This post first appeared in the March edition of: Cirios Trends: In Search of Real Estate Opportunities.

San Francisco Building Owners Sell Winners, Keep Sinners
(San Francisco Business Times)
There’s an old saying on Wall Street that you shouldn’t sell your winners to finance your sinners. Landlords in San Francisco, apparently, didn’t get the message. 303 Second St., just blocks from the freshly constructed One Rincon Tower, was just listed and is expected to fetch north of $200 million. Along with another new listing at 333 Market St., which is a few blocks from the Embarcadero and 100% leased to Wells Fargo, the activity supports the view that building owners are looking to raise capital by selling strong performing assets. SF landlords are likely hoping they don’t end up like former brokerages like Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, which shed high quality assets to stave off a cash crunch. Oops.

(Read more here: http://tinyurl.com/ciriostrendsmar1)

Bay Area Home Sales Slip in January
(San Francisco Chronicle)
It’s not unusual for home sales to fall from December to January; the holidays are a notoriously sleepy time in the housing market. But this January was abnormally slow, as transactions in the Bay Area fell 4% from a year ago, marking the first year-over-year drop in sales in 17 months. Some chalked up the slowdown to the dearth of listings on the market, while others raised the possibility of a hiccup in the housing market’s recent strength. At least within the San Francisco city limits, we at Cirios have noticed a meaningful pickup in new listings in the past month (supported by the data presented on the first page). Opportunistic buyers should be licking their chops, but, as always, picking their spots.

(Read more here: http://tinyurl.com/ciriostrendsmar2)

Hotels Slash Prices to Keep Occupancy Up
(San Francisco Business Times)
Sure, you’re broke, but it’s never been a better time to visit San Francisco. Hotels, smarting from an excessively weak tourism market, are slashing rates to keep their rooms full. Northern California as a whole saw room rates slip 13.2% from last year, while San Francisco’s decline approached 16%. Meanwhile, occupancy in San Francisco held relatively steady, off only 4.3% from 2009. Contrast this with apartment buildings, where landlords let units sit vacant rather than dropping rents. This is especially true in San Francisco, where tenant-friendly rent control laws means it can take years for landlords to recoup lost rental income.

(Read more here: http://tinyurl.com/ciriostrendsmar3)

Santa Clara Residents Undecided on 49ers Fate
(San Jose Business Journal)
Less than a month after the Santa Clara city council paved the way for a June vote on a nearly $1 billion stadium for the San Francisco 49ers, voters aren’t so sure. In a recent poll, Santa Clara voters are split right down the middle on the subject, with 45% favoring the plans and an equal portion opposed. This contrasts another poll done last month which shows just 40% of Santa Clara voters in favor of the stadium, with 54% opposed. San Francisco is still holding out hope that they’ll get a shot at keeping the team, but only time, and votes, will tell.

(Read more here: http://tinyurl.com/ciriostrendsmar4 )

This post first appeared in the February edition of: Cirios Trends: In Search of Real Estate Opportunities.

If someone were to wake up from a 5-year coma and ask about the state of our country’s economy, the chart below pretty much sums it up.

The past five years in the housing market, the financial market and the economy have been anything but boring.

With respect to the housing market, we are at a critical juncture. Pundits and so-called experts are lining up on opposing sides of the recovery debate. Optimists will point out that after historic price declines, affordability is at all-time highs and government support for the housing market has helped mitigate the negative effects of tightened credit and mounting foreclosures. The bottom, they say, is in.

Meanwhile, pessimists urge caution. Foreclosures continue to rise, more borrowers are falling behind and the government is considering removing some of the programs that have kept interest rates low.

Ultimately, both arguments have merit. But they both miss the point.

Take another look at the graph above. It’s no coincidence that during the time of most uncertainty in the stock market (2008), the housing market experienced its steepest declines. It’s also no accident that the recent bottom in stocks (March 2009) matches almost exactly with the turning point in housing.

The answer to the riddle is simple: Confidence.

In a new book called This Time is Different, economists Kenneth Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart dissect hundreds of years of financial crises and try to assess how societies keep getting themselves into the same mess over and over again.

A common thread in the discussion, specifically surrounding debt crises like the one we experienced (and indeed are still experiencing), is the notion that confidence plays a far larger, and far less understood role in economic panics than most people think. According to Rogoff and Reinhart: “Economists do not have a terribly good idea of what kinds of events shift confidence and how to concretely assess confidence vulnerability.”

Since most people equate the stock market with the economy, swoons on Wall Street send the message that all is not well with our economic future. Accumulate enough of these swoons and confidence gets punctured to the point where people start acting differently. As risk aversion grows, consumers delay purchases, businesses delay expansion and banks stop lending.

In March of last year, the housing market was beyond bleak. Liquidity dried up and buyers were terrified. Ditto on Wall Street. But as stocks recovered through the spring, hope emerged that maybe the worst was behind us.

Now, as the recent surge in stocks is tested, so too will the surge in home buying: The two are far more linked than most understand.

This post first appeared in the SPECIAL EDITION: Cirios Trends: A Decade in Flux

The books are officially closed on a decade which will be remembered for an historic real estate boom in the United States that busted in spectacular fashion, nearly taking the entire world financial system down with it.

Of course, the real story is a touch more complicated: Our housing bust was merely the most glaring crack in a global economy that grew far too dependent on cheap debt, where flows of money around the world magnetized to the hot asset, blowing bubbles first in stocks, then real estate, then commodities.

During each subsequent bust, governments rushed to the aide of markets, stitching them up with a patchwork of looser regulations, low interest rates and promises it would never happen again.

Late in 2008, the collapse of the credit markets culminated in the failure of some of this country’s most storied financial institutions. When the dust settled, Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch,
Washington Mutual, Wachovia, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, Countrywide and a host of smaller, lesser known entities had either gone bust or been bought for a song by stronger, better capitalized firms.

Some simply melted into this or that government agency, while many members of our financial complex survived only with historic government aide. Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, GM and Chrysler are alive today thanks to massive taxpayer-funded bailouts.

But enough looking behind us; historians and journalists will be employed for decades slicing and dicing this most turbulent of decades.

Surveying the horizon, the primary fear among economists, investors and ordinary Americans is that the inflationary effects of pumping trillions of dollars into an economy must eventually come home to roost.

To be sure, there are those who remain firmly in the camp that believes the more pressing concern is inflation’s less-well understood counterpart, deflation. But even the most ardent deflationists believe theirs is a debate that is more accurately painted as one of time horizons, rather than absolutes.

The US dollar is in the crosshairs of this philosophic, as well as very practical debate. The greenback’s standing as the global reserve currency has been thrown into question as investors around the world scratch their collective heads and try to figure out how we’ll ever repay our staggering, ever-growing debt.

And now, as our economy appears to be slowly healing, the Federal Reserve faces the unenviable task of withdrawing its generous stimulus. In March, the Fed plans to scale back its purchases of mortgage backed securities, spooking more than a few market participants.

The fear, particularly for the housing market, is that any Fed pullback will push up interest rates.

Higher interest rates translate into lower purchasing power for buyers, curtailing the steady stream of homebuying demand that, coupled with ongoing foreclosure moratoria, has propped up prices in recent months.

We kick off 2010 with mortgage rates approaching the all-time lows set last spring. Sure, they could always go lower, but the smart money is betting it’s just a matter of time before rising prices force regulators to ease their foot off the monetary accelerator. Higher mortgage rates are likely on the horizon.

So as we begin the first true test of our nascent economic recovery, Cirios would like to take you through a bit of history. We’ll look first at the macroeconomic picture as it relates to home prices, inflation and interest rates. Next we’ll examine a few California real estate markets illustrative of the localized trends masked by most broad economic measures.

But first, a word of caution: As Mark Twain’s oft-cited saying goes, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”

It goes without saying that the financial upheaval of the past 24 months has been, in a word, unique. There is no historical analogue, no matter how neatly we try to jam this experience into some mold cast in the 1930s, 1970s or 1980s. By extension, any conclusions drawn from this historic perspective should be taken with a very large grain of salt.

Nevertheless, understanding where we stand and how we got here is essential to understanding where we’re headed. And understanding where we’re headed is essential to finding and taking advantage of the plentiful investment opportunities the previous decade’s turmoil has created.

NEXT >>

This post first appeared in the November edition of Cirios Trends: Getting to the Bottom of the Housing Market

Of the myriad debates ongoing at a time when economics and
politics are seemingly two heads of the same freakish snake, the role government should play in directing economic actions dominates an already ideologically charged arena.

And nowhere is the issue argued more hotly than in the trenches of the housing market.

Government, some say, should come to the rescue of Main Street, vindicating the evils of Wall Street greed and excess run amok. Who else will look out for the little guy if not our elected representatives?

Others disagree, fingering Washington as one of the primary culprits in an economic landscape characterized by artificially low interest rates, lax regulation and a political class that was in bed with the corporations it claimed to be policing.

In housing, it’s no secret that government involvement in the market has reached new heights. Virtually every mortgage written today is backed by some branch of the federal government, be it via the FHA, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Tax credits to first time buyers spurred a flurry of purchase transactions this summer and fall, and inventory levels have been kept low by ongoing foreclosure moratoria.

Interest rates remain stubbornly low, despite fears of inflation and a collapsing US currency.

As a result, in some of the hardest hit real estate markets, prices seem to have stabilized, as supply has dropped to, in some cases, less than a month of inventory.

At the heart of the debate, and a point which is widely under-reported in the mainstream press, is the effect of decades of aggressive policies aimed at encouraging lower income Americans to buy homes.

These directives created a deeply liquid and profitable arena into which Wall Street moved, seized upon, and ultimately cannibalized. That Congress is now actively leading a witch hunt to track down the “guilty” is highly ironic since only with the implicit blessing of Washington could Wall Street have committed its crimes.

Look at the graph in the top right corner of this page. Taxpayers are increasingly being asked to cover losses which Washington is unloading from the private sector onto the public balance sheet. This liability will be a drag on the economy for years to come.

One unfortunate result of this crisis is that Americans with less than ideal credit are seeing access to banking services stripped away at an alarming rate. And while justified in some cases, there is a place in our economy for non-prime lending, if done right.

As big banks withdraw from this arena, smarting from losses of a similar shape to the graph above, small, niche lenders can step in and fill the void. Opportunities abound, if you just know where to look.

This post first appeared in the November edition of Cirios Trends: Getting to the Bottom of the Housing Market

This piece first appeared on Minyanville.

By Andrew Jeffery

Reality, it appears, is a dish Washington believes is best served, never.

Late Friday evening on October 30th, long after most Americans had shut off their computer screens and turned their attention to more important things — namely, Halloween — banking regulators dropped a silent, rotten egg onto the financial system.

Despite an alarming increase in the number of troubled commercial real estate loans gumming up bank balance sheets, the Federal Reserve, FDIC, and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued new guidelines Friday easing the burden this souring debt will have on lenders. Regulators are encouraging banks to modify loans, rather than foreclose and repossess property, even if the value of the building has fallen below the amount of the loan.

Loan workouts, regulators argue, can be beneficial to both lender and borrower, and are preferred to foreclosures, which drag down prices. But one look at the earlier-to-crash residential real estate market quickly proves this notion as a fallacy.

In many of the hardest hit real estate markets, ones which imploded well before ill-fated mortgage modification attempts were launched, true price discovery was given a slim opening to take hold. Now, as prices have fallen back to more affordable levels, traditional homebuyers and real estate investors have stepped back into the market, helping to stabilize prices.

Sure, there’s still a healthy dose of government intervention propping up the housing market as a whole, but only through these fresh starts can markets begin a genuine healing process.

Well-to-do markets, on the other hand, have not yet had their requisite dose of price discovery, as corrective market mechanisms are being prevented from functioning. Foreclosure moratoria (ongoing) and modification efforts (floundering) are simply kicking the proverbial can down a long proverbial road.

So too in commercial real estate, as landlords face increasing vacancies, falling rents, and, according to the Wall Street Journal, $1.4 trillion in maturing loans over the next five years. Around half of these are said to be underwater, and thus cannot be refinanced at current price levels.

Regulators’ answer, not unlike the failed mortgage modification programs introduced by the Bush and continued by the Obama Administration, is to allow big banks like Citigroup, JPMorgan, and Bank of America to forestall the recognition of losses, trying to delay the inevitable bursting of the commercial real estate bubble.

With Wall Street’s collective eyes focused on Monday’s headlines — CIT’s bankruptcy, Goldman Sachs picking up tax credits from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and of course the Yankees a single win away from their twenty-seventh World Series title — regulators are hoping investors will ignore the stench of this well-timed announcement as just another holdover from Halloween revelry gone awry.

And while the new guidelines may bolster efforts to make the banking system look healthier than it actually is, it’s further proof that rumors of a legitimate economic recovery are, in fact, greatly overestimated.

This post first appeared in the November edition of Cirios Trends: Getting to the Bottom of the Housing Market

For this month’s zip code spotlight we head down the Peninsula to Mountain View, CA, home of Google Inc. and just up the street from rival Yahoo, headquartered in neighboring Sunnyvale.

For the past decade, the relationship between Google and wealth has been a rather simple one: As goes Google, so goes boatloads of cash (and hopefully long term economic stability). And while the Google Effect has been felt throughout Silicon Valley real estate markets, let’s focus on the market immediately in the company’s back yard.

Partly because of Google’s strong economic presence in the area, some neighborhoods have seen dramatic explosions in price in the last 10 years. This month’s zip code, 94040 which comprises the western portion of Mountain View, is no exception. As can be seen on the graph below, prices doubled from 1998 through the market’s peak in 2008.

However, recent price declines have hit the area hard, giving those looking for a mid-high end home a chance to squeeze into a market likely to be basking in the Google glow for years to come.

Looking more closely at the market, one finds a wide range of available properties. Currently available single family homes range from a $1.8 Million, 4 bed, 3 bath to a tiny 1-bedroom available for a “mere” $500,000. Over 70% of the properties in the area are listed at the million dollar plus level, so come ready to spend.

Schools in the area are terrific, consistently scoring in the 90th percentile of schools in the state. Downtown Mountain View has everything from shopping to nightlife. The city also boasts a bayshore municipal golf course and Shoreline Amphitheater (pictured below), a concert venue frequented by the biggest names in show business.

If you are lucky enough to work at Google, the commute from most parts of Mountain View is less than 10 minutes, and there are numerous other technology firms just minutes away. For the rest of us, Downtown San Jose is only 20 minutes away and San Francisco is somewhat farther, over 40 minutes in light traffic. CalTrain provides an excellent option for public transportation.

As the graph shows, prices are down ~20% in the zip since the peak, and a recent spike in supply is quickly subsiding. Ultimately, the extent to which prices can hold these levels is dependent on whether Silicon Valley’s up and coming home buyers continue to eye Mountain View as an attractive, desirable place to live.

This post first appeared in the November edition of Cirios Trends: Getting to the Bottom of the Housing Market

When trying to determine if they can afford to buy their first home, many first time homebuyers leave out a whole host of costs that then become
unwelcome surprises once they’re already emotionally invested in a purchase.

There are a whole host of fees and costs that neither Realtors or lenders are terribly excited to tell you about, preferring to gloss over the details until they have you well along in the process.

It’s imperative to sit down and budget all the out-of-pocket expenses that go into buying a home, in addition to the down payment and of course monthly recurring payments to arrive at the total cost, err, joy of homeownership.

Keep in mind that these are the realities of buying, and eventually owning a home. They should be accepted, evaluated and budgeted just like more widely quoted expenses like interest rates.

But a quick scan of a list of the fees included in an estimated HUD (effectively a list of all costs associated with a home purchase) can show be a bit intimidating:

- Loan Origination Fee
- Document Fee
- Processing Fee
- Tax Service Fee
- Appraisal Fee
- Credit Report Fee
- Messenger Fee
- Flood Cert Fee
- Escrow Fee
- Notary Fee
- Recording Fee
- Other Title Fee
- Monument Fee

Now that is a lot of fees! Some are no more than $10, but others can be hundreds or even thousands of dollars. When you first meet with a lender to discuss pre-approval, always ask for a list of fees or a sample HUD statement so you can have this information ahead of time.

In addition to closing-related fees, buyers also need to be aware that they may need to pay pro-rata property taxes. Pro-rata what?

In California, property taxes are due twice a year, February 1st and November 1st. So, depending on when you buy your house, you may have to pay taxes to carry you through to the next payment at the time you make your purchase.

On top of these lesser known fees and costs, you have the down payment to consider, which in most cases is the biggest out-of-pocket expense for any home purchase.

Don’t forget moving costs, buying furniture, repainting and any other initial maintenance items that your particular home may need. Also, don’t forget upkeep, which should be expected to be around 1% of your home’s cost, per year.

Although potentially intimidating, any potential home buyer should take the time to make a detailed budget of these costs, after careful research and consultation with both a real estate broker (like Cirios!) and mortgage lender.

Then, based on your own budget and the mortgage calculator resources available online (see previous edition of Cirios Trends for thoughts on mortgage calculators), you can ultimately arrive at how much home you can afford.

Then … it’s time to go shopping!