Category Archives: Real Estate Analysis

Colors

The video links below were disabled for direct embedding on Youtube. Just click on the links and enjoy.

Snow Version

Colors / Dance — George Winston

Water version

Colors / Dance — George Winston

Our contributing arithmetician, Zileas, has provided an analysis of Aliso Viejo’s market for your study.

Conclusions:

– Over the last 9 months, the typical 2 or 3 bedroom condo of 1000-1400 sqft in Aliso Viejo dropped roughly $123 in value per day. I personally think that this number has gotten worse, but I can only prove $123 a day with the data I have. This comes out to about a 1% drop in value per month for the condos I looked at. This is less than half the rate of decrease in Ladera, which you would expect since Aliso is closer to the beach, is more developed, and anecdotally has fewer toxic mortgages and what not.

– For every $1 you overprice your home, you LOSE $0.81 off the final sales price… So if your home is worth $400k, two choices you might consider are (based upon the data): price at $400, sell at $400, or… Price at $425, sell at $380K. This is because buyers tend to ignore overpriced houses in this market (which has so many choices!), and move on to someone who is showing they are willing to sell. Again, sellers: Price to sell!

– If you are going to buy a 2 bedroom condo, you may as well go high on the square feet and get a bigger living room or bedroom or whatever, in my opinion. The cost of buying a condo with a bigger living space (but the same # of beds/baths/basic features) is only $88 per extra square foot in Aliso, which makes those 1400 square foot 2 bedrooms seem a lot more attractive than the 1000 sqft ones… I’d sure pay 35K for 40% more living space!

– Older condos sell for less… About $1700-$2000 less for every year older they are. Note that homes get older as you own them…

– Compared to typical AV properties similar to them, Windflower condos are worth a bit more (about 20k, which is roughly 2%). Other developments may be worth more or less than the average development, but I couldn’t prove it with the data I had.

– I’d really love wider and better data. If any Realtors want to hook me up for my benefit, and for helping you persuade your sellers to price reasonably, look me up!

What Properties Did I Look At?

I used 77 condos sold in the last 9 months in Aliso Viejo, with 2-3 beds, and 1000-1400 square feet. The properties ranged in age from 6 to 18 years old. I performed this analysis on Nov 22nd, on data that is a week old.

How Did I Value Them?

I used statistical regression, which is a fancy way of drawing a line through a bunch of points, but instead of lines which only allow you to study one thing in relation to another, it can study a lot of things in relation to one thing all together. This is the same type of technique that they use in science, pharmaceuticals, and economic models. There are math notes on the specifics for the curious or mathematical inclined at the bottom.

I valued homes using several slightly different methods and selections of properties to make sure my conclusions were robust. The key factors that went into housing value were: when it sold, when it was built, # of square feet, # of bathrooms, # of bedrooms, and how much the seller overpriced/underpriced the property (final asking price – sold price).

How do you Interpret This?

– Use it to look at properties very similar to the condos I used – it would be lousy for looking at a 5 bedroom house in Aliso Viejo, or a condo in Newport Beach.

It is most accurate right now. This sort of analysis can get stale, things change!

– DON’T use it as investment advice, I’m not a certified professional, just a guy with advanced statistics training, an MBA, and some spare time.

– I have included some valuations of “typical” properties below. A “typical” property has average view, has average upgrades/condition, has average selling circumstances, and so on EXCEPT for the specific details I lay out. You would have to judge if a property would command an “above average” price (e.g. diamond-inlaid bathroom mirror) or a “below average” price (mold growing on walls, neighbor owns meth lab, etc) and adjust accordingly.

2 Bed, 2 Bath, 1000 sqft, built 1990, closing dec 31: $379,000 +/- 25K for relative quality of property.

2 bed, 2.5 Bath, 1400 sqft, built 1996, closing dec 31: $433,000 +/- 20K for relative quality of property

(the +/- are a “95% confidence interval” – if 20 houses sold of each of the above types, I predict only one each would fall outside that range on average)

Where are the Graphs?

Because I am plotting several things vs price, I can’t make a graph. You can graph sqft vs price, but you can’t graph beds AND baths AND year built AND sqft vs price all at once.

How NOT to Interpret this:

– Do not read too much into the $/sqft number. When you see this figure on real estate sites, you are valuing the entire property by it’s square footage. My model considers sqft to be only a part of the overall valuation (instead of 100% of it), so the number you see is smaller.

– You may be tempted to compare this to my Ladera Ranch analysis. They use slightly different methodology and data ranges. Therefore, direct comparison requires some pretty serious knowledge of how these sorts of models work, and even then you are doing a lot of hand-waving. Treat them as stand-alone unless you have deep knowledge of this stuff.

Details of Research for the Curious or Mathematical:

Basic Method;

Linear Ordinary Least Squares regression (which is indeed a BLUE regression) of various predictors on soldprice. Boxcox proved linearity with a theta of 7 (!!). VIFs, except where noted, were generally below 2 (beds and yearsagobuilt sometimes crested over it to like 2.35ish). No crazy weighting of data points or questionable pruning, no resampling my own error, no smoking crack, this is a pretty vanilla set of regressions.

All regressions were whitewashed of heteroskedasticity. And yes, there was significant heteroskedasticity because I had no 1 bedrooms and not that many 3 bedrooms in the sample.

Dataset:

This is in the basic “layman’s” posting, and trimming is described in the chart (to either 11 months (all), 9 months, or 6 months).

Predictors and Justifications Behind Using Them:

Daysago — # of days ago the property was built, captures gradual constant pricing decreases which we know exist!

Daysagosquared – Same as above, but captures accelerating trends to a degree.

Beds – More bedrooms usually means more value, and it has regressed well in other housing studies.

Baths – Same logic as above.

Sqft – Larger houses sell for more, duh.

Yearsagobuilt – Newer homes sell for more – inherently they look better, have higher tech construction, less deferred maintenance problems, etc.

Overprice – In a buyers market, overpricing means you get less offers, which should reduce the price you get for the property… Asking too much means you artificially decrease demand away from yoru actual “willing to sell” point.

Fixed Effects – some communities are gated or have great views or better layouts or have a slightly better location or were more upgraded at initial construction by the builder. It is hard to know the specifics, but a general fixed effects model can capture some of these unobservable differences. I put condos that had 7 or more sales in the same development into a group, and all others into the omitted category. 35 out of 99 condos were in this omitted category.

Regression 1, 99 condos: In this regression, I noticed that the regression was mediocre (borderline p-values on good predictors, though same signs and all that) unless I added in daysagosquared, which crudely captured an accelerating pricing trend with time. With it, the predictor coefficients became VERY good (daysago t-stat went from 1.98 to 4.48 for example).

Unfortunately, this regression was also highly multi-collinear between daysago and daysagosquared, though they tested for P<.01% for joint significance. Nonetheless, we don’t really care what houses went for in feb and march that much, so I decided to trim the data to get around having to use daysagosquared in future regressions.

Regression 2, 99 condos: This is pretty much the same regression, but I added in fixed effects as a robustness check and also to fish and see if any developments were obviously better or worse. Not useful for answering the question we all want answered, which is, what are houses worth today, but interesting nonetheless! It seems that windflower is worth 19k more (p <.1%). Nothing else could pass the null hypothesis, so I decided that, especially since I’m cutting data which would further strain it, I may as well dump fixed effects for this regression. Alas.

Regresion 3, 77 condos (Suggested): This is the regression I’m basing the majority of my conclusions on, and I think it is the best one in terms of predicting what you’d pay RIGHT NOW. The one variable that had weaker significance, baths, is one that we know does in fact have real-world significance, so I felt comfortable leaving it in with p=10.2%. Besides, the purpose of this analysis is to track price decrease more than anything, so its not doing much harm sitting in there adding a little bit of predictive power.

Regression 4, 37 condos: I trimmed the data to the last 6 months in this regression. My model started to get unstable from lack of data at this point. Among other things, beds and baths went deep into insignificance, and their predictive power appears to have gotten sucked up by other variables, especially sqft (the strongest predictor). It’s hard to make a good comparison of this to regression 3, though the general trends predicted in 3 are also predicted here.

Regression 5, 77 condos: this is for those of you who are skeptical about the overprice variable for a variety of reasons. I encourage you to think those through carefully and consider what it would mean for the variable to have different strengths, but I included this in case you consider it invalid. The regression is reasonably useful without the variable, you just drop R^2 a lot, and reach the same conclusions on the price trend.

How ‘bout those Stata Logs

Fine fine… Here is regression #3

Linear regression Number of obs = 77

F( 6, 70) = 8.52

Prob > F = 0.0000

R-squared = 0.5250

Root MSE = 18832

——————————————————————————

| Robust

soldprice | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]

————-+—————————————————————-

daysago | 123.4795 35.79553 3.45 0.001 52.08754 194.8714

bed | 15255.4 7203.995 2.12 0.038 887.4886 29623.32

bth | 17246.57 9697.281 1.78 0.080 -2094.052 36587.18

sqft | 88.41503 25.2406 3.50 0.001 38.07424 138.7558

yearsagobu~t | -1690.508 430.1378 -3.93 0.000 -2548.391 -832.6255

overprice | -.8145235 .2480114 -3.28 0.002 -1.309167 -.3198804

_cons | 259806.1 33764.72 7.69 0.000 192464.4 327147.7

——————————————————————————

Aliso Viejo Analysis — Link to Word Document


PNG file regression analysis

Californication

It’s the edge of the world
And all of western civilization
The sun may rise in the East
At least it settles in the final location
It’s understood that Hollywood
sells Californication

Destruction leads to a very rough road
But it also breeds creation
And earthquakes are to a girl’s guitar
They’re just another good vibration
And tidal waves couldn’t save the world
From Californication

California is one of America’s cultural centers — for better or worse. Now that we have had our first nationwide housing bubble, it will be interesting to see if California exports one of its most pernicious beliefs: perpetual house price appreciation.

In the 1970s California experienced extreme price appreciation coinciding with the rampant inflation of the times. Like any financial bubble, many people made large fortunes, and many bagholders got burned. Once Californians realized they could drive up house prices and make large fortunes, the stage was set for repetition of the cycle.

This may be the most important point I have made on this blog:

House prices in California go up because Californians believe house prices go up.

Think about that for a moment. This simple fact eludes most people, and if there is anything I would like the readers of this blog to really understand it is how this works.

When people believe house prices will rise, it makes them want to buy. When they buy, they drive up house prices. Rising house prices convinces others that house prices will rise further. This causes even more buying. The cycle of rising and falling house prices in California is a completely psychological phenomenon.

It started in the 1970s, it was repeated again in the late 1980s, and it has been repeated again in the early 2000s. There is nothing magical about California real estate that makes it a better investment than real estate in other places. All California has is a pathological belief in appreciation that creates a high degree of volatility in the housing market. In my opinion, Houses Should Not Be a Commodity.

This uniquely Californian cultural pathology has been unleashed on the rest of the country. It will be interesting to see where else it takes hold.

42 Great Lawn Front 42 Great Lawn Kitchen

Asking Price: $695,000IrvineRenter

Income Requirement: $173,750

Downpayment Needed: $139,000

Purchase Price: $738,500

Purchase Date: 12/5/2005

Address: 42 Great Lawn, Irvine, CA 92620

Beds: 2
Baths: 2.5
Sq. Ft.: 1,824
$/Sq. Ft.: $381Rollback
Lot Size: –
Type: Condominium
Style: Other
Year Built: 2005
Stories: Two Levels
View(s): Mountain, Park or Green Belt
Area: Woodbury
County: Orange
MLS#: S512634
Status: Active
On Redfin: 4 days

From Redfin, “This home has it all; GREAT PRICE! BEST LOCATION! HIGHLY UPGRADED! OPEN FLOORPLAN! This home features gorgeous custom ‘old board’ wood flooring & berber carpeting. Gourmet kitchen w/ beautiful walnut cabinetry, ceasar stone counters & stainless steel appliances. Master suite offers walk-in closet, dual vanities w/ marble & Juliet’s balcony. Private courtyard entry opens to a separate den/office (which can be converted to a 3rd bedrm). Uppper level private deck w/ ‘picture perfect’ views & MORE. ..”

This home has all the UPPERCASE LETTERS AND EXCLAMATION POINTS YOU COULD EVER WANT!!!!!!!!!!

What is a ‘picture perfect’ view in Woodbury? Let me guess, your balcony looks directly into your neighbors bedroom, but at least the neighbor is hot.

Uppper?

And, of course, another gourmet kitchen…

.

.

Ordinarily I would tell you about how much this seller would lose if they get their asking price ($85,200), but this seller is not going to get their asking price because of the REO in the neighborhood…

79 Winding Way Front 79 Winding Way Kitchen

Asking Price: $639,900IrvineRenter

Income Requirement: $147,475

Downpayment Needed: $117,980

Bank Purchase Price: $491,396

Bank Purchase Date: 9/20/2007

Address: 79 Winding Way, Irvine, CA 92620

REO

Beds: 2
Baths: 2.5
Sq. Ft.: 1,850
$/Sq. Ft.: $346
Lot Size: –
Type: Condominium
Style: Other
Year Built: 2006
Stories: Two Levels
Area: Woodbury
County: Orange
MLS#: S513083
Status: Active
On Redfin: 1 day
New Listing (24 hours)

From Redfin, “Location, Location, Location! Fabulous Woodbury condo! Spacious kitchen with breakfast bar that opens to living room. Perfect for entertaining!!Gourgous tiled floors throughout. Master bedroom has it’s own bath with dual sinks. Nice patio in front. Close to everything and resort style amenities that include pool, spa, and more! “

Gourgous? Is that like couscous?

.

.

Kool Aid Man

I think the kool aid man must have visited JP Morgan’s REO department if they think they can sell this place for 25% more than they paid at auction.

It appears to me that our featured property seller is screwed. They are being undercut by this REO by $60,000, and based on the auction price of the REO, there doesn’t appear to be any market for these units at all. JP Morgan went to the auction and bought this unit for $491,396. There were no professional flippers out there who would even bid $500,000 and try to flip it for $575,000? If the pros don’t think this could sell for over $600,000, how is our featured seller going to get $695,000? No, I am afraid our featured seller is going to lose more than $85,000… a lot more…

Ladera Disaster

But you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
Ah, you don’t believe
We’re on the eve
of destruction.

Don’t you understand what I’m tryin’ to say
Can’t you feel the fears I’m feelin’ today?
If the button is pushed, there’s no runnin’ away
There’ll be no one to save, with the world in a grave
[Take a look around ya boy, it’s bound to scare ya boy]

Eve of Destruction — Barry McGuire

The following test came to me from a reader named Zileas. It is great stuff, and it contains some sobering conclusions for those hoping to sell in Ladera Ranch…

.
{adsense}
.

What I did was try to build a predictive model using the same statistical
techniques used by economists and scientists to glean insights from data.

I did this because most of the time you just see “median price” or “low tier
median price” or whatever, and this tells you very little, and with such a
shallow market (low # of sales), these medians are all over the place… so
I wanted to get the best estimate I could, so I used the tools I know how to
use — statistical regression. The quick summary is that price may be
correcting a lot faster than the medians are letting on.

I took the last 6 months of condo sales in Ladera Ranch off of the MLS
database. I only used 1, 2 or 3 bedrooms condos to try to allow some
breadth of data, but to mostly be comparing apples to apples.

Anyway, before I get into the nitty-gritty of the model, here are my
important findings, the ones that I’m very confident about:

– 1/2/3 bedrooms in Ladera Ranch, on average, are losing $334 in value PER
DAY (over the last 6 months, and there is weak evidence this is
accelerating, and no evidence it is decelerating). This represents a 2.6%
value decrease per month on a 400k home!!! This is a lot higher than a lot
of other estimates, but ties in to all the talk about the low-tier market
falling faster.

– Each additional square foot you add to a property in this band adds $134
to the price, holding all else equal.

– Bedrooms and Bathrooms each add about 25k in value to a house, all other
factors held constant.

– Overpricing your house causes you to lose $0.23 on the final sale price
for every dollar you list it over its eventual sale price (if it sells at
all). Note that this is an anomaly — in good markets, over-pricing often
causes you to get more. Note 2 (sellers): price to sell!

Details:

My approach was to start with what I thought the major factors would be:
– Square Feet
– # of Bedrooms
– # of Bathrooms
– Garage Capacity
– Time at which it was sold (just raw market trend, not “seasonality” —
since I was only looking at 6 months of data its hard to do stuff like say
that Christmas is slow and prove it)
– Square of time at which it was sold (there is some rejiggering in here to
make this work, but this is to crudely capture some
accelerating/decelerating market trends)
– Fixed effects for development (this is an adjustment for whatever tract
the home was in)
– (there were other factors I wanted too look at but which were not in the
data set — HOA dues, taxes, quality of property, the development it is in,
if it was a REO, etc, but I had to work with what I had)

I was somewhat hampered by the lack of data points — I only had 61 to work
with, and more would allow me to make a much better model.

After messing around for a while, I realized I could only get meaningful
results using the following variables, given my shortage of data(if only I
had a full dump of the past year of MLS sales in OC…):

Square Feet
# of Baths
# of Beds
# of days ago the sale closed (I did this analysis on Nov 2)

Results (for Ladera Ranch):

1) As every day goes by, the average price of a house drops by $334. No
joke. On a $400k house that represents price going down 2.6% per month.
This means if you were offering on a house there, and your comparables were
telling you “$400k right now”, you would at the very minimum add 6 weeks of
depreciation in the offer to calculate when the house would actually close.

2) Garage capacity does not seem to predict housing price. This is probably
due to my limited data and because “garages” on MLS are not very descriptive
— you can’t tell if its tandem, or wide, or whatever. It’s also because
garages strongly predict baths and vice versa (bizarre!)

3) For every bed you add to a house, the value goes up about $25,000… But
this value tweaks around depending on how you do the model — it’s not super
accurate, but adding beds, holding all else equal, almost always increases
values.

4) For every bath you add to a house, value goes up about $25,000. This has
a lot of the same issues as the bed count, and has some other issues because
beds and baths “predict” each other.

5) For every additional square foot you add to a property, given that you
have a set # of beds, baths, etc, the value of the property rises by $143.

6) Yes, houses have some intrinsic value in this model at very small sqft
and 1 bed/1 bath, but the lower you go, the less accurate the model becomes.

7) This model still has a fair amount of swing for properties, as you might
expect… obviously, I’m not capturing a lot of other relevant factors and
my model only accounts for about 3/4 of the pricing factors.

Interesting other random results

– For every $1 you list your property over market price, the actual amount
you get for it goes down by about $0.23 in this market. This is
fascinating because other studies I’ve read have shown the opposite, that
every $1 you list over market price, you get $0.50 more. Note that I was
able to prove this result with high confidence, but it wasn’t in my model
because it had a minor interaction with the beds/baths variables and due to
my lack of data, I couldn’t separate it out enough.

– I can definitely show that different complexes sell for more or less, but
didn’t have enough data to make it work out with enough confidence for me to
include it in the model.

Technical notes for mathematicians:

This is an OLS regression. I whitewashed the results, though prior to that
heteroskedasticity wasn’t proven, with my Breusch-Pagan / Cook-Weisberg test
p value at 27%. Boxcox showed a theta of 1.8 reinforcing my choice of a
linear-linear model, which didn’t surprise me much since sqft to price
should be a somewhat linear relationship and sqft was the largest predictor.
Multicolinearity was weak – my VIFs were not exceeding 2, and I don’t see
any reason why my chosen variables should have high multi-colinearity. I
did have to filter out some weak predictors because I Felt they were likely
to have too much multi-colinearity.

Linear regression Number of obs = 61

F( 4, 56) = 79.56

Prob > F =0.0000

R-squared =0.7402

Root MSE =23976

——————————

———————————————-

| Robust

————– soldprice | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]

————-+————————————————————-

beds | 25448.56 6264.813 4.06 0.000 12898.63 7998.49

baths | 26872.12 13132.92 2.05 0.045 563.7275 53180.52

daysago | 334.447 73.30785 4.56 0.000 187.5937 481.3003

sqft | 143.1072 23.48726 6.09 0.000 96.05653 190.1578

_cons | 105957 22440.9 4.72 0.000 61002.43 150911.5

—————————————————————————

.
{adsense}
.

One thing that jumped out at me was this statement:

Each additional square foot you add to a property in this band adds $134
to the price, holding all else equal.

To me this strongly implies that Ladera Ranch will bottom near $134/SF. If the incremental value is $134/SF, can the fundamental value be far behind?

What do you think?

Mortgage Magma: The Coming Eruption of Option ARM's

“Now, I don’t know, I don’t know where I’m a gonna go
when the volcano blow.
Let me say it now,
I don’t know, I don’t know where I’m a gonna go
when the volcano blow.”

Jimmy Buffett – Volcano video.

You could hear women lamenting, children crying, men shouting. There were some so afraid of death that they prayed for death. Many raised their hands to the gods, and even more believed that there were no gods any longer and that this was one unending night for the world.” —Pliny the Younger, circa A.D. 97 to 109, describing the Vesuvius eruption.

Ancient Pompeians, “poured their savings into their houses. Wealthy people enriched their homes with elegant courtyard gardens decorated with frescoes of plants and flowers and an abundance of modern conveniences…” Similarly, denizens of the O.C. take much pride in their modern day villas.

turtleridge.jpg

Tall Hedge View

Herculaneum has been described as, “…a dream town. Overlooking the Bay of Naples, it was the aristocratic dwelling of a wealthy elite, a cluster of fabulous villas and gardens.” The residents there must have felt lucky and privileged, not unlike residents in some modern day Irvine Ranch villas…with option ARMs…the dream will end suddenly…

volcano.jpg

I posted about the ugliness of the option ARMs in the forums, but it was suggested that I post about it on the blog as well. I think this is the most misunderstood loan in the industry which makes it even more misunderstood by the victims borrowers. Worse yet, the lenders who made these loans failed to properly assess the interest rate risk by overdosing on Kool Aid.

Most borrowers thought that short term interest rates wouldn’t increase 2%-3% in less than three years. This loan has a mandatory recast in year five, but if rates increase at a faster rate that recast happens sooner. A recast is when the loan will reset and the borrower will have to start paying principal and interest. It also will be amortized over 25 years if the recast happens in year five.

Lenders thought it was a good idea to let anyone sell this loan… and sell it on the fact that they can make 3% yield spread premium on the back end. Yield spread premium is paid by the lender to the broker. The amount is determined by the broker by adjusting the rate higher or lower. The higher the rate the more YSP the broker will make. However, with option ARMs it is how high the margin is. The real interest rate is the margin plus the index. Option ARMs use many different indexes, but a common index it the MTA.

Like volcanologists, who ask, “…How large will the eruption be? We ask, how big will the option ARM disaster be? Explosive, like Vesuvius, or effusive like Kilauea?

Volcanologists believe that technology will enable them to predict when an eruption is about to occur. But, they are still unable to pinpoint the eruption’s likely size or character. However, the impending Option Arm disaster is quite easy to predict…

These data point towards a Vesuvius sized disaster…

briullov-pompeii2.jpg

For the first example, I used a $500k loan amount, 2.75% margin, 1% minimum start payment and calculated the approximate MTA index with the first payment starting in January 2005.

Year 1:

option arm year 1b

As you will notice, the minimum payment only goes up 7.5% a year. That is, in year two, the payment went from $1608.20 X 7.5% = $1728.82 but the real interest rate increased nearly a full 1% higher. The minimum payment doesn’t even cover the interest and this deferred interest has added over $9200 to the loan balance.

Year 2:

option arm year 2

Year 3:

optarmyr3.JPG

Year 4… the OMFG year:

optarmyr4.JPG

In August 2008, the payment recasts because the loan has reached the maximum negative amortization of 110% of the original $500k loan amount. Now the victim’s borrower’s payment more than doubles from $1997.86 to $4132.53 because they are forced to pay principal and interest on the new balance of $550k.

I don’t know about you, but if my house payment were to double it would be one hell of shock. Some in the business will say that some of these loans had a max of 115% of negative amortization. Great! That only delays the pain until December of 2009– one month before the mandatory five year recast. However 115% means the balance is now $575k and the payment will be $4393.27 and that is assuming interest rates do not change.

Here is what the loan looks like after 30 years. As if someone would actually be able to keep it:

optarmyr30.JPG

{adsense}

In January, of 2005 it would be fairly easy to get a 30 year fixed rate loan for 5.75%. The total interest paid would be $550k for a total of $1.05mil. The option ARM loan costs about $336k more than the 30 year fixed over the life of the loan. However, that is if interest rates stayed the same as they are now. Of course, it could go down but it can just as easily go up over that time frame.

Some will argue that they will sell or refinance before any problems arise. I say good luck with either right now, but that is another story. If the home could be sold for $625k this December, the option ARM owner has a loan balance of roughly $540k and has made payments of roughly $62k. This would equal (excluding fees and commissions) a net of $23k. The the thirty year fixed owner would have a loan balance of roughly $479k and made payments of roughly $105k. This would equal (excluding fees and commissions) a net of $41k.

Now here is what this loan looks like when the victim borrower got whacked. To get the 3% YSP (this is the $15k rebate the lender pays the broker for the loan and has to be disclosed) the broker needs to up the margin to about 3.85% and stick them with a three year prepayment penalty. I cannot even begin to tell you how many chop shop brokers that used the 3% YSP as motivation for their “loan officers” to sell this loan. I moved the first payment up to July 2005 because this is when people really started to sell this loan. It also shows a more accurate adjustment of the MTA index.

The first six months and 2006:

optwack1.JPG

Take a look at when the loan recasts. I wouldn’t want to be at their house for Christmas:

optwack2.JPG

This is what it must look like when that reset hits:

skull.jpg

Now here is the rub. Let’s pretend this victim borrower bought this place for $625k, put 20% down, and today it still is worth $625k. I know it’s pure fantasy, but play along with me. Since December is month 30 they still have their three year prepayment penalty of about $25k, $5k of loan fees and $50k added to the balance making the LTV 93%. Anyone know a lender doing jumbo cash out refi’s up to 95% LTV?

Of course, they could wait until July when their prepay is up and pay $26k+ in monthly payments but their loan balance hasn’t changed much and they still would be at 90% LTV. Anyone know of a lender doing jumbo rate an term refi’s at 90% LTV and do you think they will be doing it in July 2008? What happens if the price of the home goes down 5% or 10%?

Worse yet, what if they only put 10% down? Then they would be upside down right now. If the price went down 10% they would owe $50k more than the home is worth. Get the jingle mail ready, because the only other choice here is to pay more than everyone else for a depreciating asset.

This is just the beginning of a scenario that is about to get a lot worse. I think that after reading this you will think that this chart underestimates how soon the option ARMs are going to start recasting.

Loan Reset Calendar

{adsense}

Also, for some more info on the acceleration in the default rates Calculated Risk has a great post on the subject and as usual some great charts. All I can say when I see those charts is:

“Ground, she movin’ under me.
Tidal waves out on the sea.
Sulphur smoke up in the sky.
Pretty soon we learn to fly.”

jimmy-b-volcano.jpg

The Supply Side- Postponements and Pent Up Supply

As the busted 2007 summer selling (listing?) season has transitioned to a paralyzed fall market with persistently high new and resale inventory, the fact that Orange County real estate can decline in price is no longer deniable. The precipitous drop in sales creates a serious conundrum for most homebuilders: they have to balance the need for cash flow with the desire to maximize profits (or at least minimize losses) on their investments in land purchases and in-process construction. The homebuilders working with TIC have the significant added wrinkle of not fully controlling their own pricing.

Since the fear of being ‘priced out forever‘ has convincingly departed prospective homebuyers, many have accepted the proposition that remaining in a current home or renting might not be such a bad thing after all, at least until some more of the price excess is eliminated. The term “wait and see” is showing up in more and more mainstream media (MSM) real estate stories referring to the position of buyers in this standoff. Interestingly, I’ve heard with increasing frequency anecdotal suggestions that since transaction numbers are so low, perhaps so many buyers are now on the sidelines that once prices show any sign of stabilizing, everyone at once will come rushing in to purchase and it will be off to the races with happy days and increasing medians all over again. This is the “pent up demand” theory. Although it shouldn’t be a big surprise to hear realtors make this comment, some relatively rational colleagues and friends of mine have also wondered this out loud.

Well, my analysis of news in and around Irvine developments shows that this is almost certainly not going to happen. I would argue that any pent up demand is being countered with similar, or probably more, pent up supply. Many of these have been discussed on the forums, but here is my working summary of projects that are imminent and/or postponed. All will contribute to pent up supply in the months and years ahead:

Woodbury East– John Laing’s Celadon bravely opened on schedule this summer, but the originally-scheduled (late summer 2008) debut of California Pacific’s Sienna came and went, and William Lyon’s Ivy models look complete but are standing by, currently promised as January 2008.

Lyon Ivy

Above- William Lyon’s Ivy: “bold” attached product. Are the salespeople keeping themselves occupied watching satellite TV?

CalPac Sienna Sienna spacing

Above- California Pacific’s Sienna detached condos, models still under construction…laid out like Decada and its predecessors. Is it my imagination, or did they manage to place these even closer together?

In Woodbury, CalPac’s Andalucia single family homes appear delayed (“early 2008” the letter says), but I’m not sure of what their original opening date might have been.

Not now, later.

Orchard Hills- This entire development, originally slated to begin sales in late 2007, is officially postponed more than a year to 2009. Don’t be surprised if the opening is not early 2009 or the delay goes even longer. The Orchard Hills Apartments opened this summer, and do not appear to have incentives, so they may be leasing better than I predicted. The retail shops also opened on schedule, but how long will they be willing to pay TIC lease rates without progress building the community that was (presumably) supposed to be their primary market?

You can see more discussion on Orchard Hills here in the forum or here in a previous blog posting.

The Great Park (former El Toro MCAS)- Lennar has become rather quiet regarding progress and planning at the Great Park; apparently enough so to cause questions on behalf of the City of Irvine as to whether they are still committed to the original proposals. Keep in mind that Lennar won the bid for this property at the apparent peak of the market, in mid-2005.

LA Times Lennar Delay

“In Irvine, Lennar’s plans to build thousands of homes around the planned Orange County Great Park have been pushed back, and the city has not received an updated timeline from the developer since 2005.City officials said Lennar had projected that it would have 781 homes for sale by next year, though the developer said it vowed only to have that number of home sites ready for construction.A plan unveiled by Lennar last summer to nearly triple the number of homes from 3,625 to 9,500, while cutting back on commercial space and adding 400 acres to the park, hasn’t even been discussed with city officials.”

The Orange County Business Journal(registration required) quoted company officials as saying “I don’t think anyone has seen the bottom yet…[but] Lennar will be ready when the rebound comes” in reference to the housing market and their Orange County plans.

The new Village of Stonegate, north of Woodbury, has two signs from CalPac: Palmeras and Mirasol. I couldn’t find any details about either. One or both could even be apartments.

Palmeras Sign CalPac Mirasol

The grading and laying of utilities at Stonegate appears not too far behind similar work at Orchard Hills.

In the Villages of Columbus, William Lyon’s Mirabella luxury townhomes and Ainsley Park paired homes are “Coming soon.” From the brief description on the VOC website, it appears Mirabella is the Columbus Square successor to Kensington Court. Interestingly, they list a higher starting price point than Kensington Court (Columbus Grove, Irvine), which seems implausible given the change in the market and Tustin address.

For a good recap of Irvine project planning, see Zovall’s zoning map post.

A few interesting nuggets of industry rumor: Lennar is reportedly contemplating an end-of-year auction for at least some of their properties at the Villages of Columbus. Their end of fiscal is November, so this would likely occur in the next 30 days if true. Also, The Irvine Company is floating proposals for some kind of post-sale price guarantee to try to coax buyers off the fence. Details are very sketchy, and even if true, timing is unknown.

So the bottom line question should be: Will the buyers waiting for the market to get worse outlast the sellers waiting for the market to get better? For the sellers to win that battle, it assumes plausible the argument that the market is capable of postponing itself back to prosperity. Don’t bet on it.