Skip to content
Subscribe
Notify of
21 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
brian_in_la
16 years ago

Really interesting charts.
Really interesting charts. It is helpful to keep building metrics for the market’s health.

I’ve been keeping an eye on statewide CA defaults using Realtytrac’s public data. These show huge increase in NOD since March. But, using a three month lag for NOT and four for REO, there is much more divergence than in San Diego. The NOT and REO (lagged) do not show as dramatic an increase as the NOD. At points I have read nebulous complaints about Realtytrac’s data. Anyone care to chime in with any specifics?

Thanks Rich, for the great stuff!

studenteconomist
16 years ago

Rich,
I have to call you on

Rich,

I have to call you on your first graph (Monthly San Diego Home Sales per Default) because you are so meticulous in finding the errors in other people’s measurements. Using the single family resales as the numerator makes this graph less informative than you claim. You do point out that the raw number is not the point, but then try to compare the relative numbers from the previous bust to the current one. I would argue this is inaccurate because you have not stated whether the previous bust had the same mix of single family resales to actual REAL total sales as the current bust. If the values are different between the two time periods, then the comparison is invalid and misleading. I don’t have the data, but my suspicion is that there are more condos sold today as a percentage of total sales, thus more of the defaults are condos, creating a larger denominator today as compared to 15 years ago. This would make the stated comparison of 0.7 to 1.4 not a direct comparison and thus no opinion can be derived.
Other than that, the other presentations are great and I love reading this site for the latest, most thorough information on SD housing.

CricketOnTheHearth
16 years ago

Just anecdotal info here,
Just anecdotal info here, but when I was here during the last downturn in 1994, I was told by a couple of people not to buy a condo, because they were “nuclear waste” and could not be sold again. I.e., that nobody was buying condos.

If I had only known how cyclical this market is, I might have gone ahead and grabbed that early 4S Ranch condo that the saleslady so winsomely offered me… for $95,000.

>chirp<

Fearful
16 years ago

Rich, thanks for the charts.
Rich, thanks for the charts.

One quick question: on the chart that compares the raw number of NODs with NOTs with REOs (time shifted and 4 week MA), I am surprised to see the down-tick, especially when you have a moving average, ostensibly to smooth things. Was there a dramatic decrease for some reason?

brian_in_la
16 years ago
Reply to  Rich Toscano

Realtytrac..Cali Aug REO is
Realtytrac..Cali Aug REO is 8571.

August Memo from Realtytrac is out. Their California numbers are mind-boggling. NOD went from 27k in July to nearly 42. REO’s went from 4444 in July to 8571. NTS held steady at about 7.5k.

gdcox
16 years ago

Graham
Hi , What you say may

Graham

Hi , What you say may well be true but you will notice that the graph has called the decline in prices at virtually the identical level of the determining ratio.

Anonymous
Anonymous
16 years ago

As always enjoy reading your
As always enjoy reading your web articles and thanks for explaining NOD, NOT and REO
From a practical standpoint – Where do foreclosure sales generally take place for the City of San Diego? (I’m trying to get a sense of how many bidders usually show up for these sales)
Also, I’ve heard two stories now that a homeowner did not know their home was auctioned off until they got a knock on the door telling them to vacate. Is this possible? Or is the homeowner in deep denial about what’s going on. (there was an article in the Union Tribune yesterday that outlined one woman’s debacle)
Thanks,
Elle

Anonymous
Anonymous
16 years ago

Rich and all: There’s a
Rich and all: There’s a curious feature of the “NOT, NOD, REO 4-week MA staggered” chart, which perhaps you have a theory on? The lines appear approximately parallel, rather than proportional.

But why would there be an approximately constant offset between NOD, NOT and REO? That implies that there’s an approximately constant number of cases of NOD’s rescued before NOT, and NOT’s rescued before REO. What might explain that?

I realize that the subsequent graph “% defaults turning into REOs” looks at this same idea, and suggests “rapidly worsening proportion of people able to stave off REO”. I just thought the constant number who *are* able to stave off REO was interesting.

Graham

Bugs
16 years ago
Reply to  Anonymous

I think the point some of
I think the point some of you are missing is that we’re all attempting to use these different datasets and different methods of analysis to understand what is going on and where it’s going.

It is inevitable that most of these datasets are not optimized for the methods of analysis for which they’re being used; and that most methods of analyses are going to vary in both efficacy and consistency.

To a certain extent this boils down to the equivalent of working with what you have rather than what you wish you had. That’s why it’s okay to consider some of these graphs as depicting the forest and others as depicting the trees.

capeman
16 years ago

That is some nice data Rich.
That is some nice data Rich. I really think when this gets at it’s worst with increasing mortgage rates, lack of mortgage loans and a good price decline we could see that Sales/Default ratio get towards 0.1. That would make things really interesting.

Duck
16 years ago
Reply to  capeman

Do the NOD’s include
Do the NOD’s include timeshares? I did a trial with Realty Trac and was astounded by the number of timeshares that come up. I don’t even think timeshares are financed, but I guess if you don’t pay the maintenance fee it can show up as a NOD.

As an aside, I don’t trust Realty Trac’s numbers. It seems like they are double counting (and triple counting) certain properties in order to get publicity. It does seem to be working for them.

Anonymous
Anonymous
13 years ago

All the rules have changed in
All the rules have changed in the last couple of months. Lending banks are now being held accountable for the trap they set, borrowing money they didn’t themselves have, while using loose and illegal practices in the process. The massive lawsuit against Wells Fargo / Wachovia, Indymac / OneWest bank, Citibank, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, GMAC…………..can actually, not only put a stop to your foreclosure, but also pause your house payments with no loss to you…………
https://sites.google.com/site/sueyourlendernow/