by Calculated Risk on 11/03/2009 07:04:00 PM

Just one more post on auto sales ...

The following table is from the GM restructuring plan, presented to Treasury in mid-February (no longer available online).

This data is for all vehicles (the charts in the previous post excluded heavy trucks). All information in Red is added.

Click on graph for larger image in new window.

GM overestimated sales in Q2. Of course they weren't planning on going bankrupt! And GM underestimated sales in Q3 because of cash-for-clunkers.

Overall their forecast has been pretty close for 2009.

And I wouldn't be surprised to see sales increase to 12 million plus in 2010, even with a sluggish recovery. That is about the replacement level for auto sales.

The real question mark is what happens in the later years. Although total sales in the U.S. were above 17 million for several years, some of those sales were probably the result of incentives and loose lending (buying cars using home equity, and many subprime auto loans). I doubt we will see a return to those practices any time soon.

I'd like to emphasize that the 10.5 million (SAAR) for light vehicles in October is a very low number, and is close to the average sales rate during the early '80s recession.

If sales increase to 12 million in 2010 that would still be worse than the depths of the '91 recession.

by Calculated Risk on 11/03/2009 04:00:00 PM

Click on graph for larger image in new window.

This graph shows the historical light vehicle sales (seasonally adjusted annual rate) from the BEA (blue) and an estimate for October (red, light vehicle sales of 10.46 million SAAR from AutoData Corp).

The second graph shows light vehicle sales since the BEA started keeping data in 1967.

Obviously sales were boosted significantly by the "Cash-for-clunkers" program in August and some in July.

This was the first month over a 10 million sales rate (SAAR) - excluding July and August - since December 2008. Still very low ...

by Calculated Risk on 11/03/2009 02:14:00 PM

The different price indexes can be confusing ...

From MIT: MIT commercial property price index posts first increase in over a year

The 4.4 percent increase in the transactions-based index (TBI) for the third quarter is the first positive price change in the index in over a year, and the largest increase since before the market downturn began in mid-2007. While the price index is now 36.5 percent below its 2007 peak, it is not as low as the 39 percent deficit seen last quarter — suggesting that the U.S. commercial property market may have finally found a price bottom.

But this isn't the Moody’s/REAL Commercial Property Price Index (CPPI) that is reported every month. The CPPI showed commercial real estate prices fell 3 percent in August, and are down almost 41 percent since the peak in October 2007.

The transactions-based index (TBI) is a quarterly index for commercial properties sold by major institutional investors. According to MIT professor David Geltner, the TBI probably includes fewer distressed properties:

The types of properties and owners tracked by the TBI would generally be less subject to distress than those tracked by the CPPI.

A couple of points:

Typically prices fall much faster for commercial real estate than for residential real estate (prices for residential RE tend to be sticky and decline for several years, however CRE owners have far less emotional attachment to their properties).

It is very possible that CRE prices are near the bottom for non-distressed properties. It depends on if buyers are adequately discounting future increases in the vacancy rate and lower rents. It is a different story for distressed properties.

by Calculated Risk on 11/03/2009 12:02:00 PM

From MarketWatch: U.S. Oct. sales rise 2.6% to 132,483 vehicles

This is a comparison to Oct 2008.

Update: From MarketWatch: Chrysler U.S. Oct sales drop 30.4%

Toyota U.S. Oct. sales near flat

GM U.S. Oct. sales rises 4.1%

Once all the reports are released, I'll post a graph of the estimated total October sales (SAAR: seasonally adjusted annual rate) - usually around 4 PM ET.

by Calculated Risk on 11/03/2009 10:23:00 AM

From Bloomberg: Real Estate Price Plunge Makes U.S. Homeownership Perilous Path

Kajal and Vishal Dharod paid $559,000 in 2006 for a new four-bedroom house built in Rancho Cucamonga, California. Today, it’s worth about $360,000.

“We don’t know how we can come back from a loss like that,” said Kajal Dharod, 29, a first-time homeowner with a $4,200-a-month mortgage. “Buying the house was a mistake.”

American homeownership, once considered a path to wealth, is now leading to disillusionment.

I know people who lost money in the early '80s housing bust in California, and they refused to buy again for many years. The same thing will happen this time.

Of course many homeowners are still stuck in their upside down homes, see: More walk away from homes, mortgages (ht Keith, Tim)

"It's increasingly a more important factor driving the foreclosure crisis," says Mark Zandi, of Moody's Economy.com. "As we move forward, the job market will stabilize, and the big thing will be strategic defaults. People are going to determine it doesn't make financial sense to hold on to their homes. That's going to be a significant problem. Strategic defaults mean foreclosures could be high for a long time."

Enticing people to buy before they are ready leads to a nightmare, not a dream.