Seattle Bubble

News & discussion about real estate & the housing bubble in the Seattle area.

Seattle Bubble - News & discussion about real estate & the housing bubble in the Seattle area.

Entries Tagged as 'OFHEO'

Seattle Delightfully Immune to Housing Downturn

By The Tim on November 30th, 2007 at 8:43 AM · 36 Comments

Another day, another syndicated Associated Press article reprinted in the Seattle Times with an abundant dose of rah-rah local cheerleading awkwardly thrown in by Elizabeth Rhodes (additions in italic): U.S. home prices drop for quarter; not so here.

U.S. home prices marked a quarterly decline for the first time in 13 years in the third quarter, according to government data released Thursday that provide fresh evidence of the housing-market slump.

But Washington cities continued to defy that trend.

U.S. home prices dipped 0.4 percent nationwide in the July-September period, compared with the previous quarter, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) said.

Biting the hand that feeds youBut prices in the Seattle-Bellevue-Everett region rose 1.24 percent, OFHEO found.

“Rising inventories of for-sale properties are clearly having a material impact on home prices,” said Patrick Lawler, the agency’s chief economist.

Washington state, however bucked that trend, with 6.98 percent price growth year over year. That was the fifth-highest in the nation behind leader Utah at 12.89 percent.

In other news, a prominent video game journalist was allegedly fired over a negative review of a game which was highly advertised on his employer’s site, serving as an example for journalists everywhere of what happens when you bite the hand that feeds you.

Now everyone go out and buy a condo. Right now.

(Marcy Gordon / Elizabeth Rhodes, Associated Press / Seattle Times, 11.30.2007)

→ 36 CommentsCategories: News
Tags: , , ,

Washington Real Estate: 40% overvalued?

By deejayoh on November 5th, 2007 at 8:15 PM · 69 Comments

I ran across this very interesting analysis of the California real estate market by Goldman Sachs this weekend (PDF alert!). It is the author’s contention that in the past, changes real estate prices could be explained by two factors: disposable income and interest rates. They then go on to demonstrate, as shown below – how accurate this model was from 1985 to 2003. It’s pretty simple, but it makes a ton of sense – the amount that buyers have available to spend and the amount it costs them to borrow drive prices. And the model explains 82% of variation in home prices as represented by the OFHEO index. Genius!

california.png

Then in 2004, values started to diverge from this long term trend. Here’s how the author explains:

House prices are significantly over-valued in California
Our house price model indicates that Californian homes are 35-40% above the price range implied by current and forecast economic conditions (compared to 13-14% over-valuation nationally). As of August the median house price in California was $589K, but economic conditions support prices between $350-380K; material price declines are likely, in our view. From 1985 to 2003, 82% of quarterly variation in the OFHEO index for Californian home prices could be explained by two factors (state-level disposable income and interest rates); but this relationship broke down in 2004. We believe that sales of “affordability products” (e.g., subprime, option ARMs) – which spiked in 2004 – drove Californian home prices above levels supported by economic conditions; now that the secondary market for these products has evaporated, we expect home prices to return to normalized levels (as prices fall and disposable incomes grow).

While I don’t get paid like a Goldman analyst, I figured that I could probably find the data to replicate their analysis and see what it said about Washington state. I was able to find most of what I needed, with the exception of two things: 1) I could only find annual data for disposable income, and 2) I had to estimate the 2nd quarter disposable income for 2007 (which I did on the basis of the growth in overall personal income growth). Given those two caveats, the results for Washington are remarkably similar to those for California.

washington.png

While we see that the boom started a bit later (2004 results are right on the trend line), in 2005 and beyond the prices have soared far above the long term trend line. And in our case, the relationship between the underlying fundamentals and the changes in house prices appear to be even stronger than the GS California model: they explain 91% of the annual variation in home prices in Washington state.

So what does it tell us? Based on the Goldman Sachs approach – Washington home prices were 35% overvalued versus the long term trend at the end of 2006, and a whopping 44% overvalued at the end of the second quarter in 2007. Interesting stuff. We will see how accurate their forecast is for how things fall out. But one thing it points out for certain – the real estate market in our “special” state doesn’t really seem to be all that different than that of our neighbors to the south.

→ 69 CommentsCategories: Uncategorized
Tags: , ,

Center for Economic Policy Research paper: highlight’s fundamentals (largely ingnored) and the media’s role.

By S-Crow on August 13th, 2007 at 2:12 PM · 23 Comments

Hi Bubbleheads, doom ‘n gloomers and market enthusiasts ….

Good Reading: Via Jessica Swesey at Inman News blog gives us a glimpse into the mechanics of the bubble. She cites a paper released last week by Dean Baker of the Center for Economic & Policy Research asks:(PDF document & very easy reading with excellent analysis)

  • What about the fundamentals that were at odds with forecasts, particularly those economists from NAR (National Assoc. of Realtors), NAHB (National Association of Home Builders) and the MBA (Mortgage Brokers Assoc.)?
  • What role did the media play?
  • Why was it so difficult for many to see that housing prices were spiraling to absurd heights?

“In many cases, the experts worked for organizations that had a direct material interest in sustaining the bubbles. Voices of caution were rarely presented. When it came to some of the most fundamental financial decisions that families face, investing retirement funds and buying a home, the media were badly misinforming the public.”

- Center for Economic & Policy Research, August 2007.

In other news: I’ll be visiting Massachusetts late this week and into next week and will compare and contrast market conditions in New England vs. Washington State. I expect it to be interesting and I’m crossing my fingers I can talk with the CEO of one of the largest investment management companies in New England to discuss the recent liquidity crisis. Wish me luck because it is intimidating talking to someone who manages literally billions.

Your real estate market enthusiast,

“S-Crow” (Tim Kane)

Legacy Escrow Service, Inc.

→ 23 CommentsCategories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,

Prices In Seattle Still Hot, Hot, Hot!

By The Tim on May 9th, 2007 at 2:44 PM · 36 Comments

Check out this delightful piece from today’s Wall Street Journal: Where home prices are hot now

The housing news isn’t all grim. Even as prices sag nationwide, there are several cities in the country where home values are climbing smartly.Portland, Ore., Boise, Idaho, Seattle, Salt Lake City, Houston, Austin, and Charlotte and Raleigh, N.C., are among the cities bucking the national trend. Homes’ appreciation there between the fourth quarters of 2005 and 2006 far exceeded the national average of 5.9%, according to the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.

In some markets, like Boise and Seattle, the appreciation jumped well into the double digits.

Let me stop right there for a moment. The phrase “well into the double digits” didn’t strike me as reflective of reality, so I took a look at the actual OFHEO report (pdf). Sure enough, according to the government, homes in Seattle appreciated 14.5% from Q4 ‘05 to Q4 ‘06. NWMLS stats and the Case-Shiller index both reported lower figures:

Dec. ‘05 – Dec. ‘06
OFHEO HPI: +14.5%
S&P/Case-Shiller HPI: +12.1%
NWMLS Median (Res, King Co.): +12.0%

I think the difference lies in the following (emphasis mine):

OFHEO calculates appreciation based on repeat sales or refinancings of the same single-family properties.

Including refinancings may have worked in the past, but for whatever reason, it is now apparently skewing the numbers a bit higher than they are in reality. With that in mind, let’s take a look at some of the other claims made in the article…

There’s no single secret of these cities’ apparent success, but many of them missed the housing boom of the past five years. From 2001 to 2005, annual appreciation in these cities was between 2% and 5%, far slower than the 7% to 12% national average, according to the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.

Between 2% and 5% from ‘01 to ‘05? Really? No, not really:

Quarter: OFHEO, Case-Shiller, NWMLS
Q4 ‘05: +17.2%, +18.5%, +17.3%
Q4 ‘04: +10.1%, +11.4%, +9.9%
Q4 ‘03: +5.3%, +7.1%, +11.3%
Q4 ‘02: +4.5%, +4.1%, +3.3%
Q4 ‘01: +5.6%, +4.5%, +5.6%

Looks like we got a late start, with only slight price increases in ‘01 and ‘02 but from ‘03 on, it was off to the races.

Now, their economies are strong…

Good thing our local economy is completely immune to any potential slowdown in the national economy, right?

…and housing prices are still perceived as affordable, luring buyers into the market.

Now it’s just getting ludicrous. No one but an ex-Californian perceives homes in Seattle to be “affordable.”

The growth of Portland, Salt Lake City, Boise and Seattle can be attributed in part to an influx of former Californians and people opting out of slumping Las Vegas or Phoenix.

Ah, well there you go.

While some worry that a new group of cities could face a boom-and-bust cycle, local real-estate agents and economists predict stable growth for the near future.

In other news, local burger franchise owners and beef producers predict stable growth for the near future in their own industry, as well.

Lest you still come away from the article with a puffed-up opinion of Seattle’s superiority, take a look at the seventeen cities with higher appreciation than Seattle (according to the OFHEO):

  • Bend, OR
  • Wenatchee, WA
  • Provo-Orem, UT
  • Salt Lake City, UT
  • Boise City-Nampa, ID
  • El Paso, TX
  • Flagstaff, AZ
  • Corvallis, OR
  • Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA
  • Longview, WA
  • Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC
  • Wilmington, NC
  • Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL
  • Ogden-Clearfield, UT
  • Salem, OR
  • Tacoma, WA
  • Mobile, AL

I guess the Salt Lake City area is even more specialer than the Puget Sound.

(Dean Treftz, Wall Street Journal, 05.09.2007)

→ 36 CommentsCategories: Uncategorized
Tags: ,