Total Pageviews

Showing posts with label Ownership. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ownership. Show all posts

Sunday, September 25, 2011

Handheld Vacation Ownership and Timeshare Calculator

Handheld Vacation Ownership and Timeshare CalculatorThis is the timeshare industry's 1st ever handheld calculator!! This Calculator, The Vacation Ownership Calculator will perform all standard real estate functions, but will also determine your clients Future Vacation Costs, as well as determining the difference between renting or purchasing your timeshare product. Will compare a timeshare purchase, to renting!!! A must have sales Tool!!!!! Order NOW!!!

Price:


Click here to buy from Amazon

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Home Ownership May Fall More Than Expected

Sometimes you hear one thing and don't think much of it, and then you hear another thing that makes the first thing seem much more important.

This morning the Mortgage Bankers Association put out a report from two UCLA researchers (MBA funded the report) saying that the homeownership rate may have bottomed but could still fall another one to two percentage points.

Then JP Morgan's CEO, Jamie Dimon, [JPM  Loading...      ()   ] suggested that his bank could get out of the mortgage ownership business in the future. "Owning consumer assets may be something we don't want to do," Dimon said on the earnings conference call. "It may be we'll originate, securitize, service, but not own" mortgages. He added that they don't have to make a decision on the mortgage business until rules are set, which could be eight years.

Clearly Dimon no longer sees mortgage lending as a particularly lucrative business, which is ironic, given that today's strict underwriting standards have produced the best, safest new crop of mortgages in quite a while. What he's referring to with the rules are risk retention rules and securitization rules that are still being negotiated. These rules could make it less lucrative for banks to originate and own mortgages because they could mandate holding on to 5 percent of the risk of certain loans. They could also make it even tougher for more Americans to obtain loans or to refinance, which would shrink the overall business.

Beyond new rules, though, perhaps Dimon doesn't predict the investor return to the mortgage market upon which so many federal regulators and politicians are depending. As lawmakers debate how to dismantle Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the underlying assumption is that the two can easily be replaced by a robust investor market. That market will only return if investors believe that mortgages will once again be a good bet. That's where the MBA study comes in.

The MBA researchers say that demographics, regardless of the recent housing boom, favored a drop in home ownership.

"Between 2000 and 2009 there was a one percentage point increase in the homeownership rate. But, were it not for the shifts in access to homeownership through easier credit and the changes in socioeconomic conditions, the homeownership rate would have actually fallen between 2000 and 2005, rather than increasing," researchers wrote.

This is due to changes in the population's socio-demographic composition and economic attributes. They found that the increase in the homeownership rate during the housing boom was most pronounced among those under the age of thirty; they were the most willing to take on the excess risk of the dicey mortgage products. They did not, however, have the economic standing to back it. So what now?

"If household employment, earnings and other socioeconomic characteristics over the next few years remain similar to those in 2009, then homeownership rates could fall by up to another 1 to 2 percentage points beyond 2011. Those declines are likely to be greatest in cities and regions in which house prices were most volatile in the last decade.”

What researchers leave out of their report, though, is the major shift in attitudes toward homeownership. I've interviewed dozens of younger and older Americans who no longer see any social stigma attached to renting. The rental market is surging across the nation, not just in hard hit housing markets where potential buyers have taken big credit hits; this is a major shift from the last "ownership" decade.

The nation's housing market will recover, I'm not implying that it won't. But for some reason some, including policy makers and federal regulators, think it will just go back to the way it was before the housing boom. I don't think so, and the number one reason is the overhaul of the mortgage market, not that we know what exactly that is yet.

Questions?  Comments?  document.write("");document.write("RealtyCheck"+"@"+"cnbc.com");document.write('');And follow me on Twitter @Diana_Olick


View the original article here

Monday, March 14, 2011

Empty Houses: Ownership Society Is Over

Following up on yesterday's post on the latest homeowner vacancy report, I wanted to point out a significant shift in the makeup of not just how, but where we live.

While the overall number of empty homes rose nationwide, the biggest vacancy jump was in what's called "principal cities."

These are the lower income, higher crime areas that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and prior administrations tried to bolster homeownership in. It’s close-in areas that are not attractive, according to Stephen East of Ticonderoga Securities.

Vacancy rates actually fell in the suburbs to 2.3 percent in Q4 '10 from 2.5 percent a year ago and 2.4 percent in Q3. The increase in the overall rate was really driven by a 3.6 percent vacancy rate in "principal cities," up from 3.1 percent a year ago and 2.9 percent in Q3.

"The increase in the vacancy rates in principal cities continues to illustrate the hangover from the 'ownership society' supported by the Clinton and Bush administrations," notes East. "We speak often to clients about the dichotomous market that does not get enough attention. Draw concentric rings around a city center. Two primary areas that drive the housing malaise—in close, out far. The sweet spot belt in nearly every city is seeing a significantly better housing market than broad numbers show. Fortunately, this is where most of today’s qualified buyers want to live."

I am not sure why that's fortunate. The "sweet spot belts" around the country have not seen nearly the foreclosures nor the price drops that the close-in and far out bands have seen, so we don't need so much demand there. There needs to be more demand in the "principal cities," but it's just not there. Prices have dropped the most, and most borrowers there are lower income and cannot qualify in today's tough mortgage market. That's why, again, apartment rentals are seeing such high demand.

Last night, Fannie Mae announced it was really gearing up its commercial, multi-family mortgage backed securities business, offering new products.

"Fannie Mae Guaranteed Multifamily Structures, or Fannie Mae GeMSTM, an expanded multifamily mortgage-backed securities (MBS) execution that will include DUS Megas, DUS REMICs and syndicated DUS Megas." In other words, they're getting behind the apartment boom.

"Fannie Mae is a leading provider of capital and liquidity for affordable workforce rental housing, and our role is more important now than ever," said Kenneth J. Bacon, Executive Vice President, Multifamily Mortgage Business. "When many financial institutions pulled out of the multifamily financing market during the financial crisis, we stayed and increased our participation to help keep credit flowing."

Fannie is putting more than $20 billion behind multi-family financing, as builders ramp up production. The reason rents are rising so much is because there is not enough stock, unlike the single-family market. During the housing boom, many developers did condo-conversions, turning apartment rental buildings into condos to meet the over-exuberant demand. Now developers are rushing to build as fast as they can. Reis Inc. predicts 51,314 units will be completed in 2011, and 82,971 units in 2012, and CoStar predicts over 100,000 will be completed in 2012 (many of those likely starting now). All because the inner-city ownership society is no more.

I also believe it's not just the inner-city, low-income resident who is renting; as I noted yesterday, I think renting is now much more acceptable to affluent younger workers and ever more enticing to empty-nesters. Given the rise in both those populations, multi-family has nowhere to go but up and ownership will need something of a makeover.

Questions?  Comments?  document.write("");document.write("RealtyCheck"+"@"+"cnbc.com");document.write('');And follow me on Twitter @Diana_Olick

View the original article here