Wallstreet to Mainstreet, I cover greed in all forms
Logo
WHAT IS MESSAGEDANCE?

MessageDance allows you to share messages, tweets, photos, links and videos. Share them from your email, your favorite social network and from your phone.

Sign-up now

Take a video tour



Gordon Gecko
Location: Earth
Btn_join_dnce
Preferred Network
No preferred network specified
Stats
Messages Sent 90
Messages Received 94
Comments 6
Preferred Email Gmail
Friends 3

Friends
Drew Long Brij Singh Ask Sam
 

How bad is housing? Due for 30% Nip Tuck?

 To boilerroom  Using Gmail at 07/18/2008 06:53 PM 91 views

Peter Goodman can breath. Housing is far far from bottom. 

How bad is housing?

Bad in many markets, awful in some, and still O.K. in a few.

The downturn has its roots in the real estate frenzy that turned lonely Nevada ranches into suburban ranch homes and swampland in Florida into condominiums. Speculators drove home prices beyond any historical connection to incomes. Gravity did the rest. After roughly doubling in value from 2000 to 2005, home prices have fallen about 17 percent — and more like 25 percent in inflation-adjusted terms — according to the widely watched Case-Shiller index.

Even so, most economists think house prices must fall an additional 10 to 15 percent to get back to reality. One useful measure is the relationship between the costs of buying and renting a home. From 1985 to 2002, the average American home sold for about 14 times the annual rent for a similar home, according to Moody's Economy.com. By early 2006, home prices ballooned to 25 times rental prices. Since then, the ratio has dipped back to about 20 — still far above the historical norm.

With mortgages now hard to obtain and speculation no longer attractive, arithmetic has replaced momentum as the guiding force for housing prices. The fundamental equation points down: Even as construction grinds down, there are still many more houses on the market than there are people to buy them, and more on the way as more homeowners slip into foreclosure.

By the reckoning of Economy.com, enough houses are on the market to satisfy demand for the next two-and-a-half years without building a single new one. <-- BUILDERS GO HOME

The time it takes to sell a newly completed house has expanded from an average of four months in 2005 to about nine months, according to analysis by Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

And many sales are falling through — more than 30 percent in some parts of California and Florida — as buyers fail to secure financing, exacerbating the glut of homes, Mr. Baker said.

No wonder that in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Phoenix and Las Vegas, house prices have in recent months declined at annual rates of more than 33 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/19/business/economy/19econ.html





COMMENTS

IF YOU HAVE A MESSAGEDANCE ACCOUNT, PLEASE SIGN IN AND JOIN CONVERSATION

Comments