'No’ to property price speculation

Excessive Asian property price appreciation may be over for now

PEOPLE generally like to invest in properties. It is easy to understand you buy a house. It is a simple, tangible investment. It is long term and financing is usually easy. Most people tend to have positive experience after buying their first home, which normally would appreciate after a decade or two.

Simple things can morph into complex series of events. Buying houses may turn to speculation, massive speculations become a boom and bust “housing bubble”; banks may collapse from huge bad mortgages, a financial crisis and then a government bailout ensues, an economic recession soon follows. These events sound a little too familiar.

Low interest rates, massive liquidity and investors shying away from volatile stock markets, are some of the many reasons cited for Asia's potential property bubbles today. From 2009 or so, private residential properties have seen large average price jumps in China (Beijing +100%), Hong Kong (+53%), Singapore (+53%), Malaysia (+21%) and Indonesia (Jakarta +14%).

Asian policy makers have taken many pre-emptive actions to control this property “bubble”, usually by regulating excessive speculation and guiding mortgage lending by banks. In Hong Kong, policy makers try to discourage speculators by raising special stamp duty for short term resale of residential property (5% to 15%, depending on holding period); in Singapore, measures include a hefty extra 10% stamp duty on purchase price for non-residents. In Indonesia, there's a maximum 70% property loan limit.

Recent data suggest such curbs did not slow the Hong Kong or Singapore property markets for long. Transactions or prices picked up again recently. We believe however, if Asian property prices rise rapidly again, tougher curbs may be in the cards. The slew of increasingly tough measures in China the last 18 months is seen as an example. An avalanche of curbs eventually made China home prices dip for eight straight months up to May 2012.

Historically, financial crisis in many countries (Japan 1991, US 2008 and Spain today) are caused by property price bubbles bursting hurting consumers, banks and businesses. Therefore, it makes a lot of sense to have responsible lending.

Asian policy makers, having learned bitter lessons from the 1997/98 financial crisis, sees pre-emptive measures to control any potential property “bubble” as crucial to avoid banking problems or crises.

Governments in Asia on the one hand want to curb excessive price speculation, while at the same time, know that home ownership is a very important (and personal) issue notwithstanding it is also a big contributor to domestic economic growth.

What Asian policy makers aim to do is best captured in a Chinese phrase, which literally means “in peace time, think about danger”. The best time to prepare for rainy days is when the sun is shining it's a lot harder to do so in a storm.

The biggest challenge for policy makers is to develop a sustainable property sector and promote home ownership (especially first time house buyers) without boom and bust. That includes the balancing act of curbing property speculation without inadvertently pulling the brakes on the economy.

Some Malaysian non-listed property developers I met recently have expressed deep concerns that sales of their high-end, new condominiums are lagging, because buyers find it difficult to get financing.

Bank Negara's curbs on lending for third property mortgage (maximum 70% financing) and stricter banks credit standards appears to be working for now.

The intent of Bank Negara, we believe, is to nip excessive property price speculation in the bud. Current property curbs ensure at least prices don't run up too fast and banks may allocate more funds to first time house buyers rather than investors or speculators.

Interestingly, property developers who don't complain about curbs are often the established ones who prefer sustainable growth, rather than a boom and bust property market. I believe many property companies have learnt not to borrow too much.

Tellingly, the top five Malaysian listed property developers have reduced average net gearing from 70% in 2000 to 18% in 2011, (Indonesian and Thai property developers reduced from 612% to 9% and 255% to 84% respectively). Asean property companies today are undoubtedly less leveraged with healthier cash reserves.

That's one reason why most property developers in Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand for example, are not rushing to unload properties at massive discounts, even as property curbs bite into sales. They know current measures are temporary and consumer demand is likely robust for quite some time.

Asian consumers are financially better off today. Healthy employment and wage increases across Asia means consumer demand for housing will likely stay buoyant and house prices, like in normal times, will gradually rise over time.

However, the intriguing impact on Asian properties today given the mind set and propensity of policy makers to pre-empt any potential property bubble I believe periods of excessive property price appreciation in many Asian property markets may already be over for now.

I believe policy maker's curbs on excessive price speculation is a right policy. Even if there's short-term pain, it will likely make Asian economic growth sustainable for the longer term in these difficult times.

Singular Vision
By TEOH KOK LIN

Teoh Kok Lin is the founder and chief investment officer of Singular Asset Management Sdn Bhd.

US student Loan Crisis, an Education Bubble?

I started following the student loan crisis when I noted that student loans seemed to be neck and neck with health care as the primary grievances on the We Are The 99% site.  I was very lucky to get two pretty regular guest posters Alan Collinge and Tim Smith, who have written on the issue from different angles.  I was astonished to get a call from Sallie Mae asking me how they could get their side of the story onto Forbes.com.  At the risk of being prosecuted for impersonating a journalist, I did a brief interview with John Remondi, President and COO of Sallie Mae.  I’m still hoping for some guest posts from Sallie Mae, but nothing has come through yet.  Sunday, I heard from Tim Smith, who let me know that the New York Times was picking up on the issue with this piece.  I invited him to share his reaction.  Here it is.

The Education Bubble Won’t Create A Disaster, Right?

“Looking back, anyone could have predicted the housing bubble.”  This sentiment has been echoed many times, and graphs of the past housing bubble almost make it seem obvious before the bubble burst.  The education bubble?  While many acknowledge the soaring cost – especially those in the education fields – fewer agree that we’re about to see the education bubble pop and create a bigger mess than the housing bubble.  Education may have its critics, but it also has major defenders.

Student Loan Defaulter Calls For Solidarity Peter J Reilly Contributor

Why Does Congress Love Houses More Than Students? Kelly Phillips Erb Contributor

New College Grads: Just Say No to More Debt! Sheryl Nance-Nash Contributor

Cheap Stafford Loans: A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing CCAP Contributor

However, the chorus seems to be changing.  Even the New York Times recently joined with an article that compared the education bubble to the housing bubble (this analogy has been used multiple times, but like the above graph shows, under predicts the mess that the education bubble will cause).  Even while other media players have finally seen this bubble, the warning signs were spelled out on this blog :

These warning signs would be favorable laws toward discharging student loans in bankruptcy (making it more challenging for students to receive money for education); a societal zeitgeist toward education changing (for instance, businesses preferring certification or a degree from something similar to the Khan Academy over traditional colleges); a major recession coming back to the United States, taking away more employment (making it more difficult for student with loans to pay back their loans); students becoming discouraged by negative news toward education (causing many to drop out or to avoid college).
Of course, some readers might wonder if all four signs must appear for the education bubble to pop, and the answer is “No”.

Even though the education bubble has received attention, few expect the consequences to be bad.  In fact, the Times’ article mentions that economists don’t see the consequences being similar to the housing bubble – in other words, the education bubble pops, and everything is fine.  Consider the potential reality:

1.      High student loan balances discourage future and current demand for other products and services (consider the attitude, for instance, of Natalia Antonova, who faced a debt crisis with her student loans).  This subtracts money flow from the economy to provide jobs in other areas.  Even without the bubble popping, this is the current situation.
2.      If the demand for education drops, the consequences will affect those in the education system – schools will need fewer professors, advisors and others in the education field.  This will create a terrible job hunting situation, where graduates will be placed against high-credentialed people (some of whom may have been their professors).  Remember that in order to keep these people employed, the demand for education must remain the same or rise.
3.      If the demand for education declines, the demand for educational products will decline also – textbooks, construction, and many of the expenditures that some colleges think are necessary to provide a good education.  This drop in demand will cause business, which sell products and services to educational institutions, to cut back on their staff to offset their losses.
There is one way in which economists might be right – if wages began to soar.  Like the housing bubble, Americans felt the mess because the decline in housing prices meant that debt was owed on something that had little value.  If education continues to rise, while wages stagnate or slowly rise, a college degree will be like a home, which has lost its value.  If wages soar, however, a college degree will still mean the path to prosperity.

Tim Smith blogs on the “Echo Boom”, also known as Generation Y (Americans born between 1980 – 1995). Tim has previously appeared here discussing his generation’s attitude towards homeownership and education.

I’m beginning to think that the “bubble” metaphor may not work that well for education.  In the case of the stock market and real estate people own assets that they think they can sell at any time for some minimum price.  Then something happens and everybody heads for the door at once.  At that point the seeds of the next bubble are sown, because the assets have some level of intrinsic value and somebody will buy them for something and may get rich on the next turn of the wheel.  Educational credentials, on the other hand, are not at all fungible.  They can only be cash flowed, not liquidated.  If they are not used when fairly fresh, their value erodes rather quickly.  The actual economic value of the credential will often be quickly replaced by the experience which the credential enables.  

By Peter J Reilly, Forbes Contributor Newscribe : get free news in real time

Related posts:
American mounting student loans a 'debt bomb' waiting to explode! Inside America’s Student Loan Bubble!
American Student Loan Debt: $1 Trillion and Counting
America, a "Generation of Sissies"
A "great haircut" for U.S. growth  

Why Americans Should Wait To Buy A House?

Tweet

by Michael Sanibel

see photosGetty Images

Click for full photo gallery: Cities Where Housing Prices Are Still Dropping

The U.S. government is doing its best to convince the American public that there’s an economic recovery underway, but is that really true? The economy is being artificially propped up by $1,500 billion in annual debt, and the Federal Reserve has printed trillions of dollars to keep banks afloat. It was too much debt that got the country into trouble to begin with, yet the government is essentially saying that even more debt is needed to fix the problem. This is one of the fundamental pillars of the theory developed by economist John Maynard Keynes in the early 1900s.

Not everyone agrees with Keynesian economic theory. Free market capitalists believe that markets should be unfettered by government intervention and allowed to reach equilibrium on their own. Their argument is that supply and demand should set asset values and prices without interference by artificial stimuli and freshly printed cash. (To learn more, read How To Buy Your First Home: A Step-By-Step Tutorial)

When analyzing whether or not to buy a house in this economic environment, the best approach is to focus on reality, not the talking points offered by politicians. Here are some factors to consider before taking the plunge with a new mortgage.



The Bubble
The housing bubble was caused by a lethal combination of easy credit, low interest rates and rampant speculation. This “perfect storm” reached its pinnacle of power in four states: California, Nevada, Florida and Arizona. The landscape of these states is littered with unfinished housing developments and empty condominiums. Even though prices have dropped 50% or more in some areas of these states, they are all plagued by debt-to-income ratios (DTI) that are still higher than the historical norm of three to one. This will continue to put downward pressure on prices.

Nationwide, the inventory of unsold homes was 3.33 million at the end of October 2011, an eight-month supply at the current sales rate. While this is a positive downtrend from the inventory peak of 4.58 million units in July 2008, the inventory overhang is still having a negative effect on prices. The median existing home pricewas $162,500 in October for all housing types nationwide, a drop of almost 5% from a year ago.

Prices are also being impacted by the high rate of contract failures, which is almost double that of September, and four times what it was one year ago. These failures represent canceled sales contracts resulting from unqualified mortgage applications, appraisal values below the sales price, unsatisfactory home inspections and unfulfilled contract contingencies. One-third of all sales contracts in October did not make it to closing, causing those homes to re-enter the market and increase the unsold inventory.

100-Year Trend
Yale economist Robert Shiller, known for the Case-Shiller price index, has calculated that U.S. home prices rose an average of 3.35% per year during the period 1900-2000. This timespan includes extended periods of both falling and rising prices, from the Great Depression up to the bull markets of the late 1980s and late 1990s. (For related reading, see Understanding The Case-Shiller Housing Index.)

In January 1998, just before the bubble started to inflate exponentially, the price index stood at 82.7. If prices had followed the 100-year trendline over the next 12 years, the index would have reached 126.7 in October 2010. Instead the index hit 159, a full 25% above the long-term trend. So, even though prices have already dropped more than 30% nationwide in the past five years, data suggests that the bubble has not been deflated and more price drops could be on the way.

Important Factors
There are many forces at work contributing to instability in home prices:

• Continued high unemployment, with weekly unemployment claims consistently hovering around 400,000
• The possibility of higher interest rates to combat inflation fueled by the increased money supply
• Strategic defaults, foreclosures and short sales all force prices lower
• High levels of underwater mortgages
• A “shadow” inventory of unsold homes held by banks will put pressure on prices when these homes are marketed
• Stricter mortgage qualification requirements, including bigger down payments, higher credit scores and verifiable income
• Lower conforming loan limits as of Oct. 1, 2011
• Continued high levels of government and personal debt
• The threat of more U.S. credit rating downgrades
• The potential for a European financial collapse rippling through the U.S. economy and financial institutions
• Changing demographics, slowing population growth and smaller families are causing reductions in overall demand
• Many baby boomers are downsizing their lives, including the size of their homes
• Possible future actions by the government between now and the 2012 elections: tax policy changes, stimulus spending, mortgage modification programs, etc.

The Bottom line
The evidence suggests that without government intervention, home prices would be much lower than they are now. Record low interest rates, the homebuyer tax credit, mortgage assistance programs and bailouts for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have all softened the freefall in prices. These actions have not changed the fundamentals of a weak economy that relies heavily on consumption for GDP growth and too little on industrial production.

Price stability is not likely to be reached until the excess is wrung out of the bubble that expanded by a breathtaking 19.2% per year between 1998 and 2006. Government policies have slowed the correction, but not stopped it. This has kept wary buyers out of the market because they don’t believe the market has hit a true bottom. This has delayed a sustainable housing recovery and prompted potential buyers to wait for lower prices next year. (To learn more, check out The Truth About Real Estate Prices.)

Newscribe : get free news in real time 

Related articles

• Summary Box: US home prices down in most cities (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Big cities see sharp declines in home prices (cbsnews.com)
• Survey: Home prices down in most major US cities (newsok.com)
• Home prices fall more than expected (sfgate.com)
• Bring on the US Default (lewrockwell.com)
• GreenPath Debt Solutions Shares 4 Ways To Keep Finances in Check the Rest of the 2011 Holiday Shopping Season (prnewswire.com)
• Home Prices Down In 20 Major U.S. Cities (huffingtonpost.com)
• Real estate bubble in 2012? Nah, it's starting to float back to Earth (jessagill.wordpress.com)
• A New Blow to Housing: More Boomers Will Stay Put (247wallst.com)