Showing posts with label prices. Show all posts
Showing posts with label prices. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

U.S.Home Prices Drop to 2002 Level (Chart)


Home prices continued on their record decline.

The S&P/Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index which covers the United States,
  • recorded a 19.1% decline in the first quarter of 2009 versus the first quarter of 2008.
  • This was the largest decline in the 21-year history of tracking this series.
  • The 10-City and 20-City Composites recorded annual declines of 18.6% and 18.7%, respectively.
The chart below shows the index levels for the U.S. National Home Price Index, as well as its annual returns. As of March 2009, average home prices across the United States are at similar levels to what they were in the fourth quarter of 2002. From the peak in the second quarter of 2006, average home prices are down 32.2%.


Source: S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices
Subscribe to All American Investor via Email
Bob DeMarco is a citizen journalist and twenty year Wall Street veteran. Bob has written more than 500 articles with more than 11,000 links to his work on the Internet. Content from All American Investor has been syndicated on Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Pluck, Blog Critics, and a growing list of newspaper websites. Bob is actively seeking syndication and writing assignments.


Kindle: Amazon's Wireless Reading Device (Latest Generation)

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Eggs UP, Energy UP, Food UP, PPI UP, Claims UP


The price of fresh eggs jumped 44 percent, the most since records began in 1992.
Energy goods increased 0.7 percent.
The price of food jumped 1.5 percent.
Producer prices (PPI) rose .3 percent.
Initial jobless claims rose by 32,000 to 637,000 in the week ended May 9, from a revised 605,000 the prior week.
Subscribe to All American Investor via Email


The Producer Price Index for Finished Goods increased 0.3 percent in April, seasonally adjusted, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. This rise followed a 1.2-percent decline in March and a 0.1-percent increase in February. At the earlier stages of processing, prices received by producers of intermediate goods moved down 0.5 percent following a 1.5-percent decrease a month earlier, and the crude goods index advanced 3.0 percent after declining 0.3 percent in March.

In the week ending May 9, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 637,000, an increase of 32,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 605,000. The 4-week moving average was 630,500, an increase of 6,000 from the previous week's revised average of 624,500.

The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 4.9 percent for the week ending May 2, an increase of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week's unrevised rate of 4.8 percent.

The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending May 2 was 6,560,000, an increase of 202,000 from the preceding week's revised level of 6,358,000. The 4-week moving average was 6,337,250, an increase of 128,750 from the preceding week's revised average of 6,208,500.

Bob DeMarco is a citizen journalist and twenty year Wall Street veteran. Bob has written more than 500 articles with more than 11,000 links to his work on the Internet. Content from All American Investor has been syndicated on Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Pluck, Blog Critics, and a growing list of newspaper websites. Bob is actively seeking syndication and writing assignments.


More from All American Investor





Follow All American Investor on Twitter

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Copper Soaring, China Buying (Chart)


Cash Copper, Daily Price Mark

Cash Copper Chart 414

The chart contains a single price (dot) for each trading day.

Notes:
  • The price of copper is moving up fast. This is being caused by buying out of China.
  • China is a large importer of cooper. They import about 85 percent of their need.
  • On December 24, copper traded at the low price of 124.75.
  • Today the price was marked at 212.55.
  • The price of copper has risen 70 percent in the last 4 months.
You should be looking at Freeport McMoran (FCX).  Freeport benefits from rises in the price of copper. The company is also a large producer of gold. We will cover Freeport McMoran tommorow.

You should note the effect that demand from China can have  on commodity prices. One theme that should become evident is that when China starts to demand the supply of a commodity its price is likely to rise dramatically. This will create lots of opportunites for smart investors.

There are several ways to take advantage of thirsty demand for commodities from China. These include: sector stocks, ETFs, options, and commodity futures contracts.

We will be honing in on these opportunities in the days and weeks ahead.

So stay tuned daily.
Subscribe to All American Investor via Email

Bob DeMarco is a citizen journalist and twenty year Wall Street veteran. Bob has written more than 500 articles with more than 11,000 links to his work on the Internet. Content from All American Investor has been syndicated on Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Pluck, Blog Critics, and a growing list of newspaper websites. Bob is actively seeking syndication and writing assignments.




Follow All American Investor on Twitter

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

S & P Case Shiller Home Price Indices Chart


Data through January 2009, released today by Standard & Poor’s for its S&P/Case-Shiller1 Home Price Indices, the leading measure of U.S. home prices, shows continued broad based declines in the prices of existing single family homes across the United States, with 13 of the 20 metro areas showing record rates of annual decline, and 14 reporting declines in excess of 10% versus January 2008.


SP Case Shiller Home Price Indices Chart


Follow All American Investor on Twitter
Subscribe to All American Investor via Email

Source: S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Money Supply, M2, Year over Year Change


Money supply is growing very fast. It has not yet had an impact on inflation. Delays in this effect usually take 12-18 months. The last trough in M2 occurred in December, 2007. Since then, M2 has been growing at an unprecedented pace.

It should be clear from the chart that the Federal Reserve Board has decided that deflation and the current financial crisis are more important that the risk of inflation.

Most forecaster see no inflation problem on the horizon. Many of these same forecasters didn't see a problem in housing. Of course, they failed to add in other components like consumer debt and the unprecedented leveraging of bank and Wall Street balance sheets.

I like to watch stocks like MOO to get a feel about inflation. Gold and MOO are telling a very different story than that being told on television.

By now you may have realized that the more things change the more they stay the same. This unprecedented growth in M2 will lead to a pick up in demand. It is only going to take a small incremental increase in demand for commodities to send the inflation indexes up. We already had a taste of this before the bubble burst.

A picture is worth a thousand words. You are looking at money stock. Think of it as fuel. Commodity prices should be rising soon--lets say in the second half of the year.

Saturday, January 31, 2009

Option ARM--The Toxic Mortgage


'Option ARM' mortgages were agressively marketed by banks because they generated huge amounts of phantom profits. Using generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, banks could count as revenue the highest amount of an Option ARM payment -- the so-called fully amortized amount -- even when borrowers made only the minimum payment. In other words, banks could claim "phantom income" that they never received and in the current scenario will never receive. This "phantom income" inflated reported earnings and allowed bank executives playing this game to receive enormous bonus income and enjoy dramatically inflated stock prices. Many now defunct banks, and soon to be defunct banks, reported inflated earnings that were bolstered by this phantom income. It was not unusual for "phantom income" to account for more than half of the earnings being reported.
James Grant wrote that negative-amortization accounting is "frankly a fraudulent gambit. But what it lacks in morality, it compensates for in ingenuity."--Grant's Interest Rate Observer
He wrote this back in 2006.

Default rates on so called 'Option ARM' mortgages are rising fast.
As of December, 28% of option ARMs were delinquent or in foreclosure, according to LPS Applied Analytics, a data firm that analyzes mortgage performance.
Nearly 61% of option ARMs originated in 2007 will eventually default, according to a recent analysis by Goldman Sachs.
This sobering news indicates that the bad news from the housing market is far from over and is not likely discounted in the stock markets.

Subscribe to All American Investor via Email

An 'Option ARM' is typically a 30-year adjustable rate mortgage that initially offers the borrower four monthly payment options: a specified minimum payment, an interest-only payment, a 15-year fully amortizing payment, or a 30-year fully amortizing payment. These types of loans are also called "pick-a-payment" or "pay-option" ARMs.

'Option ARMs' are particularly toxic because they allow the borrower to make a small minimum payment each month with the unpaid part of the monthly payment being added to the principle of the mortgage outstanding. In other words, these mortgages are subject to severe negative amortization. If you make the minimum payment, the principle amount you owe on the mortgage loan goes up each and every month. Current statistics indicate that 80 percent of the consumers owning these loans selected the minimum payment option.

Let's say, for example, that the fully amortized monthly payment is set at $1500. The homeowner decides to elect the minimum payment (the option) and pays $1000. The unpaid $500 is then added to the mortgage's principle balance outstanding. It only gets worse. Not only does the amount owed grow each month; this higher loan balance is immediately reflected in the next month's calculation.

The owner of an 'Option ARM' is borrowing the difference between the minimum payment and fully amoritized amount of the loan each month. In effect, the option arm mortgage holder is making a new loan each month and this amount is tacked onto the existing mortgage. Then the mortgage holder ends up paying interest not only on the increasing principle but also interest on interest. Sounds a little like loan sharking--doesn't it?

It is easy to see that the amount owed on an option ARM mortgage could grow fast. Imagine watching the amount you owe on your mortgage go up each month as you make the minimum payment. It only gets worse. This 'ticking time bomb" of a mortgage has another toxic feature built in--they reset once the principle balance owed hits 110-125% of the original loan. This fully amortized amount includes the original loan amount plus all the negative amortization. So while it appears that an 'Option ARM' works like a typical adjustable rate mortgage this in not true. A standard adjustable rate mortgages has an annual cap and the interest rate can only rise by 1-2% a year. This is true in an "option ARM" with one exception--when the 110-125% cap is hit the mortgage fully amortizes and the morgage resets to the market. This means a monster sized jump in the monthly payment. It is likely that the owner of the 'Option ARM' will see the monthly mortgage payment nearly double when the cap is hit.

Current owners of these "time bombs" are now in the unenviable postion of watching the amount they owe on the mortgage go up, the amount of their monthy payment skyrocket, and the value of the house drop like a lead stone. Talk about a double edged sword. Or is that three edges?

It appears most American's are making an easy decisions on these loans--walk away, stop paying, and go to foreclosure.
Nearly $750 billion of option adjustable-rate mortgages, or option ARMs, were issued from 2004 to 2007, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, an industry publication.
Rising delinquencies are creating fresh challenges for companies such as Bank of America Corp., J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co. that acquired troubled option-ARM lenders.
Interestingly, most 'Option ARMs' were issued to people with an above sub-prime credit rating. However, it is well known that many of these mortgage holders bought homes they intended to sell "quickly" for a profit. In effect, they were speculating in the housing market. What better way to keep the payment low than with the 'Option ARM' mortgage. 

'Option ARM' mortgages were agressively marketed by banks because they generated huge amounts of phantom profits. Using generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, banks could count as revenue the highest amount of an Option ARM payment -- the so-called fully amortized amount -- even when borrowers made only the minimum payment. In other words, banks could claim "phantom income" that they never received and in the current scenario will never receive. This "phantom income" inflated reported earnings and allowed bank executives playing this game to receive enormous bonus income and enjoy dramatically inflated stock prices. Many now defunct banks, and soon to be defunct banks, reported inflated earnings that were bolstered by this phantom income. It was not unusual for "phantom income" to account for more than half of the earnings being reported.
James Grant of Grant's Interest Rate Observer wrote that negative-amortization accounting is "frankly a fraudulent gambit. But what it lacks in morality, it compensates for in ingenuity."
He wrote this back in 2006.

Many banks moved defaulted 'Option ARMs' into "held for sale accounts". This shady accounting practice allowed banks to sequester or "hide" the loans from investors. Under normal economic conditions these loans would be sold to collection agencies or investors. However, given the enormous amounts of these loans, their uncertain futures, and the uncertainty in the market place they are now nearly impossible to sell.

When you hear proposals for the Federal government to buy "toxic assets" these are the types of loans that bankers want taxpayers to take off their hands. The bankers that issued three quarters of a billion dollars of Option Arms did so to enrich themselves.
  • They have already received obscene bonuses and sold inflated stock bolstered by "phantom income".
  • They now want to pass these assets to taxpayers via the bailout. 
  • They want us to bail them out so they can stay in their jobs.

I continue to wonder if anyone in Washington understands this scam? Or, are they going to perpetuate the scam and pass the buck to our children?

It should be mentioned that banks paid higher than usual commissions on these loans to the "hordes" of unregulated independent salespeople they used to "huckster" this product. It is already well documented that many of these so called "mortgage bankers" used pressure tactics to convince consumers that an 'Option ARM' was a good thing and that they would benefit. They might have failed to mention the onerous prepayment fees that came with these mortgages and it not likely that they explained the how negative amortization worked.  I wonder if they fully disclosed that the loan became full amortized when the 110-125% cap limit was hit?  Did they explain that the cap limit would be hit within five years if they made the minimum payment; and that, the monthly payment could nearly double or worse? 

I believe most stock market investors think that the effects of the housing crisis has been discounted by the markets. This is not likely and the potential fallout from the coming 'Option ARMs' explosion is still to be seen.

We have not yet reached the worst part of the 'Option ARM' cycle. The news on these toxic loans is going to get worse beginning in April when thousands of Option ARM mortgage holders are going to see their monthly payments spike. This phenomena is going to continue until 2010 once it starts.

I wonder if investors understand how this will effect the banks that are still holding these loans? How the shock wave from this explosion is likely to effect banks that do business with these banks? How this might effect consumers, employment, and the psyche of investors? Uncertainty does not usually lead to sustained rallies in the markets. Of course, the market might take a tumble and discount this information at any time.

Option ARM--The Toxic Mortgage


Friday, October 19, 2007

Housing Boom Has Limited Effect on Growth


clipped from blogs.wsj.com

Frank Smets and Marek Jarocinski, economists at the European Central Bank, focus their new paper on the run-up in house prices from 2000 to 2006 and note that it can’t be explained by GDP growth over that period.

Real housing prices grew at rates above 5% after the U.S. economy slowed in 2000 and 2001, and about 10% in 2004 and 2005, far above GDP growth during the period. “We find that both housing market and monetary policy shocks explain a significant fraction of the construction and house price boom, but their effects on overall GDP growth and inflation are relatively contained,” they write in the study presented at a conference hosted by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

blog it

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

The Evolution of Home Ownership




Forty-three percent of housholds aged 20-34 already own a home. Nationally about 70 percent of households now own a home. With a return to more normal lending practices and higher interest rates it is likely that the back log of homes already being built and homes from foreclosures will cause a long term hangover in the housing market.

These numbers indicate that housing is a big long term problem for the economy. This problem is not likely to resolve in a couple or few years. It seems that houses are over owned at this point in time. Demogrpahics already in place favor downsizing (retirement) and shrinkage in the pool of available new buyers. This indicates a long term, possibly a decade, hangover in the housing market. That is much longer then anything now being anticipated in the market place.

It is likely that we will see significant mark downs in prices in the years ahead in the formerly hot areas like New York, California, and Florida.

More details on next page.


Get the detailed paper from the Atlanta Fed

Source Atlanta Fed: Mortgage Innovation Boosted Home Ownership

After holding steady for three decades, the share of U.S. households owning their own home jumped from 64% in 1994 to 69% in 2005. The primary cause, argues a new staff study from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, was the introduction of new mortgage products that reduced the initial down payment needed by a home buyer.

The paper, by Matthew Chambers, Carlos Garriga, and Don E. Schlagenhauf, examines changes in home ownership by age cohort. The U.S. population aged in the last decade, boosting the share of the population in age cohorts that are more likely to own a home. But the authors conclude this explains just 16% to 31% of the rise in total home ownership. The introduction of new mortgage products, in particular those that allowed little or no down payment, accounts for 56% to 70% of the increase. Such “loans tend to be the contract of choice for younger cohorts which explains an important part of the increase in the aggregate homeownership rate observed since 1994,” they say. Indeed, while the homeownership rate rose for all age groups in that period, it rose most for households under age 35: it jumped to 43% from 37.3%