|
Ben
Bernanke, Part II
Brian
Trumbore
President/Editor, StocksandNews.com
We continue with our discussion of
Ben Bernanke's tenure at the Federal Reserve and the
housing crisis, utilizing the archives from my "Week
in Review" columns. Frankly, I'm taking a bow, as
you'll see from my own comments in covering the topic,
plus StocksandNews is above all the rest in incorporating
the thoughts of the leading experts in the industry.
WIR
2/17/07
I
kept up on events as much as I could the past week,
but aside from the ongoing real estate story it doesn't
appear there is too much to discuss. Fed Chairman
Ben Bernanke gave his semi- annual state of the economy
message to both Houses of Congress and he basically
told everyone what we already knew, at least readers
of this space. Inflation is not an issue, for crying
out loud.
Of
course he threw in the obligatory verbiage that if
the economy heats up too much the Fed may have to
raise rates anew, but this is all garbage. Sorry to
repeat myself, but, again, Bernanke, who has obviously
done a masterful job thus far, knows it would be financial
suicide to hike rates, though that doesn't mean he's
about to lower them either. Of course where a surprise
rate hike would hurt the most is in the housing sector.
Lord knows there is enough suffering already, and
now actual employment in the residential construction
market is about to take a dive as builders wrap up
their last projects that they insisted on completing.
They'll then begin to take a collective time out,
hand out pink slips, and let demand catch up again
with supply. Just how long this takes is anyone's
guess.
But
with this week's release of the worst housing starts
figure in 10 years for the month of January, down
14% and far worse than expected, I'm taking a bow
for being bang on throughout housing's slide from
Mt. Olympus, even if I was a few years early.
For
every indicator that flashes a signal we may have
hit a bottom, another one or two come around to slap
us in the face in the form of a further reality check.
And aside from the abysmal number on starts, the subprime
market continues to take it on the chin as one lender
after another goes under.
Even
in the six-county Southern California market, where
median prices have remained surprisingly stable, foreclosure
rates are soaring, as Josh P.'s latest data confirmed
is the case in once white-hot San Diego County.
Here's
what it comes down to. You have a large player like
KB Home issue a statement that it was "encouraged"
its cancellation rate of 48% in the fourth quarter
was an improvement from the 53% logged in the third.
Now that is truly pitiful and not even worthy of being
called 'spin.'
Even
the National Association of Realtors, whose own chief
economist just last year wrote a rosy book on investing
in the real estate boom, had to admit sales were down
31% in Florida for the fourth quarter and off 27%
in Arizona. I keep thinking back to what I saw in
the Tucson market last October during a trip there;
mile after mile of empty developments, as I reported
to you at the time. Scary stuff if you're on the wrong
side of that trade.
WIR
3/3/07
So
let's look at our three-legged stool for clues as
to where we're headed; housing, the consumer, and
capital spending.
The
housing sector is nowhere near a bottom, a fact reinforced
by sliding equity markets that further impact confidence.
As the subprime market (those who had no right buying
in the first place) craters, lending standards are
tightening quickly. The Federal Reserve warned banks
on Friday to be more transparent when it came to disclosing
risks and earlier mortgage giant Freddie Mac said
it would no longer buy the riskiest types of subprime
paper, with CEO Richard Syron adding:
"The
steps we are taking today will provide more protection
to consumers and enhance the level of underwriting
standards in the market" and, as of September, Freddie
would stop buying "no income, no assets" mortgages
in which borrowers are not asked to provide financial
information; "stated income, stated assets" products,
for which borrowers' incomes are not easily verifiable;
and certain kinds of mortgages offered with teaser
rates."
"It's
a tough situation," said Syron. "There's a very delicate
and difficult balance between getting as many people
into houses as you can, and at the same time not putting
them into houses they can't keep unless home prices
are appreciating or interest rates are very low."
[Financial Times, USA Today]
Countrywide
Financial, the largest U.S. home mortgage lender,
said late payments on its loans were rising rapidly,
to 2.9% of prime home-equity loans, up from 1.6% a
year earlier; while 19% of its subprime mortgage loans
were now late, up from 15.2% at the end of 2005. Not
a disaster for Countrywide, yet, but you can't ignore
trends that are only going to worsen.
And
then you throw in the derivatives angle. Years ago,
Lewis Ranieri basically created the mortgage market.
[He is best known to others for his central role in
the 1989 book "Liar's Poker."] Ranieri was the man
who came up with the idea of pooling mortgages, then
slicing and dicing them to be resold as bonds to pension
funds and institutional investors. It was the start
of the derivatives market, in many respects.
So
last weekend Ranieri told the Wall Street Journal's
James Hagerty that the business has changed so much
that if the housing market goes down much further,
no one will know where all the bodies are buried,
which has been my point on derivatives for years,
frankly. Ranieri said "I don't know how to understand
the ripple effects through the system today." If Lew
Ranieri doesn't, do you think some fresh-faced trader
does? I think not; let alone the fact there are two
sides to every trade. Actually, in the derivatives
market that's part of the problem. Often there isn't
another side; it just floats out there in the Kuiper
belt.
As
talk increased this week of problems in housing and
derivatives thereof, I couldn't help but think of
how we are also seeing a worsening of the haves vs.
the have nots. Many of the have nots are seeing their
dreams go up in flames, while the haves, battered,
are nonetheless still in fine mettle, overall. If
a rising tide lifts all boats, some higher than others,
a receding one carries out the dead, while leaving
the rich still sipping pina coladas from their decks
on shore?.
But
if you needed to be cheered up this week, take heart
from Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke who said the markets
were working well and the economy was just Jim Dandy.
He
certainly wasn't looking at the revision on fourth
quarter GDP, up only 2.2% from the first estimate
of 3.5%. This is the progression in growth for the
four quarters of 2006; 5.6% (Q1), 2.6%, 2.0%, 2.2%.
If we have now settled into a 2%-3% pace, then, yes,
that's happyland. Slow growth, low inflation, low
interest rates. Even with decelerating earnings, any
damage would be limited.
But
2%-3% is not what we'll see. Try 1%-2%, possibly worse.
It will sure begin to feel like a recession.
[Ed.
note?first quarter GDP would come in at 0.6%, but
then reaccelerate to 3.8% in the second.]
WIR
3/10/07
So
what should you care about these days? Let me put
it to you this way. You know how Lucy Van Pelt told
Charlie Brown the only thing she wanted at Christmas
was real estate? She was last seen huddling with her
real estate expert and accountant on how much further
she needed to slash the sales price of the 600 condos
she was intending to flip in order to stay solvent.
It was a fun ride for Lucy on the way up?.but there
is hell to pay on the way down, and lord knows Lucy
isn't handling it well. [As for Charlie Brown he's
chuckling over Lucy's problems, after all she did
to him. The kid who once gave a home to a scrawny
little tree put the standard 20% down on his first
and only home years ago and is sleeping soundly today.
Yes, good things do happen to good people.]
You
see, today's crisis in the subprime market continues.
In fact it's almost comical how some just a few weeks
ago, let alone months, were trying to convince you
the bottom was in. As John Wayne would say, gaze fixed
on an unknowing target, "Well hold on there, pilgrim.
You see a bottom?" "Ah, no, Mr. Wayne. Sorry I brought
it up."
You
know you have problems when the nation's second-largest
subprime mortgage lender, New Century Financial, may
have filed for bankruptcy by the time you read this.
Or when every developer, like Hovnanian, or a bank
such as HSBC, continues to speak of serious issues
in the housing sector, overall, and not just subprime.
In
fact as you've undoubtedly heard, but which I would
be remiss in not mentioning at least for the archives,
Donald Tomnitz, CEO of builder D.R. Horton, told investors
in New York that "2007 is going to suck, all 12 months
of the calendar year."
3/17/07
In
their earnings reports this week, Goldman Sachs, Bear
Stearns and Lehman all said their exposure to the
subprime mortgage market was small and any interest
they maintained well hedged. Good for them. But some
of their own analysts aren't as sanguine when it comes
to the rest of those holding the paper.
Jan
Hatzius, chief U.S. economist for Goldman, said in
a research note, "Mortgage credit-quality problems
go well beyond the subprime sector. The underlying
problem is not the subprime market per se, but the
reset of large quantities of adjustable-rate debt
- some of which is classified as subprime some as
prime - to higher interest rates in an environment
of flat or falling house prices in most of the United
States." Hatzius adds that there is still a large
segment of prime buyers with ARMs who are about to
experience their own reset issues. [Wall Street Journal]
Adam
Topalian, fixed income strategist at Lehman, told
a CFA Society of Seattle dinner that the greatest
risk facing investors is for the troubled subprime
lending sector to lead to a spiral of falling home
prices and further defaults. While Topalian added
there isn't enough evidence this is happening yet,
the risk of a broader market impact is "very real."
$900
billion in adjustable-rate mortgages is resetting
over the next two years, he allowed. "Any kind of
sharp pullback in lending could lead to a vicious
spiral of continued housing price depreciation and
defaults. This does have the potential to feed on
itself and it's a real concern." [Reuters]
Merrill
Lynch chief economist David Rosenberg, who has been
warning of housing's difficulties for quite some time,
says tighter credit standards finally being implemented
by mortgage lenders could lead to a 10% decline in
home prices. He worries about the "knock-on effect"
in sectors such as appliances and furniture; which
of course can severely impact employment.
A
former Federal Reserve chairman (I said last week
I wouldn't use his name anymore) weighed in on the
side of Rosenberg this week, even as current chairman
Ben Bernanke last insisted there will be no "spillover"
from rising delinquencies. But the Fed meets this
week and we await the language in the statement accompanying
the certain move to continue to hold the line on rates.
Speaking
of delinquency rates, this week it was announced that
a staggering 13% of all subprime mortgage payments
were late, while the rate of foreclosure for all classes
of mortgages hit an all-time high.
Credit
Suisse analyst Ivy Zelman, another who has been bang
on in calling the problems in real estate, sees another
issue; a 20% drop in new-home sales. Her argument
is if you can't sell your entry level home, you can't
move up. Inventory levels will thus continue to soar.
As
for the homebuilders themselves, last week it was
D.R. Horton CEO Donald Tomnitz who told investors
"2007 is going to suck, all 12 months of the calendar
year." This week Toll Brothers CEO Robert Toll said
the start of the spring selling season was "pretty
much a bust," adding "When will the market rebound?
Who knows? The Shadow knows. I have no idea. I would've
thought that it would've rebounded by now and I would've
been dead wrong, and I was." [Bloomberg News]
Actually,
with their recent choice of words, some of these CEOs
are beginning to lose it. And you're still not hearing
enough about their tremendous exposure to land that
they remain on the hook for (and/or their banks).
All
of the above spells ongoing troubles for the collateralized
mortgage sector, or CDOs; the packaging of which hit
$918 billion last year. According to JP Morgan, $173
billion of this paper was backed mainly by subprime
mortgage bonds and related derivatives. Well, remember
the old mantra around here. Many of those responsible
for the coming debacle just aren't that smart.
In
the end, though, it's the little guy who is still
the biggest loser. As Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo
told CNBC, his company being a diversified operation
and not subprime heavy, the "concern is for the country."
The "rush to judgment in cutting off programs first-time
buyers have used" could be crippling. The have nots
lose another round to the haves, and the full carnage
has yet to be felt during this developing credit crunch.
3/24/07
The
Housing Sector
Two
weeks ago, March 10, I wrote that I was incredulous
that some actually thought what former Federal Reserve
Chairman Alan Greenspan had to say at a speaking engagement
or two moved the markets.
"The
man is irrelevant?and I see zero reason to bring him
up in the future, unless it's about his earlier forecasts
as chairman which fell woefully short of being accurate."
Well,
Randall Forsyth had a terrific column in the March
19 edition of Barron's and on the issue of Greenspan,
Forsyth writes:
"In
a speech to the Fed's Community Affairs Research conference
in April 2005, The Maestro sang the praises of 'technological
advances' that 'have resulted in increased efficiency
and scale within the financial services industry.
Innovation has brought about a multitude of new products,
such as subprime loans,' he continued, adding that
technology had allowed lenders to size up the creditworthiness
of borrowers more cheaply.
"
'Where once more-marginal applicants would simply
have been denied credit, lenders are now able to quite
efficiently judge the risk posed by individual applicants
and to price that risk appropriately. These improvements
have led to rapid growth in subprime mortgage lending;
indeed, today, subprime mortgages account for roughly
10% of the number of all mortgages outstanding, up
from just 1% or 2% in the early 1990s.'
Forsyth:
"Since
then, subprime mortgages have burgeoned to about twice
that level, to around 20% of the total, according
to most estimates. And the results are becoming apparent?.
"Yet
among the avalanche of coverage of the subprime debacle,
the deterioration of adjustable-rate mortgages - even
of prime quality - is still more dramatic. But three
years ago, Greenspan was touting ARMs for Everyman.
'American consumers might benefit if lenders provided
greater mortgage product alternatives to the traditional
fixed-rate mortgage,' he told the Credit Union National
Association in 2004. 'To the degree that households
are driven by fears of payment shocks, but are willing
to manage their own interest-rate risks, the traditional
fixed-rate mortgage may be an expensive method of
financing a home.'
"As
Greenspan spoke, the Fed's key interest-rate target,
the overnight federal-funds rate, stood at a mere
1%. Just over four months later, however, the Fed
began tightening its monetary policy, eventually raising
the funds rate 17 times, to the current 5.25% level.
"The
impact on those who took Mr. G's advice has been dramatic.
The latest data from the Mortgage Bankers Association
show a sharp jump in delinquencies and foreclosures
in the fourth quarter. People with ARMs with low 'teaser
rates' at the beginning are getting into trouble once
they adjust up to prevailing market rates?.
"But
this latest fiasco goes beyond mortgages. 'Subprime
is today's dot-com - the pin that pricks a much larger
bubble,' writes Stephen Roach, Morgan Stanley's chief
economist?'the actors have changed, but the plot is
strikingly similar,' he continues. 'This time, it's
the U.S. housing bubble that has burst, and the immediate
repercussions have been concentrated in a relatively
small segment of the market - subprime mortgage debt.
"
'As was the case seven years ago, I suspect a powerful
dynamic has been set in motion by a small mispriced
portion of a major asset class that will have surprisingly
broad macro consequences for the U.S. economy as a
whole,' Roach concludes."
James
Grant, in an op-ed for the Washington Post:
"The
top man at the Treasury Department urged calm last
week in the face of losses on Wall Street brought
on by fears of defaults on the riskier kinds of mortgages.
Really, he said, the damage is easily containable.
"But of all people, Henry M. Paulson Jr., former head
of the New York investment banking house of Goldman
Sachs, should know just how reasonable this near-panic
was. Easy credit has long been the American financial
lifeblood. Anything resembling stringency on the part
of our formerly carefree lenders would tend to set
the economy on its ear.
"Easy
credit financed the bull market in houses and the
flood of home refinancings. Americans felt richer
and spent as though they were. It stands to reason
that the withdrawal of this manna will lead them to
spend less - with substantial collateral damage to
the housing-centered U.S. consumer economy, and, perhaps,
well beyond. Our captains of industry owe as much
to their lenders' leniency as does any subprime, or
high-risk, home buyer. They, too, have been able to
raise money on terms unimaginable only four years
ago.
"All
this sounds scary enough, and it is. But financial
history offers some solace. The U.S. economy excels
in the art of facing up to error - of identifying
it, reappraising it and then repricing it. Loans,
especially the risky kind, have been mispriced. They
were, and are, too cheap. They will be repriced -
as they were, for example, in the aftermath of the
junk-bond and real estate troubles of the late 1980s
and early 1990s. Borrowing costs will go up, and the
value of the things that debt financed will tend to
go down. In an attempt to ease the pain, the Federal
Reserve will print more money?.
"But
the ripples from this cold bath go even further than
the $8 trillion mortgage market. The truth is that
the no-down-payment, no-documentation, interest-only
mortgage loan has its counterparts in most branches
of American finance.
"The
date of the last ceremonial burning of an American
mortgage is lost in the mists of time. Outright, unencumbered
ownership of a house, a building or a corporation
is no longer an ideal that most Americans embrace.
The new goal is to borrow as much as possible, as
soon as possible, against any asset that could be
financed. And these days - thanks to Wall Street's
ingenuity - all manner of assets pass as good collateral
for a loan?.
"Nowadays,
loans rarely rest on the balance sheets of the lenders
who make them. Rather, they are scooped up and fashioned
into securities - 'asset-backed securities.' And these
are gathered up and refashioned into still other securities
- 'collateralized debt obligations.' And the CDOs,
many of them dizzyingly complex, are sold to investors
the world over. No bank regulator watches over these
financial sausage-making operations. As the Federal
Reserve has receded in importance in this worldwide
financial system of ours, so has the U.S. banking
system. A parallel kind of banking system has come
into existence. Wall Street calls it the 'CDO machine.'
?.
"In
a speech two years ago, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben
Bernanke pointed to a curious coincidence: Growth
in U.S. mortgage debt tracks closely with the growth
in the trade deficit - that is, the difference between
what we consume and what we produce. 'Over the past
two decades,' he said, 'major innovations in the United
States have improved the availability and lowered
the costs of home mortgages. These developments likely
spurred homeowners to tap increasing home equity to
finance consumer expenditures beyond home purchase.
In contrast, mortgage debt is not so readily available
among our trading partners as a vehicle to finance
consumption expenditures.'
"If
I were the head of state of one of our trading partners,
I would be asking myself if these 'major innovations'
were as wholesome as they used to seem. Deciding not,
I would command my minister of investments to unload
U.S. mortgage holdings. And I would imagine that I
would not be the only head of state to whom this thought
had occurred."
You'd
be hard-pressed to find someone who has written more
than I have on the real estate bubble, and I'm continually
amazed by those who offer we've already hit a bottom.
Robert Froehlich of DWS Scudder went so far as to
say the subprime mortgage crisis "will be the most
hyped disaster that never occurred since Y2K." Right,
Bob, but then you have mutual funds to hump so I'd
expect nothing less. How the heck can you compare
Y2K, which indeed proved to be nothing (though I was
taken in by it myself) to a real estate debacle that
has caused real pain to a broad class of Americans;
those who can least afford it? It's that kind of irresponsible
shillery (my word of the week) that gives Wall Street
a bad name.
Every
few weeks I have to repeat myself on a key point.
When we do hit bottom in the real estate market, it
is not just going to bounce right back up. Think of
the plight of the Kansas City Royals baseball team.
They last won 90 games in 1989 (92-70). They then
stair-stepped down the next four seasons before flat-
lining, with the worst period being the last five-year
stretch, 2002-2006. Or, since Detroit's housing market
is suffering as bad as any these days, think the Detroit
Lions. We will bottom and stay there.
But
we aren't close to that bottom yet. I also have a
confession to make. Until recently I didn't know what
the definition of an "Alt-A" mortgage was, the class
between subprime and prime. You know, for Alt-A, I'm
told, lenders are finally demanding 5% down! This
isn't even subprime, and yet you can still get one
without little documentation and basically no money
down. So doesn't that make Alt-A really the same as
subprime?
Andy
Laperriere of ISI Group in an op-ed for the Wall Street
Journal.
"According
to Credit Suisse, the number of no or low documentation
loans - so-called 'liar loans' - increased to 49%
last year from 18% of purchase loans in 2001, a nearly
three-fold increase. The investment bank also found
that borrowers put up less than a 5% down payment
in 46% of all home purchases last year."
That's
staggering. Laperriere:
"The
Alt-A market?.has increased sevenfold since 2001 and
accounted for 20% of home-purchase loans last year.
Fully 81% of Alt-A loans in '06 were no or low documentation
loans?. Why have borrowers employed this kind of risky
financing? Because it was the only way many of them
could afford a home in some of the hottest housing
markets, where prices more than doubled in five years."
There
are some idiots out there, snug in their castles,
who go on the air and say 'It serves them right.'
That's simply cruel and my heart goes out to those
who made some very bad mistakes in judgment, or were
flat out swindled.
I
also am not one of those free marketeers who say the
government needs to stay out of this mess. Wrong!
Think back to the Tech Bubble. What was one thing
Alan Greenspan could have done that would have without
a doubt lessened the pain? Raise the margin rate.
What one thing could the Fed, the FDIC, or the Comptroller
of the Currency have done during the real estate boom?
Insist that mortgage documents be written in plain
English and spell out the risks.
You
think that is hard to do? Ask my old mutual fund buddies.
Years ago, when I was still in the business and before
the market-timing scandals that hit the industry,
we were forced to come up with simpler prospectuses
that spelled out as plainly as possible the impact
of expenses on shareholders. Regulators also insisted
that past performance be laid out for all periods
(and adjusted for applicable sales charges), not just
the hottest one.
So
it can be done. It doesn't mean the government is
interfering in the ability of Mr. and Mrs. Jones to
buy their first home, but at least some of the homebuyers
may have realized that when their mortgage resets,
the payment goes up $500. It's been shown time and
time again that in many instances this wasn't explained
to them. No doubt, there is the principle of individual
responsibility, but there is also accountability.
I
don't feel in the least bit sorry for speculators
who were flipping Miami or Las Vegas condos and finally
got burned. They should have known the risks and if
they didn't, tough.
But
it makes me sick how some of the 'little people,'
and I use the term affectionately, were burned when
all they thought they were doing was pursuing the
American dream.
So,
no, we haven't hit bottom and while I'm at it, let
me tell you what is really on my mind, something that
Barron's Randall Forsyth and countless others in the
financial press want to write but can't because they
have editors standing behind them. Alan Greenspan
was not a great Fed chairman. He was a fraud, as history
is increasingly revealing.
WIR
5/19/07
Believe
it or not, each week I try to avoid bringing up real
estate, but for the archives I do have to note that
housing starts for April were up 2.5%, a mild positive,
but building permits (future starts) were down 9%,
the worst such figure in 17 years. The median price
across the country was also down, 1.8%, in the Jan.-Mar.
period, the third such quarterly decline in a row.
And an index of homebuilder confidence hit a new low.
But
fear not, for Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke
said "the financial system will absorb the losses
from the subprime mortgage problems without serious
problems."
Of
course just a little while ago he was acting as if
subprime would create zero problems, but who am I
to argue with a man whose intelligence dwarfs all
mortals'?
WIR
6/9/07
It
was all about the 10-year Treasury as it rocketed
through 5% and finished the week at 5.11%, the highest
level in about a year. In a speech, Federal Reserve
Chairman Ben Bernanke reiterated comments from the
Fed's minutes of its May 9 meeting, admitting that
housing will be a "drag on economic growth for somewhat
longer than previously expected," while inflation
was "somewhat elevated." Overall, though, Bernanke
is optimistic the economy will pick itself up off
the floor after a lousy first quarter and those looking
for a rate cut will be deeply disappointed.
Last
week we talked about how the second quarter could
be solid for the simple reason that store shelves
needed to be replenished after inventories were run
down in the first. Certainly we've seen a rebound
in recent manufacturing data. The consensus among
economists is that growth in the second quarter will
be 2.6% after just a 0.6% rise in the Jan.-Mar. period.
On Friday, Morgan Stanley took it a step further and
said growth would accelerate to 4.1%. In either case,
if this kind of growth were to carry through into
the second half of the year, there is obviously no
way the Fed is lowering rates. But, again, if they
were to raise instead, as I have consistently said
all year, it would be the death-knell for the U.S.
economy. As it is, the bond market is already doing
the Fed's work in taking rates higher without Bernanke's
crew having to worry about acting itself and this
alone can help dampen inflation.
Globally,
rates continue higher across the board with the European
Central Bank hiking its key lending rate to 4% this
week, the highest since Aug. 2001, while New Zealand
captured some attention when its banking officials
raised their benchmark rate to 8%, second highest
in the developed world next to Iceland. Where this
comes into play is in perpetuating the yen carry trade;
borrowing yen at 0.5% and buying 8% Kiwi paper, for
example.
But
what do I think is really going to happen? With the
action in the bond pits this week, we are one step
closer to flipping? rolling over. Maybe the inventory
rebound leads to a solid current quarter, but the
developing headwinds are too strong to ignore.
For
starters, real estate. I love the comment of Richmond
Fed President Jeffrey Lacker, who reiterated his view
that the economy will rebound as housing recovers.
"The
housing market is likely to find a bottom some time
this year and no longer be a drag on top-line growth."
Were
this true, though, it doesn't mean we're back off
to the races, as I've pounded home all year. Some
analysts conveniently ignore the fact that when the
average American's #1 asset is no longer rising, an
asset that was the source of cash in the form of home
equity loans and cash-outs, it doesn't make you want
to go out and buy a new car.
And,
anyway, I don't know how Mr. Lacker et al can claim
we're going to find a bottom just yet when housing
inventories continue to rise, long after they were
to have leveled off. In most parts of the country
inventories are up 30% year over year. Even the National
Association of Realtors, the industry's mouthpiece,
has lowered its forecast on home sales and prices
for the balance of 2007.
WIR
7/21/07
Wall
Street?.Housing Debacle, Part XXVI
There
are basically two schools of thought out there. The
first says that the problems in the domestic housing
sector will be contained and that the U.S. consumer
will keep spending, even as their number one asset
shrivels up, while the second says that housing and
all the pieces of paper attached to it is far from
bottoming and that eventually this will impact the
health of the overall economy.
It's
pretty funny how Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke,
a bright guy with a lot of brainpower, just a few
weeks ago was saying that the problems in housing
would indeed be contained. But this week in his semi-annual
congressional testimony he was far less sanguine,
saying that housing "could get worse before it gets
better," and that conditions in the subprime mortgage
market "have deteriorated significantly." As the line
from Meatloaf's "Paradise By The Dashboard Light"
goes, "What's it gonna be, boy?"
Well,
you certainly know where I've stood on this topic,
consistency being one of my virtues, I'd like to think,
so I'll let others do the talking first today; such
as Freddie Mac CEO Richard Syron, who knows a thing
or two about mortgages. In predicting the subprime
crisis would deepen, Syron said in an interview with
Bloomberg that "Unfortunately I don't think we have
hit bottom. I think things are going to get worse,"
though Syron adds the crisis doesn't threaten "the
stability of our financial system."
But
noted fixed income manager Robert Rodriguez, who has
been all over the mortgage debacle, told U.S. News
& World Report, "We're set up for a storm that could
be much larger than Long-Term Capital," referring
to 1998's meltdown. "The elements are all there. The
tinder is there. The question is: What will be the
match to set it off?"
Of
course the answer is contained in the subprime market
itself and the $1.8 trillion in paper that was issued,
including collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs.
Fed Chairman Bernanke, when asked by a senator to
quantify the potential losses, said $50-$100 billion.
But he doesn't have a clue. In fact I can guarantee
all he was doing was parroting a story he saw in Bloomberg
or the Wall Street Journal. I've passed along that
number, too, as well as another one that said the
losses would be up to $200 billion. Of course I don't
have a clue either what the actual number will be;
except for the archives I'll say it exceeds $200 billion
when all is said and written off.
We
already know of $1.5 billion being wiped out in the
two Bear Stearns hedge funds specializing in this
crapola (the actual total is far higher, though as
yet incalculable), as Archie Bunker would have opined,
and the contagion has spread to London and Sydney
as hedge funds are beginning to report large losses
there due to investments in our mortgage paper.
But
Bear Stearns added that part of the problem in their
offerings was losses in AA and AAA securities, as
well. In other words, yes, the problem is far from
contained and we're beginning to see emerging signs
of a true credit crunch, as the likes of Washington
Mutual, for example, slam the door on some of their
more generous, and egregious, lending practices.
And
it's not just mortgages. Josh P. passed along a Bloomberg
story I had missed that sums up the issue in the loan
market, as in:
"Goldman
Sachs, JP Morgan Chase and the rest of Wall Street
are stuck with at least $11 billion of loans and bonds
they can't readily sell.
"The
banks have had to dig into their own pockets to finance
parts of at least five leveraged buyouts over the
past month because of the worst bear market in high-yield
debt in more than two years.?
"Bankers,
who just a few months ago boasted that demand for
high-yield assets was so great that they would have
no problem raising debt for a $100 billion LBO, are
now paying for their overconfidence. The cost of tying
up their own capital may curb earnings and stem the
flood of LBOs, which generated a record $8.4 billion
in fees during the first half of 2007, according to
Brad Hintz, the former chief financial officer at
New York-based Lehman Brothers?.
"
'The private equity firms, being very tough negotiators,
are unlikely to let the banks off the hook,' said
Martin Fridson," a leading expert in the high-yield
sector.
The
bottom line is there are a ton of highly-leveraged
deals out there that have yet to close and are relying
on investors of all shapes and sizes to step up. Will
they?
But
back to real estate, the CEO of KB Home said on Thursday
that he didn't expect the U.S. home market to bottom
until the end of next year, 2008, and that he didn't
envision any real price increases until well into
2009. You can take this to the bank. If Jeffrey Mezger
is correct, as I believe he is, we have serious problems.
It's comments like Mezger's that reaffirm my outlook
of last December that it's not 2007 when the market
and the economy crater, but rather '08.
WIR
8/4/07
I'm
starting to write this segment around 3:00 p.m. on
Friday and I just watched Jim Cramer on CNBC almost
explode through the television set as he went ballistic
over how bad it is out there on Wall Street and how
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke needs to cut
interest rates immediately.
Here's
what I know. We had another week where the economic
releases were less than expected, including on both
manufacturing and consumer spending, we had another
punk jobs report, and the rate on home mortgages,
even for 'prime' candidates, is suddenly skyrocketing,
irrespective of where the benchmark 10-year Treasury
sits.
On
top of this there was a slew of bad news on the mortgage
originators' front, as well as with the investment
banks and anything housing related, and as reflected
in July auto sales, the consumer appears to finally
be pulling in their horns in earnest.
Plus
there were further stories from overseas, such as
with IKB, a German bank with a heavy exposure to subprime
bonds, or Australian giant Macquarie, the world's
largest private manager of infrastructure (ironically)
that is also in the investment game. Two of its funds
lost 25% in value the past month.
The
great trader/strategist Jim Rogers said this week
that the U.S. subprime market rout has "a long way
to go. This was one of the biggest bubbles we've ever
had in credit." I didn't see his comments for Bloomberg
include the fact it is a global phenomenon.
Economist
Larry Kudlow, the unofficial Mr. Sunshine for the
White House, said "the rest of the world is rising"
so stop worrying. Economist David Hale wrote in an
op-ed for the Wall Street Journal that we were witnessing
the "best economy ever." It's all about globalization
and corporations maxing out productivity, he wrote.
No
doubt hundreds of millions worldwide have emerged
from poverty and moved into the middle class?a great
thing.
But
I also recall similar statements were made before
the Asian currency crisis of 1997, after which many
an Indonesian went back to eating insects.
Bond
expert Tony Crescenzi gave a number of reasons why
today's credit crisis is nothing to be concerned about.
Crescenzi noted record international reserves, record
corporate cash levels, improved balance sheets at
even the state level, and a strong banking system.
But
that has little to do with Mr. and Mrs. Jones being
able to meet their mortgage payment. And I repeat,
the real estate bubble is global. Talk to any Londoner,
for example. It's about "affordability," and a growing
gap between rich and poor.
It's
the same story in China and Brazil, Russia and Spain.
The rich are thriving, while the little guy is struggling
mightily to just make ends meet. Before this cycle
plays out you will see massive protests outside the
United States, of this I'm sure.
And
the pretty budget or balance sheet picture that Tony
Crescenzi and others paint will lose its luster as
tax revenues and profits dry up. But that's been my
2008 scenario, though it's kind of looking like I
may need to move up the timeframe a bit.
Where
the likes of Kudlow and Hale are correct, however,
is in their dire warnings on protectionism, which
is where Congress is headed.
Lastly,
as if there wasn't already enough bad news, throw
in the fact the U.S. stock market is rigged, though
on this I need to be very clear.
Over
time, the average investor doesn't have to worry.
Good companies will perform like good companies, while
bad will perform like bad. But the intra-day activity
in many stocks, as well as the broader action at the
close of trading, the last half hour, was clearly
rigged this past week. The hedge funds and investment
banks controlled the activity, totally irrespective
of fundamentals, especially Wednesday and Thursday.
WIR
9/22/07
Wall
Street...Give me 50!
The
Federal Reserve met this week and in a surprise move
lowered the key short-term funds rate 50 basis points,
not the expected 25, to 4.75 percent after holding
the line at 5.25 percent since June 2006. In its accompanying
statement the Fed offered:
"Economic
growth was moderate during the first half of the year,
but the tightening of credit conditions has the potential
to intensify the housing correction and to restrain
economic growth more generally. Today's action is
intended to help forestall some of the adverse effects
on the broader economy that might otherwise arise
from the disruptions in financial markets and to promote
moderate growth over time."
Wall
Street took the rate cut bait and ran with it, back
into its den, or up in some secure branch, and devoured
it like a mongoose that's just strangled a cobra.
But wanting more, frothing at the mouth, and finding
no road kill, traders began to do the next best thing;
bid up stocks for a second straight week.
It
didn't matter that the U.S. dollar was hitting mega-year
or all- time lows against other currencies, such as
the euro and the Canadian dollar, the latter now at
parity for the first time since the 1970s.
And
it didn't matter that gold, normally a harbinger of
all things bad when it takes flight, soared to its
highest levels since January 1980, or that crude oil
hit a high of its own, touching $84 before finishing
the week near $82?still it's first weekly close at
this level.
It
didn't matter that the crisis in commercial paper,
worldwide, is still a factor, even if a diminished
one for the time being, or that the leveraged buyout
premium that had helped propel stocks the first half
of the year was officially kaput.
And
it certainly didn't matter that everyone's number
one asset, outside of those on the Forbes 400 list
of billionaires, their home, is no longer rising 8%
a year; more likely than not it's falling.
Yet
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke told a congressional committee
on Thursday that "Global financial losses have far
exceeded even the most pessimistic estimates" for
the mortgage sector.
Speak
for yourself, Bennie Boy. Some of us were bang on,
especially compared to your prior musings.
If
nothing else this column is consistent. It's gets
a little repetitive, for sure, and I'm early with
many of my bigger themes, such as the Nasdaq Bubble,
concerns over Russia's political situation, or real
estate. But it's been about a key word regarding this
last one, "affordability," around the world.
[Ed.
I then cited past comments.]
WIR
5/29/04
"Yes,
since World War II, nationwide, housing values haven't
declined in any single year, but tell that to California
homeowners during the period 1989-1997, or Houston
residents during the oil bust of the 1980s. No doubt,
many parts of the country have more diversified economies
than they once did, as in the above two cases, but
the watchword is 'affordability' and in large swaths
of America, folks are either stretching beyond their
means or simply can't make the move.
"Housing
was the prime source of the wealth effect that helped
carry the economy through the post-2000 bubble period,
as people saw their #1 asset appreciate at 8%+ a year
and then borrowed against it. And heck, I know I'm
a broken record on this topic and have zero credibility
by now, but the big gains are in and now we wait to
see if the next move is down or sideways. Either way,
many won't feel as wealthy a few years hence, if not
sooner, unless there is a spectacular rally on Wall
Street, and consumer spending is bound to suffer."
WIR
4/2/05
"Remember,
the bubble isn't just a U.S. story, it's global; whether
we're talking Britain, Spain, Australia, or China."
WIR
5/27/06
"Ask
anyone who's been to Europe in the past few years,
chatting up a few blokes in a pub, and you'll find
everyone is buying a second home in Spain, to cite
but one prominent example; thanks in no small part
to the prevalence of low-cost airlines that make it
far easier to jet away for the weekend. But these
same communities are going to slide like the rest."
WIR
5/12/07
"So
pray the rest of the globe doesn't catch the cold
we appear to be developing, though of course it will
because it is suffering from the same chief symptom
we have?a real estate bubble. Ours has popped. The
rest are in the early stages of doing so; whether
it's Britain, Ireland, out of control Moscow, Spain,
or Australasia. And you can take that to the bank."
This
week, for the first time that I can remember (at least
it's not in any of his 'monthly outlooks' this year),
PIMCO's Bill Gross specifically mentioned real estate
bubbles in "Ireland, the UK, and Spain." And in my
daily reading I saw these headlines in just the past
few days.
From
the Sydney Morning Herald:
"Housing
affordability has worsened (in Australia) as the pace
of house price growth has outstripped increases in
disposable income, said the report by Fujitsu and
JP Morgan?.
"
'It is really quite difficult now for many people
to afford to buy property. There is huge demand, huge
drive to own your own property,' said the consultant
at Fujitsu."
The
New Zealand Herald:
"A
bank survey of residential real estate sector sentiment
has presented a pessimistic picture, with many professionals
saying the market has turned down fast?.
"A
valuer [appraiser] said some prices were 'easing backwards'
and valuation work was very slow?
"Property
investors said the market had turned and the peak
had been reached."
Call
this the popping of the "Lord of the Rings" bubble,
in actuality.
London
Times
"House
prices across much of Western Europe have stalled
or begun to fall as spiraling borrowing costs and
fears of over- supply take their toll on markets from
Ireland to Spain, an industry survey has revealed.
"The
German housing market has been hit hardest. A glut
of property for sale in former East Germany dragged
down price inflation countrywide, leaving the national
average down 6.9 percent over the 12 months to the
end of June."
Ben
Bernanke may not really know what the heck is going
on, but while the focus this week was to some extent
on the dollar, gold and oil, when it comes to the
Big Picture, globally, it's still about real estate
by my way of thinking, linked with massive debt loads.
The
thing is, as I've noted on countless occasions, the
picture is unfolding at various rates of speed, as
proved yet again in the above anecdotes. I said long
ago there would be no recession in 2007, but I've
been focusing on 2008 because I felt by then it would
all come to a head when the decline in a chief asset's
value finally begins to impact consumer spending?and
thus earnings. Frankly, some of the other items we've
been concerning ourselves with the past two months
are noise.
None
of this means stocks can't still rally. I've almost
given up trying to predict the market. I also said
the past few weeks the Federal Reserve was irrelevant,
outside of a few days' response to a change in interest
rate policy, and I stand by that. The Fed, as Bernanke
and former chairman Alan Greenspan both said this
week, can't be totally blamed for the housing bubble.
But accomplices? Yes.
For
now, I agree with Yale Professor Robert Shiller's
statement to a Senate committee.
"The
decline in house prices stands to create future dislocations,
like the credit crisis we have just seen."
---
Wall
Street History returns next week.
Brian
Trumbore
BUYandHOLD
does not recommend any securities. The securities
mentioned above are being used for illustrative purposes
only and should not be regarded as an offer to sell
or as a solicitation of an offer to buy.
|