Showing posts with label real estate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label real estate. Show all posts

Friday, April 15, 2011

Video looking back at the events leading up to the 2008 crisis by Michael Burry


Remember Michael Burry?  The Doctor/Investor made famous in the Big Short for seeing the mortgage/debt/real estate problems before others.  Here is a reference to him on NPR.

He recently spoke at Vandebilt.  Highly recommend it!






I particularly like the use of "teaser rate" as opposed to just "adjustable rate" mortgages.

HT to Simoleon Sense and ValueInvestingWorld.  Highly recommend.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Housing market collapses after tax credit expires

Given the size of the US population now (307 million) vs the population in 1963 (189 million),  these numbers are even more staggering. 

Sales of US new Homes sales plunge to lowest level on record--Bloomberg

"Purchases of U.S. new homes fell in May to the lowest level on record after a tax credit expired, showing the market remains dependent on government support.

Sales collapsed an unprecedented 33 percent from April to an annual pace of 300,000, less than the median estimate of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News and the fewest in data going back to 1963, figures from the Commerce Department showed today in Washington."




Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, June 18, 2010

Behavioral Real Estate

Need more evidence of the impact of seemingly irrational behavior?  Look no further than the Real Estate Market where Seiler, Lane, and Seiler find that people make decisions that differ substantially from what classic economists would suggest.

Mental Accounting and False Reference Points in Real Estate Investment Decisions by Seiler, Lane, and Seiler. 

From Abstract:
"We find a statistically significant degree of mental accounting at all points throughout the disposition effect curve when holding a real estate investment in isolation versus holding the asset as part of a mixed-asset portfolio. We also identify four distinct disposition curve shapes beyond the traditional “S-shaped” curve where investors are more willing to sell an asset that is in the gains domain. Further, we conclude that an investor’s willingness to sell jumps by the greatest amount when going from zero return into profitable territory. Finally, this false reference point does take into consideration transaction costs."
From the paper:
"If people were rational utility-maximizers, the decision to sell an asset would be independent of the price that was paid for the asset. The price paid in the past is a sunk cost, and should therefore be irrelevant to future buy/sell/hold decisions."

This would suggest a S-shaped function where people would be less willing to sell at a loss and more willing to sell at a gain.  This is what they found most of the time.  However they also found some exceptions: people who would sell major losers and major winners, but were reluctant to sell in the middle (the so-called U shaped curve).

"... the “S-shaped” disposition curve does not hold for all investors. Specifically, 7.3% of the sample possesses a “U-shaped” curve. This means that their willingness to sell is higher or lower around their break-even point when compared to extreme gains and losses."


The behavioral findings are very strong, but there are at least some "rational" people, but not many.  The authors find
".... only 6.8% (36/533) of the sample exhibits complete rationality. In support of the extent literature, 74.9% (399/533) of the sample are more willing to sell as the return on the investment increases.
Good stuff that will definitely make it to the classroom!

Cite:  Seiler, Vicky L., Lane, Mark and Seiler, Michael Joseph, Mental Accounting and False Reference Points in Real Estate Investment Decision-Making (June 15, 2010). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1625407

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

SSRN-House Prices and Fundamentals: 355 Years of Evidence by Brent Ambrose, Piet Eichholtz, Thies Lindenthal

As a part time landlord, I will definitely agree with this this one. I am not sure the reason, but rent prices take much longer to adjust than do real estate prices. Now we have 355 years of data (amazing btw) to back up that statement.

SSRN-House Prices and Fundamentals: 355 Years of Evidence by Brent Ambrose, Piet Eichholtz, Thies Lindenthal:
"This paper examines the long run relation between prices and rents for houses in Amsterdam from 1650 through 2005. We first demonstrate that these series are cointegrated, a necessary condition for studying movements of the rent-price ratio. We then estimate the deviation of house prices from fundamentals and find that these deviations can be persistent and long-lasting. Lastly, we look at the feedback mechanisms between housing market fundamentals and prices, and find that market correction of the mispricing occurs mainly through prices not rents. This correction back to equilibrium, however, can take decades"