect there will be big assessments in the future for all the new homeowners.

Astute Observation by Will
2011-11-03 03:12 PM

Alan - you took the words right out of mouth.  “View of surrounding office buildings” indeed!  That is what I have always wanted - to live in a condo with a view of surrounding office buildings.  Think about it…office buildings are so scenic and romantic.  Unlike, say, the ocean or the setting sun they never change.  They’re always there.  Steel and glass, glass and steel…maybe the signage might change, but the buildings will always be there!

Astute Observation by zubs
2011-11-03 05:19 PM

When the nearby Astoria was made into a leasing building instead of ownership building, the 6 people who owned apartments in Astoria were bought out.  I know one of them.  He got bought out at a higher $ value than he bought in.

Astute Observation by wheresthebeef
2011-11-03 05:54 PM

Talk about getting bailed out, that guy should buy some lottery tickets.

Astute Observation by zubs
2011-11-04 04:12 PM

I told him he was going to lose his ass when he bought that apartment in 2009…but I was wrong.

Astute Observation by SanJoseRenter
2011-11-03 10:37 PM

I wasn’t aware they reduced HoAs. Is there a link to that somewhere?

Astute Observation by ToivoS
2011-11-03 05:37 PM

I was in Shanghai in 2008 and there were already many empty high rise condo buildings.  But they were not empty because they hadn’t sold.  Rather the buyers were mostly pure speculation buyers and they believed if the units were occupied then it would reduce their resale value.  Craziest thing I ever witnessed.  About the same time I visited Vancouver BC and also saw many empty condo buildings. Similar situation.  All of the units were sold but the owners for the most part lived in China and used them as vacation spots.  But they were not renting them out presumably because of resale concerns.  Construction of new condo buildings were briskly continuing in neighborhoods surrounded with dozens of dark towers.

I was sure that these two markets were headed for a collapse, but at least in Vancouver have seen little sign of it happening.  Different cultures have different bubble psychologies I guess.

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2011-11-03 07:37 PM

You can’t sustain a real estate market trading empty boxes. We tried that for a while, and it didn’t work out. If these buyers are holding these units empty, they will eventually resort to plan B and rent them. When that happens, the bottom will drop out of the rental market which will in turn lower rental parity and put more pressure on resale pricing. The double whammy will push prices much, much lower for a very long time.

Look out below….

Astute Observation by Freetrader
2011-11-03 08:10 PM

Good Post, IR.

I lived in China for three years and things are getting crazier than ever.  It is worse than California ever was due to the lack of an open economy and a limited number of good investment opportunities.  One of the great ‘benefits’ of communism is that the whole society has lost it’s sense of supply and demand.  In middle-class areas of Shanghai, condos are stll trading for $500,000 and up, despite the fact that the prevailing wage in those parts is around US$10,000 per year. People don’t bother to rent them out because they are investing ‘for the capital gains’.  Sound familiar?

In the smaller cities it is even worse.

Astute Observation by SanJoseRenter
2011-11-03 10:36 PM

Chinese (and Russian) real estate purchases in London, Australia and Vancouver are examples of capital flight.

Wealthy people know that they are only one informant or Cultural Revolution away from losing it all.

So they mainly care about parking capital somewhere else, and generating rental income is low on their list of priorities.

The wealth disparity in China is also so great that some rich people who have “made it” dream of emigrating to countries where they can have a lower profile. Or for now at least keeping their options open. smile

Astute Observation by Soapboxhothead
2011-11-05 09:02 PM

I think you’re referring to the very, very wealthy few Chinese who can actually move enough of their capital offshore to effect a purchase in a foreign land.

If many of them are “paper tigers” much like all the wanna-be RE tycoons here during our massive run-up then they’ve not got any real cash at all. No cash means no buying assets in foreign markets.

Guess that means that all those mysterious FCB’s (foreign cash buyers) who are supposedly going to save OC property values are now actually F***ked Chinese Busted.

As IR suggests .... LOOK OUT BELOW!!!

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

<< Back to main