Monday, April 09, 2007
By George W. Mantor,
Realty TimesI keep reading about how the real estate market has changed. It's either "slowed, leveled-off, in a trough, retreated, plunged, plummeted, collapsed, corrected, contracted or returned to normal," depending upon who wrote the story.
More accurately, what has occurred is that the easy surplus of transactions over the last few years that fed the hopes and dreams, if not the mouths of a crush of new licensees, has abated.
The market hasn't changed; it has moved on. And it certainly hasn't returned to normal and never will. There isn't any such thing as a normal real estate market because each market is new and different and unique to now, and driven by not one event but several, some of which never repeat themselves.
Take for example the past five years. Was that a "buying frenzy" as bubble-heads assert? Or, was it a dynamic period resulting from the intersection of real estate favorable circumstances?
Often the events that shape the present take place well in advance of the visible result.
Everyone knows we just had a real estate boom, but few people seem to understand why. Some pundits have gone so far as to argue that the run-up in housing prices was the 21st century equivalent of Holland's infamous "Tulip-Mania."
What writers and academics don't seem to understand is that nobody wants to spend so much to buy a house. There is not only strong resistance to rising prices, but also the very real limit placed on that price by issues of affordability.
This is evidenced by the astonishing pent-up anger that is being expressed in real estate blogs. Fueled by impatience and wishful thinking, these advocates of the bubble theory have disparaged brokers, lenders, builders, and even the buyers themselves for locking them out of the market. People aren't livid about the cost of Cadillacs.
When you understand how we got here it's all perfectly reasonable and logical. Powerful forces are at work here. The circumstances that produced these forces are actually accelerating.
Return with me now to those thrilling days of yesteryear.
1978 -- the last "normal" year. Housing was generally affordable and interest rates were 9.5 percent. Between 1980 and 1981, sales plummeted as interest rates topped 16.5 percent. Nothing normal about that. Homes sat on the market for months and many were foreclosed.
Given those circumstances, many practitioners left the business as it seemed impossible to find a way around such an obstacle. Those of us who stuck it out invented a little wrinkle that was quickly maligned and eventually outlawed. "Creative financing" they called it back in the day. Risky, they said. An evil concoction that combined nose thumbing at the existing lender with sellers financing parts of their own transactions. Big banks just loved it. Not!
A loophole in California law allowed a buyer to "take subject to" existing financing without any approval from the lender. Just start making the payments. But the lower interest loans were on properties that had about doubled in value and that left an often sizable gap to be bridged. A higher interest second would be obtained for part of the financing and the seller would carry a reasonable third trust deed for the balance. We would wind up with a "blended" rate equivalent to 11 or 12 percent.
Soon it became apparent that the other advantage was that the buyer didn't need to put twenty percent down, overcoming yet another obstacle in California.
1983 -- the market began to improve dramatically as adjustable rate mortgages began to appear and interest rates began to decline. But for the next seven years, rates would not fall below 10 percent. Yet year after year more homes, both new and resale were being sold.
1988 -- new home sales hit a record 675,000 units while existing homes sales peaked at 3,512,000.
1991 -- new home sales bottomed out at 507,000 while resale closings fell to 3,186,000 units.
1993 -- locally this was not a time of optimism within the real estate industry. But as I looked into the future, I realized that the events preceding the next boom were already underway, and I published my analysis in April in which I predicted the coming boom.
1994 -- Boomers are in their peak family-forming years and should have been flooding the market. Instead the tail end of a brutal recession spooked many potential homebuyers into remaining renters. Pent up demand was building below the surface and as circumstances improved, one by one these over-ripe candidates came off the fence to join the competition for a shrinking inventory.
1997 -- Taxpayer Relief Act radically changed capital gains treatment on profits made on the sale of a personal residence. This began to impact the second home market as well as underscore the financial benefits of home ownership.
1999 -- the appreciation cycle began. Boomers were returning to the market to find limited choices and shortages began to develop in some areas. Boomers will continue to be first time buyers for another decade. Both generations X and Y have had an impact on the market over the last five years and that will continue to grow.
Builders responded, selling a record 885,000 homes in 1998 and 881,000 in 1999.
2000 -- "Dotcom" crash causes corresponding slow down in both new and resale housing.
2001 -- Demand of all types, deferred, pent-up, contemporary, investor refugees from the stock market and accelerated demand combine to overwhelm inventory in many communities.
During the prior decade, builders all but abandoned condominium construction because of rampant defect litigation. The result was that overtime, a smaller percentage of resales would occur at lower prices because that inventory was never built.
And while all of that was unfolding, an evolution in real estate finance was taking place which would make homeownership possible for more people. Today there is a loan for anyone who is responsible with money and has a decent job. That alone is worthy of a moment of pause.
I know that some of you are prone to thinking that many of these new loan types are dangerous to borrowers and, frankly, I think that's nonsense.
I'm from the old school. Give a man a chance, even a desperately slim chance, and see if he can make it. Most will find a way. The idea of a starter loan or a temporary loan is a solid one. The problem is that financing is an area where the industry has done a poor job of educating the consumer.
Factor in historically low interest rates and the explosion of attention that has surrounded the boom and it is easy to explain the events of the last few years.
Along the way real estate development has become more expensive as easy to develop land has disappeared and what remains often has significant challenges.
Material costs have increased, infrastructure costs have increased, labor costs have increased, and the bottom line is that, in many markets, builders are abandoning plans because the consumer cannot afford what it costs to build.
And if they cannot build them for less, the gains of most real estate owners are well protected. These are important talking points to share with everyone you meet.
The economy is solid if not spectacular when compared to historical norms.
The wild card for the next few months will be the number of unoccupied homes in some regions. Will that result in significant declines in value? My bet is that it won't go deep and it won't last long.