By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Despite Herculean efforts, the Federal Reserve is losing its battle to keep mortgage rates at all-time lows.

As fear that we’re headed for imminent collapse slowly wanes, investors’ appetite for risk is coming back. This renewed confidence has helped buoy stocks, and the major equity indices have rallied more than 30% from their March lows. The shift, however, has come at the expense of the Treasury market, which has been in a 7-week slump.

According to Bloomberg, big money managers like Blackrock (BLK) are betting the Fed will step in to support the Treasury market (again), as regulators hope renewed Treasury purchases will push down mortgage rates (again).

Bond prices and yields move in opposite directions. When investor demand falls, so do prices, pushing up yields. And as investors shun the safety — but relatively low return — of government-backed debt, the impacts are felt throughout the credit markets. Of concern to the Fed, and what has led Chairman Ben Bernanke to increase Treasury purchases in the past, is the effect this dynamic has on mortgage rates.

A mortgage is nothing more than a long term bond, given to a borrower to purchase a home. So when lenders get fearful they’re not being compensated for tying up money for as long as 30 years, they increase rates. Further, as the specter of inflation rises, lenders demand bigger interest payments to keep up with higher prices. In other words, when dollars in the future are worth less than dollars today, banks demand higher payments to make up the difference.

Keeping mortgage rates low has been a cornerstone of Washington’s efforts to jump start the flagging housing market. But with rates at the highest level since April, the “smart money” is betting the Fed may return to the Treasury market en masse.

Paradoxically, even as the Fed tries to keep interest rates low — which are rising in part due to the expectation that higher prices loom in the years ahead — its actions increase the likelihood of future inflation. Running its printing presses around the clock has consequences, even if Fed officials are loathe to admit it.

Minyanville’s Mr. Practical often discusses the fallacy that credit markets are improving. As he points out, only in corners of the market where the government has stepped in to support lending is any so-called “normalcy” returning.

So too in the mortgage market.

Loans backed by Fannie Mae (FNM), Freddie Mac (FRE) and the Federal Housing Administration account for the lion share of mortgages currently being issued in this country. Aside from the occasional jumbo loan written by banks like JPMorgan (JPM) or Wells Fargo (WFC), government mortgages are the only game in town. Coupled with the Troubled Asset Lending Facility (or TALF), which funnels money into the market for mortgage-backed securities, the home-loan market remains completely dependent on government support.

This is one reason recent “strength” in the housing market will provide transitory. There’s a limit on how much government can control markets, as evidenced by mortgage rates that move persistently higher every time the Fed eases its aggressive intervention. Fundamentals, not subsidies, will provide a true floor in prices.

And as banks prepare to unleash a firestorm of foreclosure inventory into the market, fundamentals will remain pointed south, thereby pushing down prices. And as foreclosures continue to infect higher end real-estate markets, these price declines will be felt by a growing — and more prosperous — segment of the population.

Mortgage rates, left to their own devices, would be far, far higher without government support. This is the message of the market – one bureaucrats in Washington seem unwilling to learn.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

As a growing number of economists, pundits and real-estate professionals assure us the housing market’s worst days are over, prospective home buyers need a trusted advocate to make sure they don’t end up on the wrong side of someone else’s trade.

More often than not, that person will come in the form of a real-estate professional working on the buyer’s behalf and earning a commission for their trouble. Below are 5 simple questions you can ask to gauge whether a given candidate is looking out for your best interests – or his or her own.

But first, a word on terminology.

The terms “agent,” “broker” and “realtor” are often thrown around interchangeably. This isn’t exactly right. While laws differ from state to state, acquiring a broker’s license typically requires a series of courses on real estate practices, principals, finance, law, appraisal and the escrow process. A broker can use his license to form a brokerage, and the company can then perform services as a licensed entity.

In many states (like California) a licensed broker can not only conduct real estate transactions, but earn commissions for arranging mortgages and other types of real estate-related loans. For this reason, a brokers license offers the holder huge potential earnings power.

An agent is a step below a broker. While requiring a license, an agent is normally treated as an employee of the broker and thus the broker is responsible for the actions of the agents under his charge. If an agent screws up, his reputation (and license) as well as his broker’s is on the line. Agents can typically conduct the same transactions as a broker, but must do so under the supervision of their boss.

Finally, the term “Realtor” is used to specifically identify a real estate broker or agent who is a member of the National Association of Realtors, or NAR. The NAR is a nationwide trade group that collects member dues, lobbies in Washington and runs marketing campaigns urging Americans to buy homes. The NAR is conspicuous in its role as national housing cheerleader, as it’s chief economist Lawrence Yun has been predicting an imminent bottom in prices since early 2006.

1. Is it a good time to buy?

Of any question a buyer is likely to ask his broker (or agent), this may be the first. And the most important. The answer itself isn’t nearly as important as how the broker responds.

Any broker that says definitely that yes, this is a great time to buy, should be eyed with skepticism. Without knowing a buyer’s specific circumstances, understanding localized market trends and the underlying value of a specific home, saying it is a great time to buy is a sales pitch, pure and simple.

Brokers will often cite low interest rates, high levels of affordability, low replacement costs and home prices that have fallen precipitously from their peaks as reasons its never been a better time to buy. But ask yourself, all those conditions were true six months ago — was it a great time to buy then?

The proper response to this question from a responsible broker is to answer the question with a question, or questions. How much money have you saved? How long do you plan on owning the home? How much money do you make? How much is your other debt service? What are your contingencies if you lose your job? How is your credit? What are your other motivations for wanting to buy?

Only armed with answers to these and other questions can a broker — or a buyer for that matter — determine whether its the right time to buy.

2. Are home prices near a bottom?

As with the previous question, the answer should be in the form of a question. Where and when are you looking to buy? Do you want a move in ready home or one that needs some work?

While there is no crystal ball as to the direction of home prices in the near or long term, a broker should have a clear understanding of the dynamics effecting his or her local market. I hear ad nauseum here in California that home prices are stabilizing because demand is up, prices are down and homes are receiving multiple bids. But those are external symptoms of market machinations underneath the surface.

Foreclosure moratoriums put in place late last year limited the number of bank owned homes dumped onto the market. This constricted supply, and coupled with tax incentives, low interest rates and aggressive marketing from the NAR, led to a situation where in some areas, for some homes, demand outweighs supply. But that doesn’t mean the situation will persist — in fact, the smart money is betting it won’t.

This dynamic is far from ubiquitous, as most high end markets remain illiquid with prices tumbling into an apparent vacuum.

Real estate is, and will always remain, local.

3. How do you determine which homes to show me?

Not to beat a dead horse, but this question should be met with yet another series of questions. What size home are you looking for? Are schools important to you? How close do you want to be to public transportation? Do you care about being within walking distance to shops and restaurants? What style of home do you like? Do you want a yard?

A good real estate broker should be a blank slate, absorbing your preferences, desires and reasons for buying without injecting his own bias. Just because your agent loves a certain home and thinks its a great buy, doesn’t mean it fits your criteria. Don’t be afraid to tell your broker that you don’t like a particular home.

Brokers should show you a variety of homes, below, within and above your price range, to give you a sense of what is out there on the market. With prices still coming down in most areas, you may walk inside your dream house and decide its worth it to keep renting — and saving — for another year until prices fall to something you can afford.

Until you feel comfortable your broker is showing you everything that may fit your criteria, perform your own searches on the myriad free websites out there. Redfin.com is a great resource for the metropolitan areas it covers, while Trulia.com, ziprealty.com and even Realtor.com have excellent free search features.

4. What are my financing options? How much can I afford?

While real-estate brokers are often legally allowed to arrange loans, more often than not its a dicey legal proposition for the broker to sell you a house as well as a mortgage.

Nevertheless, brokers should be well-versed in available financing, rates, qualification requirements and whether sellers require a mortgage pre-approval letter to accompany any offer (these days, most do). If your broker doesn’t know the answer to a certain question, that’s OK as the rules change almost daily, but he should actively pursue the answer and report his findings back without too much delay.

Shopping around for the best loan terms can be a time consuming and confusing process, but it must be done. Gone are the days where Wells Fargo (WFC) always gave you the best rate, or your buddy down at Chase (JPM) could get you a great deal. Keep in mind most loans these days are originated to Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) guidelines, which means most big lenders offer similar loan programs.

All things being equal, choose a lender you feel you can trust (not just the one offering you the best deal) and always have a backup.

Lastly, never trust a broker to “tell” you how much you can afford. This decision, especially in an environment where home prices are likely to fall for the foreseeable future, should be one each buyer must make for himself.

Plans change, life doesn’t always follow the path you hope it does. Being conservative in what you can afford, leaving a cushion and planning for the unexpected are paramount in today’s uncertain market conditions.

5. Provide me with examples of a few closings you are the most proud of over the past year.

This question gives your broker a bit of an opening to sell himself, and will go along way towards helping figure out whose side he is actually on. If your broker launches into a a story about this cute young couple he helped get into the house of their dreams, move along, cute young couples rarely make savvy home buying decisions and are easy prey for aggressive brokers. Also pass if you hear things like, “I found this great house right when it came on the market, we jumped at it and got in before the other buyers had a chance to bid.”

Sellers, by and large, are still unrealistic about how much they can sell their homes for. This means that when houses come out onto the market, the asking price is nearly always above where it will actually go for. Be patient, make your broker work for his money.

Although there are situations where multiple bids will come in from prospective buyers, chances are this isn’t a house you want to buy. Most of this sort of activity is going on in areas with high levels of foreclosures. Now that the moratoria are lifted, banks will start flooding the market again come next month. All that great news about limited supply will become ancient history as prices plunge once again. The house itself may be great, but just because homes are “cheap,” doesn’t mean they won’t get cheaper.

A good response is one where a broker tells you a story of a buyer he worked with for months, go to know a few neighborhoods that fit all the pertinent criteria, and waited for the right house to come on the market. Many sellers will list their house at a “hopeful” price for the first 30 or 45 days, then drop it down to something more reasonable. Rarely will a house sold in the first couple weeks be a “steal” for the buyer.

Your broker should stress that patience, research and shrewd negotiating got his client a great home at a great price.

To be sure, there are other questions to ask of a prospective broker, but this is a good start. Finding a broker should be treated like a job interview, after all, even though the commission may not be coming out of your pocket, you, as the buyer, end up paying one way or another. Make sure your broker is worth his salt.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Every month, it seems, Washington dreams up new and fantastic ways to funnel taxpayer money towards a growing list of undeserving recipients.

Now, in the latest attempt to coerce banks into modifying delinquent mortgages en masse, the Treasury Department plans to offer cash incentives to lenders who lower interest rates or forgive principal on second liens (so-called “piggyback” loans). According to Bloomberg, the new program aims to simplify the modification process and help struggling borrowers avoid foreclosure.

The subprime second lien was a highly profitable, nearly usurious loan product that proliferated during the housing boom. Once reserved for high-quality borrowers and those with sufficient equity in their homes, seconds became an easy way to jam borrowers into homes they couldn’t otherwise afford.

If a homeowner wants to take out a first mortgage for more than 80% of the home’s value, he or she is typically required to take out mortgage insurance, issued by firms like Radian (RDN), MGIC Investment Corp (MTG) and the PMI Group (PMI). For years, the cost of insurance — plus the required down payment — limited home ownership to those who, by and large, could afford to buy responsibly.

But as housing demand ballooned from 2002 to 2005, banks discovered they could just loan borrowers the down-payment money – and charge a hefty fee to do so. Without those pesky requirements — and by bypassing the sometimes strict credit guidelines of mortgage insurers — banks were able to open up their loan products to a whole new group of unqualified borrowers.

Second liens, by virtue of being subordinate to first liens, carry additional risk, and thus a higher interest rate. In other words, if a borrower defaults, the holder of the second lien has to wait until the first mortgage holder is made whole before getting paid.

And since seconds carried super-high interest rates, securities backed by this type of loan offered juicy returns for investors. It should come as no surprise that the second-lien market was dominated by Bear Stearns (now JPMorgan (JPM)), Countrywide (now Bank of America (BAC)), and Citigroup (C) (now in hock to Uncle Sam for a cool $300 million).

Now, the Obama Administration wants to give billions to not only the banks who wrote these loans, but the borrowers who accepted them. The program is destined for failure.

In fact, it’s already failed.

A little over a year ago, Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) introduced an initiative called the “HomeSaver Advance.” Under the program, borrowers behind on their mortgage payments could take out an unsecured line of credit to get current. Under this program, Fannie and Freddie lent out $462 million over the course of the next 12 months.

Now, based on current market prices, the loans are worth a whopping $8 million, or $0.017 cents on the dollar. Talk about throwing good money after bad.

The President’s initiative to modify seconds is no different: It takes a situation destined for foreclosure and simply prolongs the agony. This prevents the borrower from getting out from under his mountain of debt and starting anew. Meanwhile, homes become ever more dilapidated, and banks further delay their own days of reckoning.

The rationale for this program is obscure – though it does provide yet another way to hand taxpayer money over to the very banks who got us into this mess in the first place.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

For almost 2 years, we’ve been told government-backed loan modification efforts and foreclosure moratoriums would help ease the pain of the ongoing housing crisis. It’s not working.

Despite recent calls to the contrary — this morning’s came courtesy of real-estate mogul Sam Zell — residential home prices are still in free fall, and the bottom will remain elusive.

Picking up a trend noted weeks ago by housing blogs and other real-estate analysts, the Wall Street Journal reports banks and mortgage-servicing companies are pushing through foreclosures at the fastest rate in more than a year.

JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Citigroup (C) and Wells Fargo (WFC), 3 of the country’s biggest loan servicers, scaled back foreclosure efforts in recent months at the request of the Obama Administration. Now, with the bans lifted, a new wave of repossessions are simply a matter of time. In California, notices of default and trustee sale, which precede foreclosures, spiked in March as moratoriums expired and lenders returned to “business as usual.”

Banks, especially those collecting payments on behalf of Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE), say they’re doing everything they can to keep borrowers in their homes. But according to GMAC (GM), as few as 10% of struggling homeowners qualify for the Obama Administration’s highly touted foreclosure prevention program.

The logical conclusion is that this new wave of bank owned homes being dumped onto the market will put even more downward pressure on housing prices. And while this is true on a localized, market by market level, widely monitored home price indicators may not tell the whole story.

As noted by the Field Check Group, a real-estate analysis firm, delinquencies on jumbo loans are rising at an alarming rate. This is consistent with trends we have been seeing over the past 6-9 months as prime defaults are now rising faster than subprime.

Currently, low-end, inexpensive homes dominate sales data, dragging down median and average prices. Foreclosures, however, are creeping into high-end markets, and coupled with high levels of inventory and weak demand, prices are tumbling. As forced sales become more prevalent and transactions rise in these well-to-do areas, expensive home sales will begin to represent a larger portion of transactions used in broad measures of prices.

In the coming months, we could see home price measures falling at a less severe rate as the data mix becomes less skewed towards the low end. The bottom will be cheered, recovery will be lauded by the spin machine known as the National Association of Realtors, and buyers around the country will be lured into a false sense of security that housing has finally hit rock bottom.

Meanwhile, back in reality, property values — actual homes, rather than statistics — will keep sliding.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Despite recent reports to the contrary, the impending stabilization of the housing market is a myth. While declines in certain markets are coming to an end, real estate, in general, is still in freefall.

Last November, amidst a great deal of media fanfare, Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) enacted a temporary foreclosure moratorium, angling to give renewed loan modification efforts a chance to work. All the major financial news outlets jumped on the story, loudly proclaiming the mortgage giants were doing their part to give the housing market a chance to lick its wounds.

Then last week, without so much as a nod from the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg or CNBC, the foreclosure ban was quietly lifted, right on schedule. A nod to the Washington Independent and Calculated Risk for picking up the story.

This is a not-insignificant development in the round of bottom-calling that’s gripped the world of real-estate punditry and prognostication.

Two datapoints are to blame for this misplaced optimism: A month-over-month increase in February new home sales, and one in existing home sales. In addition to rising transactions in the most depressed markets, many cite the eagerness of big banks like JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Citigroup (C) and Wells Fargo (WFC) to get foreclosed properties off their books a a sign supply is quickly being eaten through.

Meanwhile, reality tells a very different story.

In yesterday’s San Francisco Chronicle, Carolyn Said revealed a phenomenon familiar to real-estate insiders, but little appreciated by the financial world at large: phantom supply. Also known as “shadow inventory,” phantom supply represents homes banks have repossessed, but have yet to sell. In other words, it’s the pipeline of foreclosures still to come on the market.

According to data from RealtyTrac, a foreclosure monitoring service, banks are selling less than half the homes they take back from borrowers. This analysis is echoed by courthouse auction results, which show the vast majority of foreclosures are delayed, rather than being taken back by banks. Even fewer are being sold to third parties, which means asking prices are still too high.

Couple banks’ unwillingness to take back, market and sell properties with Fannie and Freddie’s recent lifting of their foreclosure ban, and improving housing data could prove to be short-lived. As one well-informed California real estate broker and Minyan writes, ”There is a huge logjam [of foreclosures]. With Fannie and Freddie’s recent announcement, the logjam may be coming undone.”

To be sure, being negative on the housing market is beating a very, very dead horse. However, with the spin experts at the National Association of Realtors flooding the market with ads — and with media cries of “stabilization” – prospective homebuyers should be skeptical of anyone who says the best deals will pass them by if they don’t act now.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

With mortgage rates at historic lows, housing prices plummeting, and Washington throwing billions at housing-market recovery efforts, why is it still so damn hard to get a loan?

And while the easy answer is that banks are flat-out broke, the real answer may lie in an esoteric corner of mortgage finance which has all but disappeared: warehouse lending.

In the heyday of the housing boom, small mortgage companies were able to compete with huge financial institutions by tapping so-called warehouse lines of credit. Using cash from their warehouse lender to fund loans at the closing table, as big banks do, these smaller mortgage shops could often provide better service than their bigger competitors, though at the same low rates.

Warehouse lenders, often big banks themselves — remember Washington Mutual and Countrywide (Bank of America (BAC))? — held onto loans until they were sold in the secondary market. Turnaround time could be anywhere from a few days to a few months for larger, more complex transactions.

The benefits to being able to finance one’s own loans rather than just acting as a broker were numerous. Having a warehouse line gave mortgage bankers better control over the closing process, enabling them to beat out big banks in terms of response time and customer service.

By aggregating loans on a warehouse line, bankers could bundle them together and sell packages at a premium, rather than selling them off one by one. And since they could sell loans to any bank on the street, most such originators offered loan programs just as varied as those of even the biggest institutional lenders.

At the height of the boom, it was estimated that almost half of the over $3 trillion in annual loan production was first funded on a warehouse line.

As the mortgage market began to collapse, big purchasers stopped buying, and warehouse lines filled up with unwanted loans. Warehouse lenders began margin-calling clients, cutting off funding capacities, and capturing every penny they could from the few sales that actually went through.

The result, which can be plainly seen on websites like The Mortgage Lender Implode-o-Meter, was that hundreds of small bankers closed up shop.

Now, as banks scramble to handle the flood of requests for refinances at super-low interest rates, the mortgage industry is once again facing a credit crunch. By one estimate there’s only $25 billion in available warehouse lines to support the $2.8 trillion in mortgages expected to be written next year.

Mortgage bankers I speak with say the only thing holding them back from giving out more loans is a lack of warehouse capacity.

According to the Wall Street Journal, one solution being floated by the Mortgage Bankers Association (or MBA) is for Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) to provide government-backed warehouse lines to the few intrepid mortgage bankers still eking out a living in this nightmarish market.

The MBA argues that, since big banks like JPMorgan (JPM), Citigroup (C) and Wells Fargo (WFC) don’t need access to warehouse lines, they’re pushing out the smaller guys and stymieing competition. There’s little incentive for a Chase or a Citi to reopen its warehouse lending group, since the move would just allow competitors to grab market share from the very profitable business of originating loans.

While it makes logical sense for regulators to allow Fannie and Freddie to prop up this segment of the market, it may run contrary to other bank-friendly initiatives. Fees generated by writing new mortgages may be the only thing keeping the likes of Bank of America and Citigroup from tapping even more government support to stay afloat.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

This week, 2 data points led optimistic market-watchers to declare the bottom in the housing is nigh: Indeed, one widely read trader-writer proclaimed, “The oversupply of housing that so plagues the market at present will be a figment of our memory a few months hence.”

The first: On Monday, the National Association of Realtors said existing home sales jumped 5.1% in February compared to the previous month, largely due to the high number of foreclosures being dumped onto the market by big banks like JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Bank of America (BAC) and Wells Fargo (WFC).

While indicative of buyers gingerly dipping their toes back into the market, existing home sales are still down 13.4% from a year ago.

The second: On Wednesday, the Commerce Department released data on February new home sales which showed a similar trend: Transactions bounced 4.7% from January, but remain a whopping 41% below sales this time last year. Nevertheless, shares of beleaguered homebuilders like Centex (CTX) and Lennar (LEN) had stellar performances this week, capping a nearly 100% gain since the beginning of the month.

Prices, however, continue to slide for both existing and new homes. And while median (and average, for that matter) price data is skewed to the downside due to the mix of homes sold in a given period — in this case, more cheap houses than expensive ones — property values remain in a decidedly downward trend.

But since transactions typically find a bottom prior to prices, the number of people who believe prices should stabilize in the near future is growing.

Examining the data, unfortunately, tells a different story. Below is a chart produced by my firm, Cirios Real Estate, showing home prices and sales transactions in for the eastern part of the San Francisco Bay Area. The East Bay is a fairly representative sample of California housing markets: A little high-end, a little middle-class and a little low-rent all mixed in.

Click to enlarge

The red line shows average home prices, while the blue line shows sales transactions, as measured by their change from a year ago. Notice how, even as sales have spiked from the previous year, prices continue to plunge.

Two things jump out at me on this graph (aside from the massive increase in transactions and precipitous decline in prices):

First, transactions began to ramp up as prices moved down toward levels where borrowers could get government-backed loans to buy homes. That means Fannie Mae (FNM), Freddie Mac (FRE) and the FHA have financed a whole swath of homes in the past 18 months that are now severely underwater.

Second, transactions bottomed in September 2007, not long after the market peaked. 18 months have passed and prices have dropped more than 50% since that time.

With that in mind, the current “euphoria” over housing data — after a single month-over-month increase in sales, when year-over-year measures remain well behind even last year’s weak totals — seems a bit premature.

This is not to say prices will never stabilize, or that increased sales are a bad thing. In fact, the more sales we have, the quicker price discovery happens and the faster a true bottom can be found. Nor is this some proclamation that this part of California is a perfect proxy for home prices nationwide.

But given the backlog of foreclosed homes sitting on the books of the major American banks, continued price declines across the country and tight mortgage market conditions, calls for the devouring of supply by voracious home buyers causing an imminent housing bottom is downright premature.

To be sure, we may be one step closer to a housing bottom, but that’s one step on a very, very long path.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Despite herculean efforts to stop the foreclosure juggernaut, Americans are still losing their homes at near-record pace.

According to RealtyTrac, a firm that sells default data, foreclosure filings rose in February to nearly 300,000, up 6% from the month before. This figure is the third highest for any month since the housing market turned south in 2005.

As property values fall, more borrowers are finding themselves underwater – owing more on their homes than they’re worth. This, coupled with job losses, means homeowners are missing payments at an alarming pace.

Sky-high foreclosures are even more astounding when myriad loan-modification efforts and short-term foreclosure moratoriums enacted by big lenders like Fannie Mae (FNM), Freddie Mac (FRE), JPMorgan (JPM) and Bank of America (BAC) have been taken into account.

And while President Obama’s hotly debated $275 billion housing-relief package is barely a month old, its becoming clear that no cleverly worded press release or inspiring oratory can reverse the trend that’s firmly in place: Housing supply remains elevated, with buyers sitting on the sidelines awaiting better deals. Prices, as a result, will keep falling for the foreseeable future.

In fact, Rick Sharga, executive vice president at RealtyTrac, told Bloomberg he believes the country’s biggest lenders have yet to list over 700,000 bank-owned homes.

This “phantom supply,” as its known in the real-estate world, paints a bleak picture for the housing market in the near term. Even though strong sales activity in distressed markets is pushing aggregate inventory data back towards historical norms, phantom supply is patiently waiting to punish those bold enough to prematurely call a bottom.

Further, well-to-do areas, formerly immune from home price declines, are starting to follow their more bubbly counterparts over the proverbial cliff. In the San Francisco Bay Area, for example, 15 homes had sold for over $5 million by this time last year. This year: Just one.

Many of the most distressed markets are in their last gap of depreciation. And while material appreciation is simply fantasy, high-end markets will pick up where they left off and keep broad measures of property values under pressure.

But as this dynamic plays out — and the depreciation torch is passed from the “subprime” people to those who are “prime” — opportunities will emerge in markets that stabilize first. Just as housing prices overshot to the upside, they will likewise overshoot to the downside.

The opportunities are currently few and far between. But with each day that passes, the world of possibilities grows, if only ever so slightly.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

There isn’t an economic forecaster or media pundit alive who isn’t angling to be the first to (correctly) call the bottom in housing. Many have tried; they all have failed.

But what happens when one’s right?

At some point in the future, broad home price indicators will cease to slide, then stabilize and even begin to move back up. When, and in what shape that trajectory will be, of course remains a mystery. As I’ve written in the past, the eventual recovery in housing will be a prolonged, localized event. The rising tide will not lift all boats, as the fundamentals of the old cliché “location, location, location” will be truer than ever.

And although predicting the date of this event is a fool’s errand, savvy home buyers will be ready to jump in ahead of those who remain in their shells long after the best bargains are behind them.

Here are 5 simple things you, the future home buyer can do now, without putting your nest egg at risk, to be ready for the coming opportunities in real estate:

1. Have patience.

There will be false bottoms, dead-cat bounces and treacherous pitfalls on the path to a recovery in real estate. Be patient. Don’t believe the hype – a couple months of strong sales numbers don’t foretell and imminent rebound in prices. Let the beginnings of a trend develop before you begin your home search in earnest. Future appreciation will come slowly, as tightened mortgage guidelines and fear of the collapse we’re now experiencing will not be soon forgotten.

2. Find a market, do your homework.

Had your eye on that classic Victorian around the corner from your kids’ future grade school, and hoping the elderly couple living there knock off just in time for you to swoop in at the estate sale? Expand your search.

Pick a couple of areas you could be happy in – look in multiple cities even. By focusing too narrowly on a single street, or even a single neighborhood, you could be missing out on what could be a fantastic opportunity on the other side of town. Don’t compromise, but play with your list of priorities to give yourself the most “exposure” to localized markets that may become increasingly attractive.

Tour the schools, scope the neighbors – hang around on Halloween to see who gets egged. RealtyTrac.com is a great resource for watching foreclosure activity all over the country and in your backyard. Their free site provides a great overview of cities and neighborhoods, but you have to pay for the house-by-house detail. Unfamiliar with an area? Use RealtyTrac to eyeball major neighborhood dividers (railroad tracks, highways, main roads, etc.) and examine foreclosure activity on either side.

3. Find a broker and start a housing “tracker”.

Real estate brokers can be a valuable tool in your home search – use them.

An aside: The commonly used term “realtor” denotes an association with the National Association of Realtors, or NAR, the lobbyists who have been predicting a bottom since the downturn began over 3 years ago. Tread carefully with anyone proudly bearing an NAR pin. Contrary to what many tell you, you don’t need to be a realtor to have access to MLS. But I digress.

Today, with transactions down in all but the most distressed areas, any broker worth his (or her) salt should be out prospecting for future clients, not proclaiming the time to buy is now. Collect referrals, test drive a broker or 2 and find one you’re comfortable with. Your broker should not just understand the local market but be up to speed on the macro-level events affecting the real estate and mortgage markets. Ask him what a CDO (collateralized debt obligation) is – watch for a flinch. For better or for worse, understanding the state of Wall Street is as important these days as understanding the state of your street.

Ask your broker to help you develop a “housing tracker,” a simple tool that allows you to watch homes as they come on the market to see when and for how much they sell. Watching the life cycle of homes in a given market will give you a sense of how desperate sellers are, when asking prices drop and what concessions buyers are able to receive from sellers. As concessions begin to swing in favor of the sellers, the bottom may be nigh.

4. Start saving money.

If there’s one sure bet in the housing market, it’s that mortgage requirements will remain tight for the foreseeable future. Banks — Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC), JP Morgan (JPM) and Wells Fargo (WFC) being the obvious examples — are hoarding cash and reticent to lend even to the most qualified buyers. Unless a loan falls within guidelines set by Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE), rates remain elevated and approvals elusive. This isn’t likely to change any time soon.

Save for a down payment and be able to point to liquid reserves (i.e. money in the bank) during the application process. Think about this as the lender’s cushion should you fall on hard times – and banks will need all the cushion they can get.

5. Think of your home as an investment, not just a place to raise your kids.

This may seem counter-intuitive, since speculation on housing prices played a huge role in creating the recent housing bubble. But speculating and investing are not the same thing.

A home, in addition to being a place to raise kids, is a massive financial obligation. Becoming emotionally attached to a house, rationalizing the financial realities away and hoping paychecks keep coming simply isn’t a viable home-buying strategy. As un-romantic as it may be, treat a home as you would a stock: Examine it, turn it upside down, run the numbers. Love it every day you’re there, but financial responsibility and emotional attachment don’t need to be mutually exclusive.

The time to buy may not be today — and it may not be tomorrow — but we’ll be closer to that day tomorrow than we are today. However, just as prices overshot to the upside, they’ll likely overshoot to the downside – be ready when that day comes.

Preparation, not hoping, will be the key to taking advantage of the opportunities that will present themselves on the other side of this mess.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Many months ago, long before bureaucrats dreamed up their massive, ill-conceived loan-modification programs, the free market found a solution to the mortgage mess.

Specialists in handling distressed debt amassed tens of billions of dollars to buy up bad loans at steep discounts. The offending institutions who had bought the stuff in the first place would be forced to own up to their mistakes, take their lumps and move on. Meanwhile, those deft enough to clean up the problems would reap their just deserts.

Alas, it was not to be.

Sometime around the middle of 2006, some regulator woke from a decade-long slumber and decided to hazard a look at the balance sheets of America’s largest financial institutions. To his horror, just about every bank in the country would be insolvent, given the going prices for delinquent mortgage debt.

He raced off to tell his boss, who alerted his superior, and so on up the chain until then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson got wind of the coming tsunami of losses. Paulson barely flinched, for Wall Street’s top brass was well aware their collective predicament. After all, it was the likes of his former charge, Goldman Sachs (GS), who designed and sold the toxic assets in the first place.

The choice then was simple: Step back and let markets sort out the mess, risking the lives of storied firms like Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC) and JPMorgan Chase (JPM) – or latch onto the absurd notion that these institutions were “too big to fail,” and begin a process whereby the American taxpayer’s hard-earned nest egg would be used to forestall the inevitable day of reckoning.

We now know how that sad story ends.

To prevent the market from clearing these assets at their true value — sometimes just pennies on the dollar — lawmakers, bureaucrats and big bank executives huddled together and devised ingenious schemes like the Super-SIV, HOPE NOW, Project Lifeline, TARP, and other utterly contrived “solutions” that, despite their claims to the contrary, were simply ways to extend the lives of these zombie banks.

Two pieces today, one run by Bloomberg charting the failure of myriad modification programs to address the problem of negative equity, and one in the New York Times documenting the exploits of former Countrywide executives buying distressed debt from the FDIC on the cheap, evidence the abject failure of government efforts to stem the rising tide of foreclosures.

Private investors, the ones best suited to forgiving principal or lowering interest rates to keep a family in their home, were handcuffed by political bumblings. But these programs, by preventing true price discovery in the housing market, have likely achieved their goals of their designers.

Our banking system has buckled, but not broken. The eventually recovery, however, has been pushed well down the line and the cost shoved onto future generations. Those responsible have by in large retained their posts at the institutions deemed “too big to fail,” save a couple token scapegoats tossed to the media wolves.

Meanwhile, the responsible few who did not speculate on their home, did not use credit as a vehicle for illegitimate economic growth and never thought they’d be asked to pick up the tab for those that did, have now been asked to shoulder the burden.

It should come as no surprise that housing prices keep falling — indeed they must in order for true stabilization to occur. But the slow bleed, the persistent drag on the fundamentals of our economy, is doing more damage under the hood than our wise leaders would care to admit.

Still, they insist the more economic control centralized in Washington, the better. After all, the ones that drove us off this cliff certainly should know how to break the fall.