Real estate year in review 2015

2015 could have been considered a “damn if you do and damn if you don’t” year for the Fed. The Fed is often criticized (sometimes harshly) for their action and inaction. And as the historic run of near zero interest rates ended this year, many criticized the Fed for waiting too long to raise interest rates, while others said it was still too soon. The full impact of the first Fed rate hike in nine years won’t be known well into the next year.

Another real estate milestone that occurred this year was the implementation of the TRID (TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure) rule. Although the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau decided to delay enactment once; the decision to put the rule in effect in October was not only significant, but a historic change to the real estate settlement process. Initially, there was mixed reception; some lenders indicated that they have transitioned smoothly, while others reported having difficulty. Even Congress attempted to provide a grace period for those still transitioning (Homebuyers Assistance Act, H.R. 3192). Like the Fed’s rate increase, the full effect of TRID on consumers and the industry won’t be realized until next year.

Home

Even though the 2015 housing market started slowly, because of record cold weather; the market demonstrated its resiliency with increased sales and continued home price growth throughout the year. Some markets were on fire this year; such as the Seattle WA region, where multiple offers and single digit days on market were the norm and home price indices exceeded the national average. However, most other regions (such as the Washington DC region) experienced average growth. The lack of inventory in some markets was said to add pressure on price growth. Home sale growth is expected to continue in 2016, as housing formation and employment outlooks are brighter. While home prices are still below the 2006 peak, home prices are expected to increase with a market expansion. And as housing affordability decreases, some housing critics are clamoring to predict another housing bubble.

San Francisco CA was one of 2015’s hottest markets. The market was so heated that many described it as “insane.” Madeline Stone reported that San Francisco teardowns sold for well above $1M while resales typically sold for 70% above list price (San Francisco real estate has gotten so crazy that this startup founder was offered stock options for his house; businessinsider.com; March 31, 2015).

And of course, there is the notable sale of a 765sf two-bedroom home that sold for $408,000 earlier this year (17% over list price). The significance of the 100-year-old San Francisco home is that it was described as a “shack” and needed much more than TLC (Daniel Goldstein; San Francisco earthquake shack sells for $408,000; marketwatch.com; October 22, 2015).

And what can be more proof that the real estate market has been recovering (at least for those who can afford it) than the world’s priciest home sale. Patrick Gower, Francois De Beaupuy , and Devon Pendleton reported on December 15th (This $301 Million Paris Chateau Is the World’s Priciest Home; bloomburg.com) about the sale of Chateau Louis XIV for €257Million (approximately $301Million); a private sale to a Middle Eastern buyer. Located in a 56-acre park, the recently built Paris estate is said to have taken three years to build. Amenities include an aquarium, cinema and a wine cellar, and a gold-leaf fountain.

By Dan Krell
Copyright © 2015

If you like this post, do not copy; instead please:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector


Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

The Fed, interest rates, and the housing market

From Zillow.com

After a historic run of over seven years of near zero interest rates, the Fed pulled the trigger to raise the target rate on December 17th to 0.25% – 0.5%. The last time the Fed changed the rate was almost exactly seven years ago on December 16th 2008, when the rate decreased from 1% to near zero. And it’s the first rate increase since June 29th 2006!

In the midst of what was to become the beginning of the great recession, the Federal Open Market Committee press release  from December 16th 2008 (federalreserve.gov) described the rate change to near zero as a means to, “…promote the resumption of sustainable economic growth and to preserve price stability.  In particular, the Committee anticipates that weak economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for some time.” And since, housing experts anticipated a Fed rate increase; often predicting how the real estate market would be affected.

Although a significant move by the Fed, the rate increase is minor and rates continue to be relatively low. And don’t worry, even with last week’s Fed target rate increase last week, it doesn’t mean the that mortgage interest rates automatically increase the same amount. Mortgage rates are gauged by bond yields, which usually anticipate and “bake in” any significant news into rates prior to economic announcements.

Real Estate

Putting rates in perspective, Freddie Mac’s Primary Mortgage Market Survey indicated that the average national 30-year-fixed mortgage rate increased last week slightly from 3.95% to 3.97% (and up from the 3.80% a year ago). Furthermore, Freddie Mac’s Economic and Housing Research Weekly Commentary and Economic Update December 17th statement expects a gradual Fed monetary tightening, with a “modest increase” in long term rates. Additionally, “…Mortgage rates will tick higher but remain at historically low levels in 2016. Home sales will remain strong, but refinance activity should cool somewhat…” (freddiemac.com).

Some say that the Fed’s rate increase is premature, while others say that it may be too late to raise rates; however, many economic experts concur that the economy remains in uncharted waters. Regardless, housing experts agree that the Fed rate increase is good for the real estate market.

The National Association of Realtors® chief economist, Lawrence Yun stated that mortgage rates should continue to remain relatively low through 2016, saying, “…The raising of short-term rates could be more of a confidence play to the market — it provides a signal that the economy is strengthening, … and the lenders believe that, it may actually provide more lending opportunity for the banks…” (What the Fed’s Decision Means for Housing; realtormag.realtor.org; December 17, 2015).

Bankrate’s Mark Hamrick pointed out two benefits to the housing market from a rate increase (7 unintended benefits of higher interest rates from the Federal Reserve; bankrate.com; September 11, 2015). The first benefit is increased lending: Banks are incentivized to lend money when rates increase; possibly expanding mortgage lending which could increase the number of qualified home buyers participating in the market. The second benefit is increasing the pool of home buyers: increasing rates could get fence sitters into the market because of rising buyer costs. However, this may be a progressive effect through 2016, as mortgage rates are estimated to gradually increase beyond 4.5% (rising interest rates may also moderate ballooning home prices to prevent another housing bubble).

By Dan Krell
Copyright © 2015

If you like this post, do not copy; instead please:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector


Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

Will stock volatility spill into real estate market

houseAfter a few days of steep stock market declines, I, like others, wonder if there will be spill over into the real estate market. Many have forgotten the consequences of the dot-com crash of the late 1990’s, and the brief housing market slowdown that followed in 2000. One thing is certain – there is no consensus from the financial talking heads about the meaning and impact of the equity markets on the economy; some are optimistic, while others caution for rippling effects across other sectors.

MarketWatch’s Steve Goldstein estimated that $1.8 Trillion have been lost in the market over the past week (Households just saw $1.8 trillion in wealth vanish as stocks fall; marketwatch.com, August 24, 2015). And because many rely on their 401k and other equities investments for down payment funds on their home purchase – housing may be impacted. If mortgage rates increase, as anticipated earlier this year, combined with a lack of down payments; home prices could be pressured downward.

In the face of a stock market meltdown, the good news is that the housing market has been gaining momentum, such that existing home sales are as strong as just before the housing decline! According to a National Association of Realtors® (realtor.org) August 20th press release, existing home sales “are at the highest pace since February 2007.” July existing home sales increased 2%; which is the tenth consecutive month showing year-over-year gains. Additionally, median home prices increased 5.6% compared to the same time the previous year.

Pending home sales, a forward looking indicator of homes under contract, have also been strong. An NAR July 29th press release indicated that pending home sales increased 8.2% year-over-year during June; which is the tenth consecutive month for such an increase. Lawrence Yun, NAR Chief Economist, surmised that “Strong price appreciation and an improving economy is finally giving some homeowners the incentive and financial capability to sell and trade up or down…”

Locally, the Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors® (gcaar.com) reported that Montgomery County single family home sales increased 13.3% year-over-year during July; while pending home sales increased 13.2% year-over-year. However, July’s median home sale price for Montgomery County single family homes dropped slightly, from $460,000 to $458,000.

An interesting detail is that although home sales continue to increase, the NAR August 20th release reported that some buyer pools are shrinking; first time home buyers, cash buyers, and individual investor buyers have decreased compared to the same time the previous year. In light of this, some are beginning to question the validity of NAR’s recent existing home sales data reporting. In addition to dwindling home buyer pools, ZeroHedge pointed out a data discrepancy between increased home sales and decreased mortgage applications by (rhetorically) asking the NAR, “where are the buyers coming from… and how long is this sustainable?” (Existing Home Sales Extrapolation Surges To Highest Since Feb 2007; zerohedge.com, August 20, 2015).

ZeroHedge alluded to NAR’s history of predictions of strong home sales and rising home prices through 2006. Of course, the NAR announced in 2011 of about five years worth of home sale data revisions, calling it “re-benchmarking.” According to the NAR, “data-drift” was revealed in existing home sales data compiled from MLS boards; that was due to a number of factors, including: double listings, and inconsistencies.

Google+
Copyright © Dan Krell

If you like this post, do not copy; you can:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector
Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

Homeowners do better than renters

million dollar homes

Many years ago, buying your first home used to be a rite of passage that usually coincided with starting a family. Your first home was not just a place to live; but was considered an investment that was expected to grow and provide a “nest egg” for your later years.

Several generations later, a lot has changed. We view investments differently, and have become amateur number crunchers trying to get the most of our money. But what was once considered a sound long term investment has now been deemed as poor judgment.

Of course to real estate investors, housing is a commodity; they take risks to reap rewards. Short term real estate investors (“flippers”) are often viewed as opportunists, buying homes at a discount and selling at retail value. The flipper’s goal is to have a quick turnaround between the time of acquisition and resale (flip), avoiding as much carrying cost as possible. The risk for the flipper is very high, especially in fickle markets; but the payoff can be very rewarding. It is not unusual for a flipper to lose money on a project because of delays, unexpected costs, and/or poor timing.

Long term real estate investors acquire homes to be used as rental properties, banking on the properties’ appreciation when it comes time to sell. Although the financial reward for this investor is long term, the risk is considered to be leveraged over time as well. However, unexpected costs and loss of rent can make such an investor rethink their plan and cut their losses.

For the rest of us, however; housing may not be such a great investment after all, according to many financial pundits. One such pundit, Morgan Housel (of Motley Fool fame), wrote about his meeting with Robert Shiller (of Case-Shiller fame) to give some telling insight about home values (Why your home is not a good investment; usatoday.com; May 10, 2014). Shiller told Housel that the housing market is “a provider of housing services” and “not a good provider of capital gains.”

According to Shiller, home prices from 1890 to 1990 (adjusted for real inflation) are “virtually unchanged.” Housel further added that home prices between 1890 and 2012, adjusted for real inflation, “went nowhere;” and decreased 10% from 1890 to 1980, when adjusted for real inflation. Shiller even suggested that “real” home prices could decrease over the next 30 years, due to a number of factors including obsolescence and advances in construction techniques.

With all the stats and figures, are those who touted the investment value of long term home ownership – wrong? Not necessarily. The consensus is that home ownership offers stability as well as many other benefits including: a place to live, a place to raise a family, and belonging to a community. These intangibles may be responsible for the research conclusions by Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, that indicated there is an association between home ownership and growing wealth; where home owners fared better than renters (Herbert, McCue, and Sanchez-Moyano; Is Homeownership Still an Effective Means of Building Wealth for Low-income and Minority Households? Was it Ever? Joint Center for Housing Studies Harvard University, September 2013).

Is buying a home a bad investment? Housel pointed out that even Robert Shiller owns a home, and (at the time of the interview) indicated he would buy a home if he were in the market.

by Dan Krell
Copyright © 2015

If you like this post, do not copy; you can:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector


Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

DANGER Report not a mea culpa – but forecasts issues affecting housing market

real estateNews about the D.A.N.G.E.R. Report is making the media rounds, but maybe the excitement is more hyperbole than news. And contrary to the recent hype, the D.A.N.G.E.R. Report is not a mea culpa by the National Association of Realtors®.

D.A.N.G.E.R. is an acronym for “Definitive Analysis of Negative Game changers Emerging in Real estate.” The Report was commissioned by the National Association of REALTORS® as that is part of the NAR Strategic Thinking Advisory Committee’s attempt to identify issues affecting the future of the industry; the Swanepoel | T3 Group researched and authored the Report, which identifies trends and offers the residential real estate industry an impact assessment.

Described as a “…mix of yesterday, today and tomorrow…” the Report is intended to assist those in the industry to “…anticipate the forces taking shape that we can’t yet see;” by pointing out possible challenges, threats, and opportunities. Although the result is meant to “inspire” discourse, the reception has so far been mixed. NAR CEO Dale Stinton was quoted to say, “The D.A.N.G.E.R. Report is like 50 things that could keep you up at night. It isn’t a strategic plan. It isn’t telling you to do anything. It’s 50 potential black swans. It’s for your strategic planning processes. Digest it and cuss and fuss and decide whether it’s right or wrong…” (Anrea V. Brambila; ‘Danger’ report alerts industry to 50 biggest threats; inman.com; May 15, 2015).

One issue highlighted in the Report that has attracted the media attention is agent competency and ethics. The use of Report quotes such as, “the real estate industry is saddled with a large number of part-time, untrained, unethical, and/or incompetent agents…” is as if some in the media are saying “we told you so.” But the truth is that competency does not guarantee ethical behavior, and vice versa; the answers, like the issues, are more complex than you might expect – and do not assure advancement.

Like many of the issues reported in D.A.N.G.E.R., concern about agent competency and ethics is not new. The National Association of Realtors® has for years tried to influence public opinion of Realtors® and the industry by publicly promoting the high ethical standards by which Realtors® are held. Many are unaware that a code of ethics was adopted in 1913 by the association, and has since strived to instill and maintain a high level of integrity in the field. And yet with such emphasis on ethics, you might expect that public opinion would be much higher, but the limited research on consumer perception of ethics is mixed at best. And according to one study, consumers consider price, quality, and value more important than ethical criteria in purchase behavior (The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? The Journal of Consumer Marketing. 2001;18(7),560-577).

The D.A.N.G.E.R. Report may have missed the mark by not acknowledging that the industry’s transformation over many decades has been mainly influenced and driven by market forces, regulation, and technology. Discussing “black swans” with regard to these three areas may have been more valuable and practical to professionals and consumers.

However, as much as we try to identify unforeseen events; they are just that – unexpected and unanticipated. Take for instance the extreme changes that have occurred over the last ten years in the real estate industry – much of which were due to market forces, regulation, and technology.

Google+
Copyright © Dan Krell

If you like this post, do not copy; you can:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector
Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.