by Anonymous on 10/29/2007 09:56:00 AM

Lenders continue diligently to seek out new customers eager to trade home equity for entrance into the "upscale subprime" class.

From the LA Times:

Sunwest's president and co-owner, Jason Hayes Evans, didn't respond to requests to discuss his company's mailings. But a salesman at Sunwest, describing it as staffed by capable mortgage veterans who survived the industry shakeout, said everyone at the brokerage took pains to carefully explain to borrowers the risks as well as the benefits of option ARMs.

The salesman, who asked not to be identified because he wasn't authorized to speak for Sunwest, said the company provided option-ARM loans from several companies, including Wachovia, that keep the loans as investments rather than sell them.

Sunwest considered disclosing more about pay-option perils in its two-page mailings, the salesman said. "But that would have taken up too much space. You'd need four pages to cover everything." The firm instead relies on explanations by its employees, he said.

The option ARM that allows payments based on a 1% interest rate is intended only for people who have at least 30% home equity, have lived in the home for three years or more and have solidly prime credit scores of 700 and up, the Sunwest salesman said.

Good candidates for such loans, he added, include salespeople living on commissions that vary month to month or people nearing retirement who have more than 50% equity in their homes and know for sure that they will sell their properties when they downsize in a few years.

Of course, the salesman acknowledged, many borrowers at all income levels are attracted to the option ARM because they have let their personal spending get so out of control that the low payment is the only one they can afford.

"Newport Beach, where everyone is driving a Mercedes and the homes start at $1 million, is like an old western movie set," he said, describing the finances of many wealthy homeowners as precarious. "It's all just a front, with stilts holding it up."

This kind of reminds me of my favorite cheesecake recipe, which calls for two and a half pounds of cream cheese, six large eggs, and a half a pint of heavy cream, among other things. It's intended for people in perfect health and at an ideal body weight whose ancestors lived to be 100 and who only eat raw green veggies. Somehow it gets consumed down to the last crumb anyway.

by Anonymous on 10/29/2007 09:24:00 AM

Remember all those witty ursine puns in July when the news was all Bear Stearns all the time? Sure you do.

Since it's likely to be all Merrill all day for the foreseeable future, we're going to have to have a talk with the headline writers at Bloomberg.

"O'Neal Ouster Makes Mess of Maternal Merrill Lynch."

"Maternal Merrill"? Is this the New Formality, or did someone's online translator have a bit of difficulty with "Mother Merrill"?

Let it be . . .

by Calculated Risk on 10/28/2007 03:23:00 PM

From the WSJ: Merrill Chief O'Neal Decides To Leave Firm, Source Says

Merrill Lynch & Co. Chief Executive Stan O'Neal has decided to leave the firm, according to a person familiar with the matter.

An announcement on his departure could come today or Monday morning ...

There is an old saying in the corporate world: "New broom sweeps clean". With a new CEO, I'd expect more write-downs and a reduction in headcount.

by Calculated Risk on 10/28/2007 11:00:00 AM

From Gretchen Morgenson at the NY Times: Guesstimates Won’t Cut It Anymore

THE props holding up the values of risky mortgage securities finally started to give way last week. And that means the $30 billion in losses and write-downs taken by big brokerage firms in the third quarter are not likely to be the last.
...
First to face the music was Merrill Lynch, which stunned investors Wednesday with an $8.4 billion write-down, $7.9 billion of which was for mortgage-related assets. The write-down was $3.4 billion more than it had warned investors about just three weeks before.

Until that moment, investors had been willing to trust companies claiming to have limited exposure to the credit mess.
...
The executives on Merrill’s dismal conference call conceded that even after they decided to value their C.D.O. holdings more conservatively — resulting in losses — much of their methodology was based on “quantitative evaluation.” ...

ANALYSTS quickly responded by forecasting an additional $4 billion in write-downs on Merrill’s portfolio. ...

We’ll definitely see a lot more write-downs,” said Josh Rosner, an expert on asset-backed securities at Graham-Fisher, ... “I think that the exposures that we are seeing and the announcement out of Merrill are the leading edge, not the end.”
emphasis added

No worries. It's all contained discounted.

by Calculated Risk on 10/27/2007 03:44:00 PM

From Fleck at MSN: Tech stocks' pain proves they're vulnerable, too. Here is an excerpt on housing and credit:

... the Lord of the Dark Matter, whose postings on the mortgage-paper unwind will be familiar to my regular readers [says] [t]he problems continue to worsen ... But people keep giving him the same silly line, that it's all been discounted, which is a variation of "it's contained." He says that there are more dark-matter downgrades to come and that some of the insurers of credit may find themselves in serious trouble as credits go bad. He points out that if the insurers get into trouble, then all of the credits they insure obviously will worsen.

For those who don't know, there is an absolute mountain of paper that trades where it does only because it has insurance. Sort of like the paper that traded where it did because it was supposedly AAA, and that rating turned out to be worthless. Any AAA, AA, A or whatever rating that's based on insurance may not be worth the paper it's written on.

Barf went the Merrill bull

It's a lesson that hit Merrill Lynch hard. Witness the subprime fallout behind the company's sobering third-quarter earnings report. Merrill wrote down about $5.8 billion of $14.2 billion in what's known as super-senior subprime assets -- the stuff that's supposedly above AAA and bulletproof.

When asked on the conference call if everything was marked where it could be sold, there was no answer, leaving folks with the idea that there was plenty of stuff still marked to model. And you can be sure that if Merrill Lynch has this problem of potentially mismarked paper, so do all of the brokers and probably some of the big banks. This is a huge deal. (Memo to nonbelievers: The problem is spreading, it has not been discounted and it has not been contained.)

Discounted, the new Contained.

by Anonymous on 10/26/2007 06:00:00 PM

The Joint Economic Committee report discussed in the Times yesterday, "The Subprime Lending Crisis: The Economic Impact on Wealth, Property Values and Tax Revenues," is now available online.

There's lots in here to discuss, but I just noticed one little snippet while I was skimming that answers a question I had a while back. In 2006, 29% of all mortgage loans were originated through mortgage brokers, but 63% of all subprime mortgages were originated through brokers (page 17).

Otherwise, enjoy the graphs, charts, and maps.

by Calculated Risk on 10/26/2007 05:23:00 PM

From PMI: David W. Berson Joins PMI as Chief Economist and Strategist (hat tip Lurker).

I wish Dr. Berson well at PMI, but I'm going to miss his publicly available economic analysis at Fannie Mae. Here is his final Fannie Mae piece: Twenty years of economic, housing, and mortgage market analysis.

Friday, October 26, 2007 marks my retirement from Fannie Mae after almost exactly 20 years (I started on Monday, November 2). Much has changed in the economy, housing, and mortgage finance markets over that time -- but there are many similarities as well. In that 1987 period, the stock market had crashed just two weeks before and analysts weren’t sure if the economy would head into a downturn (or worse) as a result (it didn’t). Today, we have the severe housing downturn and a broadening credit crisis. Will this be the precursor of a downturn? Most economists don’t think so, although we are skirting dangerously close to recession (not that the real GDP numbers show it) and economists are notorious for egregiously missing business cycle turning points (both up and down). The high odds of a downturn (even if not over 50 percent) suggest that households, businesses, and governments should start to make contingency plans for such an event. Another interesting similarity between that late-1980s period and today has been the rise of new, aggressive mortgage products. In the earlier period, we saw a rise of low-documentation lending -- starting out with loan-to-value ratios (LTVs) of less than 70 percent, but over time moving to LTVs of over 90 percent. Additionally, the investor share of purchase originations rose sharply. More recently we have had a plethora of low-doc, no-doc, investor, 2/28 subprime, even more investors, and option ARMs -- arguably more aggressive lending than in the late-1980s. Of course, in late 1987 the housing/mortgage market was still ramping-up with these new mortgage products. Today, we are suffering the downside of overexposure to them (making 2007 perhaps more similar to 1990, in that regard). Ultimately, the lending practices of the late 1980s resulted in an extended period of weakness in home sales, house prices, and mortgage market volumes. We may be in year two of a similar five-year downturn today. (Note that not all of these areas fell for five years in the earlier period, nor are they all likely to decline for five years this time -- but some of them may.)
...
And now, in the immortal words of Porky Pig, “that’s all folks!”
emphasis added

Best wishes to David Berson! Thanks for all the great analysis.

by Calculated Risk on 10/26/2007 02:35:00 PM

From DataQuick: Record California Foreclosure Activity

Click on graph for larger image. This graph shows the NODs filed in California since 1988 1992. For 2007, the number is estimated at the total for the first 3 quarters (46,670 in Q1, 53,943 in Q2, and 72,571 in Q3) plus an estimate of Q4 at the same rate as Q3.
ADDED: The second graph shows the NODs normalized by the approximate number of owner occupied units in California. Normalized, 2007 foreclosure activity is 33% higher than '96 (the previous record year), as opposed to 51% higher in nominal numbers. I had to estimate the numbers - if someone has the annual owner occupied numbers for California, please send them to me. Thanks!

Lenders started formal foreclosure proceedings on a record number of California homeowners last quarter, the result of declining home prices, sluggish sales and subprime mortgage distress, a real estate information service reported.

A total of 72,571 Notices of Default (NoDs) were filed during the July-to-September period, up 34.5 percent from 53,943 during the previous quarter, and up 166.6 percent from 27,218 in third-quarter 2006, according to DataQuick Information Systems of La Jolla.

Last quarter's default level passed the previous peak of 61,541 reached in first-quarter 1996. A low of 12,417 was reached in third-quarter 2004. An average of 34,781 NoDs have been filed quarterly since 1992, when DataQuick's NoD statistics begin.

"We know now, in emerging detail, that a lot of these loans shouldn't have been made. The issue is whether the real estate market and the economy will digest these over the next year or two, or if housing market distress will bring the economy to its knees. Right now, most California neighborhoods do not have much of a foreclosure problem. But where there is a problem, it's getting nasty," said Marshall Prentice, DataQuick's president.

Half the state's default activity is concentrated in 293 zip codes, almost all of which are in the Inland Empire and Central Valley. Grouped together, those zip codes saw year-over-year home price increases that reached 34.0 percent in first quarter 2005. Prices peaked in third-quarter 2006 at $399,000. Last quarter's median of $352,250 is 11.7 percent off that peak.
...
Most of the loans that went into default last quarter were originated between July 2005 and September 2006. The median age was 18 months. Loan originations peaked in August 2005. The use of adjustable-rate mortgages for primary purchase home loans peaked at 77.8% in May 2005 and has since fallen.

Because a residence may be financed with multiple loans, last quarter's 72,751 default notices were recorded on 68,746 different residences.

It's hard to imagine, but next year will probably be worse.

by Calculated Risk on 10/26/2007 01:57:00 PM

From the Census Bureau on Residential Vacancies and Homeownership

National vacancy rates in the third quarter 2007 were 9.8 percent for rental housing and 2.7 percent for homeowner housing, the Department of Commerce’s Census Bureau announced today. The Census Bureau said the rental vacancy rate was not statistically different from the third quarter rate last year, or the rate last quarter. For homeowner vacancies, the current rate was higher than a year ago (2.5 percent), but was not statistically different than the rate last quarter (2.6 percent). The homeownership rate at 68.2 percent for the current quarter was lower than the third quarter 2006 rate, but was not statistically different from the rate last quarter.

Click on graph for larger image.

The first graph shows the homeowner vacancy rate since 1956. A normal rate for recent years appears to be about 1.7%. There is some noise in the series, quarter to quarter, but it does appear the vacancy rate has stabilized.

This leaves the homeowner vacancy rate almost 1% above normal, or about 750 thousand excess homes.

The rental vacancy rate has been trending down slightly for almost 3 years (with some noise). This was due to a decline in the total number of rental units in 2004, and more recently due to more households choosing renting over owning.

It's hard to define a "normal" rental vacancy rate based on the historical series, but we can probably expect the rate to trend back towards 8%. This would suggest there are about 600 thousand excess rental units in the U.S. that need to be absorbed.

This suggests there are about 1.35 million excess housing units in the U.S. that need to be worked off over the next few years. These excess units will keep pressure on housing starts for some time.

by Anonymous on 10/26/2007 12:00:00 PM

While we're on the subject of "price discovery," it appears that former Treasury Secretary Snow isn't impressed by Sivvie Mac ("The Knife"):

WASHINGTON, Oct 26 (Reuters) - Former U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow on Friday said a proposed multibillion-dollar fund assembled by top banks to prevent a fire sale of shaky debts may cause problems by delaying inevitable losses.

"We've got all this paper out in the system, and my inclination is to say, let's accelerate the price discovery process on this paper," Snow said on CNBC Television.

"We know that when you prop things up artificially -- Japan -- we know when you prop things up artificially -- the (savings and loans) in the United States -- you get bigger adverse consequences," said Snow, the immediate predecessor of current Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

Snow, now chairman of private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, said he has not discussed the fund with Paulson.

Is anyone else enjoying the spectacle of Snow sounding smarter than Paulson?

by Calculated Risk on 10/26/2007 11:57:00 AM

From Bloomberg: Moody's Cuts Ratings on CDOs Tied to Subprime Bonds (hat tip Robert)

Moody's ... cut the ratings of collateralized debt obligations tied to $33 billion of subprime mortgage securities, a decision that may force owners to mark down the value of their holdings.

Securities from at least 45 CDOs were either cut or put under review, according to news releases sent by the New York- based ratings company.

by Anonymous on 10/26/2007 11:47:00 AM

This is killing me:

PHILADELPHIA (Dow Jones/AP) - Bankrupt lender American Home Mortgage Investment Corp. has sued Lehman Bros., accusing the investment bank of essentially stealing from the company as it struggled to stay on its feet.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Del., accuses Lehman Bros. of hitting American Home with improper margin calls in July and demanding money the company says it did not owe.

When the Melville, N.Y.-based lender couldn't meet Lehman's second margin call, for $7 million, Lehman foreclosed on $84 million worth of subordinated notes issued in American Home's structured-finance operation. . . .

American Home is relying in part on the frozen market for mortgage-industry paper to make its case against Lehman Bros. Without actual trades to show the value of the notes had declined, American Home argues that Lehman Bros. should have obtained an independent valuation before issuing the margin call.

That's an interesting theory of levering up your "assets": if the market says "no bid," you apparently get "no mark" and therefore "no call" and hence "no bankruptcy."

The thing is, in a nutshell, that AHM was using these borrowings to fund new mortgage origination operations. A "frozen market for mortgage-industry paper" means no money to make new loans with (proceeds from sales of commercial paper backed by the warehouse of held-for-sale loans) until you can sell the loans you've already made. But you can't sell the loans you've already made, unless you want to take a nasty hit on them, because nobody's buying decent whole loans in a "frozen market," and there is excellent reason to think AHM's warehouse held a boatload of not exactly decent loans. We know this because AHM was forced to visit the confessional about its massive number of buybacks of loans that didn't make the first three payments sucessfully.

So Lehman wanted out of its exposure to AHM's held for sale pipeline, as far as I can tell, because unlike your usual "pipeline," this one was a pipe to nowhere (kind of like the bridge to nowhere). It sounds like AHM is now saying that Lehman made up some ugly mark to model valuation instead of getting "independent" verification of the fact that there were no bids--or horrible ones--for the AHM loans. I guess the fact that AHM couldn't get 'em sold in the first place, which is the whole point of having a "held for sale pipeline," is insufficient evidence that the stuff was worthless.

I look forward to hearing about Lehman's response to this.

(Many thanks to the indefatiguable Clyde)

by Calculated Risk on 10/26/2007 09:13:00 AM

From MarketWatch: Countrywide reports $1.2 billion loss

... mortgage lender Countrywide Financial Corp. reported Friday its first quarterly loss in 25 years ...

The Company ... said it has also negotiated $18 billion in additional liquidity that it characterized as "highly reliable." Countrywide also said it expects to turn a profit in the fourth quarter and in 2008. ...

Its mortgage-banking business suffered a $1.3 billion loss in the latest quarter.
...
"We view the third quarter of 2007 as an earnings trough, and anticipate that the company will be profitable in the fourth quarter and in 2008," Sambol said.

Countrywide said it took losses and write-downs of about $1 billion on non-agency loans and mortgage-backed securities. Moreover, The company increased its loan-loss provisions on its held-for-investment portfolio to $934 million, up from $293 million in the second quarter.

The lender also raised its estimates of future defaults and charge-offs due to a worsening housing market, higher delinquencies and tighter credit. Countrywide plans to cut between 10,000 and 12,000 workers by the end of the year as a result of plunging origination volume.
...
The company said it expects the housing market to continue to weaken in the near term, and unless interest rates head lower, it sees lower mortgage originations through 2008.

by Calculated Risk on 10/25/2007 08:30:00 PM

From MarketWatch: AIG may take $9.8 bln subprime hit, analyst says

American International Group could take a $9.8 billion hit from its exposure to subprime mortgages, Friedman, Billings, Ramsey analyst Bijan Moazami estimated on Thursday.

The write-downs will be big, but manageable...

This was the big rumor today.

by Anonymous on 10/25/2007 06:15:00 PM

Mr. Lewis is not a happy camper:

CHARLOTTE, N.C. - In addition to scaling back its investment banking operations, Bank of America Corp. is exiting the wholesale mortgage business and eliminating about 700 jobs, bank officials said Thursday.

The nation's second-largest bank will stop offering home mortgages through brokers at the end of the year to focus on direct-to-consumer lending through its banking centers and loan officers. The move also eliminates the jobs in the bank's consumer real estate unit. . . .

The cuts are part of a 3,000-job reduction engineered by Chief Executive Ken Lewis after the nation's second-largest bank reported a huge decline in third-quarter earnings.

"When Ken talks about a top-to-bottom review in five days time, you can't make that happen. These cuts were in the works, and expect more," said Tony Plath, an associate professor of finance at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. "Don't underestimate the depth of Lewis' disappointment in earnings. This guy is pissed." . . .

"Ken says he likes the retail business, he likes getting to know customers, underwriting, and managing his risk," said Plath, the university professor. "He just doesn't like the securitization and servicing sides of the business."

Hey, I can relate, Ken. These days nobody likes being a servicer . . .

by Calculated Risk on 10/25/2007 01:41:00 PM

Update: Dean Baker says maybe up to$8 Trillion. (hat tip Lindsey)

Last week, in the comments, I noted that some economists were predicting financial losses of $100 Billion from the mortgage crisis. I joked that maybe they dropped a zero - and I also noted that that estimate didn't include the $2 Trillion or more that will be lost in U.S. household net worth.

The NY Times had an article this morning that provided new estimates for these losses: Reports Suggest Broader Losses From Mortgages.

Note: Tanta excerpted part of the same NY Times article this morning on Foreclosure Predictions.

The article includes these projections of financial and household losses:

... economists say the troubles in the mortgage market could, all told, cost financial firms and investors up to $400 billion.

That is far more than the roughly $240 billion cost, adjusted for inflation, of the savings and loan crisis of the early 1990s, according to estimates of the combined financial toll of that crisis on both the federal government and private sector. The loss in total real estate wealth is expected to range from $2 trillion to $4 trillion, depending on how far home prices fall, according to several economists.

These unnamed economists didn't add a zero - yet - to the earlier projections, but they are getting closer!

Let's look at these projected U.S. household real estate losses. Currently (end of Q2) U.S. household real estate was valued at $20.997 Trillion (Fed: Flow of Funds report). So a $2 Trillion dollar loss is about a 10% decline in total U.S. household real estate value. A $4 Trillion dollar loss is a 20% decline.

Click on graph for larger image.

This graph shows the real (inflation adjusted using CPI less Shelter) value of U.S. household real estate since 1952. The real value increases because new homes are built each year, older homes are improved, and, in general, the value of land increases (especially in dense areas) faster than the rate of inflation.

Even adjusted for inflation, the value of U.S. household real estate increased sharply in recent years.


The second graph shows the nominal value (not adjusted for inflation) of U.S. household real estate. This is useful because the $2 Trillion to $4 Trillion in potential losses described in the article are nominal values.

Just to put these numbers into perspective, I've plotted the two declines - $2 Trillion and $4 Trillion - assuming the price declines happen between now and the beginning of 2010. Note that this doesn't add in any new homes or home improvement.

A decline of this magnitude in U.S. household real estate value seems very possible.

by Calculated Risk on 10/25/2007 10:40:00 AM

For more graphs, please see my earlier post: September New Home Sales

Let's start with revisions. Last month I wrote:

The new homes sales number today [August] will probably be revised down too. Applying the median cumulative revision (4.8%) during this downtrend suggests a final revised Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate (SAAR) sales number of 757 thousand for August (was reported as 795 thousand SAAR by the Census Bureau). Just something to remember when looking at the data.

Sure enough, sales for August were revised down to 735 thousand. I believe the Census Bureau is doing a good job, but the users of the data need to understand what is happening (during down trends, the Census Bureau overestimates sales).

This makes a mockery of headlines like this from the AP: New Home Sales Rebound in September. Sales did not "rebound", in fact the September report was horrible, and the sales number will almost certainly be revised down.

For an analysis on Census Bureau revisions, see the bottom of this post.

Click on graph for larger image.

This graph shows New Home Sales vs. Recession for the last 35 years. New Home sales were falling prior to every recession, with the exception of the business investment led recession of 2001. This should raise concerns about a possible consumer led recession - possibly starting right now!

The second graph compares annual New Home Sales vs. Not Seasonally Adjusted (NSA) New Home Sales through August.


Typically, for an average year, about 78% of all new home sales happen before the end of September. Therefore the scale on the right is set to 78% of the left scale.

It now looks like New Home sales will be in the low 800s - the lowest level since 1997 (805K in '97). My forecast was for 830 to 850 thousand units in 2007 and that might be a little too high.

by Calculated Risk on 10/25/2007 10:00:00 AM

According to the Census Bureau report, New Home Sales in September were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 770 thousand. Sales for August were revised down to 735 thousand, from 795 thousand. Numbers for June and July were also revised down.


Click on Graph for larger image.
Sales of new one-family houses in September 2007 were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 770,000 ... This is 4.8 percent above the revised August rate of 735,000, but is 23.3 percent below the September 2006 estimate of 1,004,000.


The Not Seasonally Adjusted monthly rate was 60,000 New Homes sold. There were 80,000 New Homes sold in September 2006.

September '07 sales were the lowest September since 1995 (54,000).


The median and average sales prices are declining. Caution should be used when analyzing monthly price changes since prices are heavily revised and do not include builder incentives.

The median sales price of new houses sold in September 2007 was $238,000; the average sales price was $288,000.


The seasonally adjusted estimate of new houses for sale at the end of September was 523,000.

The 523,000 units of inventory is slightly below the levels of the last year.

Inventory numbers from the Census Bureau do not include cancellations - and cancellations are once again at record levels. Actual New Home inventories are probably much higher than reported - probably about 100K higher.


This represents a supply of 8.3 months at the current sales rate

This is another very weak report for New Home sales. The stunning - but not surprising - downward revision to the August sales numbers was extremely ugly. This is the second report after the start of the credit turmoil, and, as expected, the sales numbers are very poor.

I expect these numbers to be revised down too. More later today on New Home Sales.

by Anonymous on 10/25/2007 09:51:00 AM

This is what we refer to in the risk management business as "interesting." From the New York Times:

In a new report to be issued today, the Joint Economic Committee of Congress predicts about two million foreclosures by the end of next year on homes purchased with subprime mortgages. That estimate is far higher than the Bush administration’s prediction in September of 500,000 foreclosures, which in itself would be a tidal wave compared with recent years. Congressional aides provided details of the report yesterday to The New York Times.

The Joint Economic Committee estimates that the lost of real estate wealth just from foreclosures on subprime loans will be about $71 billion. An additional $32 billion would be lost because foreclosed homes tend to drive down the prices of other houses in the neighborhood.

Those figures would cause a decline of $917 million in lost property tax revenue to state and local governments, which will also have to spend more on policing neighborhoods with vacant homes. The states most likely to be hard hit fall into two categories: those where prices had been rising fastest, like California and Florida, and Midwest states with weak economies, like Michigan and Ohio, where people with low or moderate incomes made heavy use of subprime loans to become homeowners and consolidate debts.

For those of you keeping score, back in October of 2006 Michael Perry predicted foreclosures "in the coming months" of around 2 million.

In December of 2006, the Center for Responsible Lending predicted 2.2 million foreclosures of subprime loans.

In March of 2007, First American predicted 1.1 million foreclosures in the next 6-7 years.

Anybody want to take 500,000 foreclosures by the end of 2007?

(Thanks, Clyde!)

by Calculated Risk on 10/25/2007 02:13:00 AM

From the WSJ: Commercial Construction May Slow (hat tip Jim)

The pace of U.S. commercial-construction activity ... is showing signs of slowing and could drop next year for the first time since the early part of the decade ...

In a closely watched report expected to be released today, McGraw-Hill Construction will forecast that spending on commercial and manufacturing buildings, such as offices, warehouses and hotels, will decline 7% next year, in dollar volume, and 10% in the number of square feet of space built. That would be a sharp turnaround from this year, when commercial and manufacturing construction is expected to end the year up 11% in dollar volume.