|
There have been some positive signs lately in the real estate market. And, being an optimist at heart, I probably tend to focus on those pieces of news. (Let's face it, it's easier to get up and do this every day if I'm optimistic!) But I don't want to be an unthinking cheerleader for the industry. The news is truly mixed right now and I want to highlight a couple of pieces today that give you the other side of the picture. Bloomberg has a piece today on the latest mortgage delinquence/foreclosure numbers. To say the numbers aren't pretty is to put a little too good a spin on it. The delinquency rate and the numbe of loans entering foreclosure are both the highest since 1972. And, these are not sub-prime loans. We're talking about the loans any lender, in any market, would have thought were good. These are foreclosures occurring because of a combination of a terrible economy and the huge decrease in the value of the homes. If you lose your job and your house is worth half of what it was 5 years ago; even if you put 20% down, there's a good chance you've got a problem. If you have to sell quickly there may not be buyers at a price that gives you even enough to pay off your mortgage. Foreclosures continue to drive prices down and they continue to come onto the market at an alarming rate. Even locally, whether you're talking Prince William, Fauquier or Culpeper counties, the foreclosures are a continuing problem. Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal (subscription required) takes a look at whether a home is even a good long term investment. The article is not exactly an encouragement to buy instead of rent. Here's the heart of their argument: Yet look at the numbers. Since 1987, when the Case-Shiller index of 10 major cities begins, it's risen from an index value of 63 to 151. Annual return: Just 4.1% a year. During that period, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, consumer prices rose by 3% a year. Net result: Home prices produced a real return of just 1.15% a year over inflation over that time. Critics may point out that the analysis is unfair -- after all, it starts counting near the peak of the 1980s housing boom. Fair enough. Look at the performance since, say, early 1994, when home prices were near a historic trough. Surely someone who bought then has made a bundle. Not necessarily. Since then the ten-city index has risen from a value of 76 to 151. Annual return: 4.7%. Inflation over that period: 2.5%. That's still only a real return of 2.2% a year above inflation.
They go on to add that a home could cost you an additional 2% in things like property taxes, insurance, repairs, maintenance, etc. I'm not saying I agree with their analysis. They admit that focusing on these 10 cities is not necessarily a representative sample. But I do think that not everyone should own a home and that it's important to think it through carefully before you buy, especially now.
|