by Calculated Risk on 5/27/2009 08:39:00 AM

Back in 2007, when many lenders were going out of business, the MBA Purchase Index was distorted by the changes in the mortgage industry.

The lenders in the MBA survey accounted for about half the volume of applications during the housing boom, and most of the failed lenders were not included in the survey. So even though the housing market was in free fall in 2007, the surviving lenders actually saw an uptick in applications, distorting the Purchase Index.

At that same time many borrowers started filing multiple applications too, also distorting the survey results.

But it might be worth watching the index again.

The MBA reports that the Purchase Index increased 1.0 percent to 256.6 this week. The four week moving average (removes the weekly noise) increased to 260.2, and is now at the level of the late '90s.

Note: the refinance index declined as mortgage rates increased, but the index is still very high.

Click on graph for larger image in new window.

This graph shows the MBA Purchase Index and four week moving average since 2002.

Although we can't compare directly to earlier periods because of the changes in the index, this shows no pick up in overall sales activity.

by Calculated Risk on 5/27/2009 12:17:00 AM

From the WSJ: Banks Aiming to Play Both Sides of Coin

... Banking trade groups are lobbying the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. for permission to bid on the same assets that the banks would put up for sale as part of the government's Public Private Investment Program.
...
The lobbying push is aimed at the Legacy Loans Program, which will use about half of the government's overall PPIP infusion to facilitate the sale of whole loans such as residential and commercial mortgages.

Federal officials haven't specified whether banks will be allowed to both buy and sell loans ...

Some critics see the proposal as an example of banks trying to profit through financial engineering at taxpayer expense, because the government would subsidize the asset purchases.
...
"The notion of banks doing this is incongruent with the original purpose of the PPIP and wrought with major conflicts," said Thomas Priore, president of ICP Capital, a New York fixed-income investment firm overseeing about $16 billion in assets.

Hopefully the answer will be a resounding "NO". The purpose of PPIP is to remove the toxic legacy assets from the bank's balance sheet, not to allow the banks to game the program at taxpayer expense.

Either a buyer or a seller be - but not both.

by Calculated Risk on 5/26/2009 09:08:00 PM

The lack of move up buyers is starting to get attention ...

From David Streitfeld at the NY Times: Home Prices Decline Again in March

In many urban areas, including those tracked by Case-Shiller, the residential real estate market is essentially cleaved in two. The top half of the market is largely stagnant, with owners unwilling to sell and buyers unable to buy. “Move-up” families seeking another bedroom or a better kitchen are an endangered species.

And from Carolyn Said at the San Francisco Chronicle: Signs of more trouble ahead for housing market

No "move-up" buyers. In a normal real estate market, about 80 percent of buyers are "moving up" or "moving across" - people who sell one home before buying another, said Mark Hanson, principal of Walnut Creek's the Field Check Group, a mortgage consultant. Remaining purchasers are split between first-time buyers and investors.

In today's market, about half of buyers are first-timers and a third are investors, leaving just 15 percent of what he calls "organic" buyers. Those first-timers and investors all troll for bargain-basement foreclosures - leaving few buyers who are interested in the homes being sold by "Ma and Pa Homeowner." That, in turn, leaves Ma and Pa unable to move up to a nicer home. "The organic seller is left out in the cold," he said.

This is going to be a serious problem for the mid-to-high end home sellers. Just wait ...

Note: Carolyn Said lists a number of additional problems ...

by Calculated Risk on 5/26/2009 05:38:00 PM

From the NY Times: Manhattan’s Sublet Office Market Is Bursting (ht Sunil)

In Midtown Manhattan ... 13 percent of ... Class A space — was available in April, up from 7.2 percent a year earlier, according to Colliers ABR, a commercial real estate services company. And sublets now account for some 40 percent of the space available in Midtown, compared with 30 percent of the much smaller total that was available a year ago, the company said.
...
Robert Sammons, the managing director in charge of research at Colliers ABR, said that sublet space in trophy office towers along Madison Avenue and Park Avenue has been leasing for as little as one-third of what that space might have commanded in early 2008, at the height of the roaring market.

“A year and a half ago, this space might have leased for $150 per square foot,” Mr. Sammons said, while he has heard of recent sublets in high-end buildings in this office corridor with annual rents of as little as $40 to $50 per square foot. “This is the most remarkable turnaround in pricing that I’ve ever seen in such a short period of time.”

No wonder S&P is concerned about CMBS.

Note: that $150 sounds high, so maybe it just half off!

by Calculated Risk on 5/26/2009 04:28:00 PM

S&P put out a request for comment today titled: U.S. CMBS Rating Methodology And Assumptions For Conduit/Fusion Pools (ht Will, Jason, all)

It is likely that the proposed changes, which represent a significant change to the criteria for rating high investment-grade classes, will prompt a considerable amount of downgrades in recently issued (2005-2008 vintage) CMBS. Classes up through the most senior tranches of outstanding deals (so-called "A4s," "dupers," or "super-duper seniors") are likely to be affected. Our preliminary findings indicate that approximately 25%, 60%, and 90% of the most senior tranches (by count) within the 2005, 2006, and 2007 vintages, respectively, may be downgraded. We believe these transactions are characterized by increasingly more aggressive underwriting than prior vintages. Furthermore, recent vintage CMBS, particularly those issued since 2006, were originated during a time of peak rents and values, and as such, may be more affected by the proposed rental declines discussed in this RFC. We are currently evaluating the impact of the potential criteria changes on conduit/fusion CMBS transactions from all vintages. Once we evaluate the potential impact on existing ratings, we expect to issue a follow-up publication to this RFC.
emphasis added

From Bloomberg: Top-Graded Commercial Mortgage Debt May Face Cuts

The highest-graded bonds backed by commercial mortgages may be cut by Standard & Poor’s, potentially rendering the securities ineligible for a $1 trillion U.S. program to jumpstart lending.

As much as 90 percent of so-called super senior commercial- mortgage backed bonds sold in 2007 may be affected as the ratings firm changes how it assesses the debt, New York-based S&P said today in a report.

“We believe these transactions are characterized by increasingly more aggressive underwriting than prior vintages,” S&P said. “Furthermore, recent vintage CMBS, particularly those issued since 2006, were originated during a time of peak rents and values,” and may be more affected by falling rents.

This undermines the Fed's efforts to expand the TALF to legacy CMBS. These downgrades would make Super-Senior CMBS ineligible for Legacy TALF funding. Of course the Fed could change the rules ...