april to may change

12 down 8 up (also both composites down)

http://www2.standardandpoors.com/spf/pdf/index/SA_CSHomePrice_History_072820.xls

NV-Las Vegas -3.08%
AZ-Phoenix -1.73%
FL-Miami -1.12%
OR-Portland -0.88%
CA-Los Angeles -0.87%
WA-Seattle -0.82%
MI-Detroit -0.54%
FL-Tampa -0.49%
GA-Atlanta -0.40%
CA-San Diego -0.27%
Composite-10 -0.21%
Composite-20 -0.16%
NC-Charlotte -0.11%
NY-New York -0.08%
CO-Denver 0.31%
MA-Boston 0.34%
MN-Minneapolis 0.38%
IL-Chicago 0.52%
DC-Washington 0.67%
CA-San Francisco 0.69%
TX-Dallas 1.13%
OH-Cleveland 2.78%

Nearly 863 houses and condos were lost to foreclosure in the three-county Seattle region, up nearly 37 percent from May and up 119 percent from a year ago.

I think as we enter winter we may see foreclosure repossessions actually being higher than sales on a monthly basis.

http://www2.standardandpoors.com/spf/pdf/index/SA_CSHomePrice_History_072820.xls

But those numbers you posted do show how nominal the movement had been the past couple of months. As I mentioned above, the move for May was the equivalent of about $1,000 in the King County median.

date C.S. Index, Seattle
5/31/2009 148.69
4/30/2009 149.92
3/31/2009 150.84
2/28/2009 154.51
1/31/2009 156.45
12/31/2008 161.11
11/30/2008 166.10
10/31/2008 169.12
9/30/2008 170.96
8/31/2008 173.21
7/31/2008 174.88
6/30/2008 176.95
5/31/2008 178.38
4/30/2008 180.24
3/31/2008 180.39
2/29/2008 182.60
1/31/2008 183.99

Home foreclosure rate jumps in June

“There are a half million people who will lose their homes in California when all is said and done,” he said. β€œIt’s a question of ‘when,’ not ‘if.’”

“Home-loan delinquencies sped up in June for several loan categories, Standard & Poor’s said Tuesday, showing that the rate of customers falling behind has yet to plateau overall.”

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200907281610dowjonesdjonline000625&title=update-us-home-loan-delinquencies-pick-up-in-june—sp

“In my opinion this will be another year where people look back and ask, β€œwhat was I thinking.”

Further proof that context is important. Just because it’s a third off doesn’t make it a deal.

I know that you put that in there as a standard disclaimer… but I couldn’t help but think that this is hardly entertaining for most people in the business right now. :)

Let’s say that a person buys a million dollar house in March that has all the bells and whistles, then sells the house they moved out of in June for $525K.

Those two sales have an effect on the data, but the buyer us just trading up. The buyer got a better deal on the million dollar home and sold at what was this years top of the market.

When I went back and looked at the prices that people paid I thought that the majority of the pricing was high. Some one else may look at a house in Ballard that was asking $750K and selling for $500K as a bargain.

In my opinion this will be another year where people look back and ask, “what was I thinking.”

The median is so noisy as a measure that IMO it is not terribly useful for looking at MoM trends

Have you tried comparing 3 month moving averages to the C-S? That might reduce the “noise.”

Kary, you drag us into the conversation every month. If this were the “Case-Shiller only, all the time” blog, then you would have a point. But we’re not looking only at Case-Shiller, we’re looking at the NWMLS data as well. So I don’t understand why you drag out the “it’s two months old and tells us the same thing as the NWMLS” stuff every single month.

True, but my point is the comments everyone made about the data, that aren’t related to some other city, were probably made about 50 days before when the NWMLS released it’s data. The insights about trends really are nothing new.

Now Aubrey did manage to change it up a bit with the break of record declines, although he may have gotten that from Case-Shiller’s own press release.

The best case I can make that these data don’t exclude the possibility of a further significant drop is to compare the April to May 2008 price changes in several other cities with how much they’ve lost in the last year. Here is that list (from the seasonally adjusted data):

CITY / APR08 to MAY08 % change / APR08 to MAY09 % change

Atlanta / -0.1% / -15.1%
Chicago / -0.9% / -18.3%
Boston / -0.2% / -7.4%
Minneapolis / -0.1% / -21.8%
Charlotte / 0.0% / -10.0%
NYC / -0.3% / -12.5%
Portland / -0.5% / -16.8%

So, even taking seasonality into account, at least some cities that barely budged between April and May of 2008 have nevertheless underdone very significant double-digit annual drops. The data certainly does not give us any confidence to believe we’re out of the woods.

Ya gotta squint a bit, but I think I can see it. Or maybe it’s the heat… ;-)

fine, agreed

I would say that it is bordering on premature to say “Spring Home Price Bounce Erased in May” since the data doesn’t even encompass all of the spring data.

RE: The Tim @ 37 –

Your headline could have just as easily read “Case-Shiller: Spring Home Price Bounce Erased in May, but will probably rebound in June” since we already know this from NWMLS.

Maybe it will, maybe it won’t. As I pointed out a few weeks ago, there was a rather large jump in the share of monthly sales in the highest-priced region (Eastside) and a matching dip in the share of monthly sales in the lowest-priced region (South King) between May and June, which was quite likely the cause of a large part of the $20k spike in the median.

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/3672/comparo.png

Also why I would not suggest changing the headline as suggested above!

Your headline could have just as easily read “Case-Shiller: Spring Home Price Bounce Erased in May, but will probably rebound in June” since we already know this from NWMLS.

The best thing I get out of Case-Shiller is insight into how other markets are trending, which with my short term view from a thousand feet are trending up.

RE: patient @ 26 – The reason I repeatedly point out how closely C-S and the NWMLS median track each other is because of the claims of some that the median doesn’t mean much. If it doesn’t mean much, then neither does C-S because they’re highly correlated.

It depends on the comparison you make. If you are comparing YoY stats, then CS and KC SFH median are highly correlated (86%). But if you look at MoM performance there is almost no correlation between the two time series ( only 11%).

The median is so noisy as a measure that IMO it is not terribly useful for looking at MoM trends

And as of today it’s only 30 day old news. This is May performance, and we only have the median up through June. And as compared to median it actually gives a useful read on a monthly basis so IMO it is worth watching.

Kary number one says past info is worthless because it is old.

Nope, I’m saying you have blinders on, and don’t even realize it.

On the second one I’m just saying there’s a time-lag in closing. Typically about 45 days from the time they find a property and come to terms.

I just re-read Slaughterhouse Five, and those of you making something of this remind me of the human on the rail car who has always been encased in a metal shield that only allows them to see what’s passing by at the moment, and thinks that’s all there is, because that’s all they’ve ever known. In this case it’s more like someone who only looks at the rear view mirror all their life, but whatever.

Kary number one says past info is worthless because it is old.

By Kary L. Krismer @ 19:

There would be a lag on interest rates affecting things. It’s not like people can see interest rates are low and then buy the next day.

Kary number two says current conditions are results of past info because the housing market moves slowly.

Next month will have the combined punch of March rolling out and June rolling in.

And at least in King County, March was very low and June much higher. About 8.5% higher. The three month moving average for King was about 2.8% higher in June than May.

“Every month from February 2008 through April 2009, annual declines set a record for Standard & Poor’s S&P/Case-Shiller Seattle home price index, which goes back to the start of 1990. May’s numbers, released Tuesday, show the price of a typical house in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties down 16.6 percent from May 2008, smaller than April’s 16.8 percent annual decline.”

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/408521_housing28.html

This is pretty bad news for people who believed in or hoped for a bottom.
April c/s is a moving avg. of Feb-March-April. It saw a slight uptick from Jan-Feb-March indicating barely higher prices in March compared to Jan ( no big surprise here ) . Now, a downtick in May ( March-April-May) indicates that May sees lower prices than March which definately is not a sign of strength. I think jon made a comment at April’s c/s that once we switch out March from the mix we will see much stronger c/s numbers. It sounded very possible but now when it didn’t happen things look very bleak for bottom callers.

It is easy to forget that even though it is almost August, we are now discussing the May CSI data. That means March has not rolled out yet, because the latest CSI is the average of March-April-May. So this says that May prices were about the same as in February. Next month will have the combined punch of March rolling out and June rolling in.

As far as strength, I meant simply an end to the deflationary expectations for housing, because that will cause people who are now fearful of buying to be more comfortable and re-enter the market.

Second, it maybe has something to do with the difference between needing to use the information and not needing to. Those who need to use the information will use the information that’s available first. That doesn’t explain, however, the great surprise those who use the later information show when the later information shows up and tells us what we already knew.

Seattle is one of the few cities that had a price decline from April to May. Most of the cities tracked showed price increases and prices increased for the composite as a whole. Phoenix, LA, Vegas, Miami, and Tampa are the other cities that had monthly price declines.

I think there are steep price declines in Seattle’s future.

Are you saying Seattle is special?

The latest case-shiller numbers are quite good — better than expected.

“Robert Shiller, the Yale University economist who helped create the Case-Shiller indexes, said he was surprised by the month-on-month gains in May.

The “change in momentum here is very significant,” he said. Last month, Mr. Shiller was forecasting sustained home-price declines well into the next few years. That forecast now looked less plausible, he said.
” — http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124878477560186517.html

Wait and see… Or continue to live the fantasy.

Pink ponies for all, and for all a sweet life!

Once again C-S doesn’t really mean much, other than to confirm the NWMLS numbers that we already knew.

RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 19 –
The CS numbers were “basically flat” from March to June of last year as well. In retrospect, how well would that have been a predicator of a bottom in the market? We’re down 17% since then.

“Basically flat” in the spring is a sign of bad things to come, not a indication of a bottom.

Actually, I’ve been making an argument (that you’d presumably agree with) that pointing to the increase in the NWMLS numbers last year as a reason not to get too excited about the increases this year. Short periods of time don’t mean much. That’s why I keep saying you need to get two years out before you know there’s been a bottom.

But clearly the C-S numbers from last year were not predictive at all that we’d have a major economic crisis in September. ;-)

In this case it’s more like someone who only looks at the rear view mirror all their life, but whatever.

If that were the case I would have been calling for continued 20-30% year-over-year price gains in 2005.

But just looking at the month to month absolute changes in C-S from October (post Paulson announcement), clearly the changes have been moderating, and that is something the bottom callers could point to.

Here are the approximate changes since October:

Oct Down 2.4
Nov Down 4
Dec Down 6
Jan Down 5.8
Feb Down 2
Mar Down 3.1
Apr Up .35
Jun Down .4

The fact is that the change that we’re discussing is microscopic. If you applied the same change to the NWMLS median it would be about $1,000. The median often jumps around more than that on a typical day. The change is mere noise. I don’t think you can make much of it one way or another, but again to do so on the down side you have to totally ignore what we already know about June.

I just re-read Slaughterhouse Five, and those of you making something of this remind me of the human on the rail car who has always been encased in a metal shield that only allows them to see what’s passing by at the moment, and thinks that’s all there is, because that’s all they’ve ever known. In this case it’s more like someone who only looks at the rear view mirror all their life, but whatever.

“Basically flat” in the spring is a sign of bad things to come, not a indication of a bottom.

Also, you have to ignore the fact that C-S has been basically flat the past three months reported. Ignoring the seasonality factor the one thing that makes such an observation worthless, that would be a sign bottom callers would point to.

Fixed that for you.

Here’s the March to May percentage change for each year since the inception of the Case-Shiller index for Seattle:

1990 | 7.27%
1991 | 2.42%
1992 | 2.10%
1993 | -0.07%
1994 | 2.39%
1995 | 0.62%
1996 | 1.42%
1997 | 3.73%
1998 | 2.75%
1999 | 2.94%
2000 | 2.48%
2001 | 2.19%
2002 | 1.28%
2003 | 1.87%
2004 | 3.02%
2005 | 3.67%
2006 | 3.17%
2007 | 2.27%
2008 | 0.21%
2009 | -0.05%
Average: +2.29%

If “basically flat” is a sign of a bottom when only three of the past 19 years have turned in a gain of less than 1% during the same time period… Well that’s just such complete nonsense that attempting to argue with it would apparently be worthless.

This data is from when interest rates hit their lowest too.

Assuming that’s the case, that might explain why June was higher. There would be a lag on interest rates affecting things. It’s not like people can see interest rates are low and then buy the next day.

This is pretty bad news for people who believed in or hoped for a bottom.
April c/s is a moving avg. of Feb-March-April. It saw a slight uptick from Jan-Feb-March indicating barely higher prices in March compared to Jan ( no big surprise here ) . Now, a downtick in May ( March-April-May) indicates that May sees lower prices than March which definately is not a sign of strength. I think jon made a comment at April’s c/s that once we switch out March from the mix we will see much stronger c/s numbers. It sounded very possible but now when it didn’t happen things look very bleak for bottom callers.

Only if you totally ignore what you already know–that prices were up significantly in June. Also, you have to ignore the fact that C-S has been basically flat the past three months reported. Ignoring the seasonality factor, that would be a sign bottom callers would point to. Simply put, the movement in the C-S has been so slight it’s hard to make anything of it one way or another.

It looks like July will fall back a bit for the NWMLS, both in price and volume, but we’ll see.

I think jon made a comment at April’s c/s that once we switch out March from the mix we will see much stronger c/s numbers. It sounded very possible but now when it didn’t happen things look very bleak for bottom callers.

Indeed. I’ll actually be posting an update later this week to the bottom-calling series, since we now have Case-Shiller data beyond the first two forecasted bottoms in February and April.

I notices the price rebound news for some cities in the news too; due to summer/spring bounce: or perhaps cashing in on the $8000 tax credit before its gone?

Here’s another possible fraud reason the banks can still keep loaning money at low interest rates to prop the prices artificially up, from Roubini’s blog in part:

“…It just occurred to me today how the central banks could have orchestrated events to achieve the impossible: issuing up to $5 trillion in government debt worldwide without crashing equity markets or spiking interest rates. It’s really quite beautiful – and oh so familiar to those schooled in the glorious history of bank fraud.

Daisy chain.

The last great daisy chain of bank frauds was the Texas, Florida and California thrift frauds of the 1980s. 25 years of deregulation, securitisation and derivatives, and another Bush in the White House, meant the same could be done on a much bigger, global scale second time around, and now it may be taken to the logical extreme of the central banks themselves.

In the 1980s the corrupt networks of thrift executives created fraudulent “deposits” for each other on their books to enable fraudulent loans to their associates in real estate development. Cooking the books with each other’s help meant that they could fool investors into thinking the thrifts were safe places to put their cash. Corrupt regulators and politicians ensured there were never any inconvenient investigations or prosecutions. Rising real estate prices – from fraudulent valuations – kept the scam going long after it should have collapsed, as more investors could be suckered in. The money streamed from the phoney developers to drugs, arms for Saddam, the Contras and the usual offshore tax havens – all with plausible deniability and untraceable.

I’ve been wondering lately how the US Treasury and UK Treasury could have sold record amounts of debt without interest rates rising or equities falling. Yesterday I read that SAMA had confirmed that it bought a lot less Treasuries in the first half of 2009, but that doesn’t square with the auction results of fully subscribed auctions.

An orchestrated daisy chain would explain it – central banks in the chain fraudulently create “assets” and “liabilities” for each other without any money moving between them – only money from the suckers outside the network who really buy the auctions. Any real money invested is streamed to the bankster collaborators in the asset markets where it will conveniently disappear into untraceable “losses” when the time is right.

This fits with the changes to the “indirect” category reporting for Treasury auctions. Now it is impossible to distinguish legitimate foreign central bank buying from fraudulent “wash” purchases from connected daisy chain central banks or Fed-funded “indirect” purchases by crony banksters.

No auction among daisy chain banks will be allowed to fail, no interest rates will be allowed to rise, as phony assets and liabilities can be recorded just as in the thrift daisy chains to keep the scam going. The banksters get the cash, just like Texas developers, and wash it in ever rising asset markets, just like Texas real estate, skimming off a heavy slice with each iteration. The markets have to keep rising, otherwise the suckers wouldn’t keep putting real money into the rigged game.

Organised crime at its best – premeditated, organised, continuous, and facilitated by relationships between its perpetrators and public officials.

Daisy chain.

And yes, I have a big smile on my face from being “first” above.

Hide replies Reply to this comment By London Banker on 2009-07-27 08:47:40…”

The rest of the URL:

http://www.rgemonitor.com/roubini-monitor/257362/my_interview_with_ferguson_and_zuckerman_on_fareed_zakarias_gps_program_on_cnn#readcomments

If you want to call some of the big banks doing this kind of thing organised crime, a good example comes to mind: B of A, handing out mass bad loans to undocumented immigrants.

Almost as great as the Alabama video Deejayoh……..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnB5vqObkLw