Showing newest 12 of 21 posts from December 2009. Show older posts
Showing newest 12 of 21 posts from December 2009. Show older posts

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

New Federal Short Sale Rules Once Again Stiff Lenders


The Obama Administration's widely touted but proven unsuccessful foreclosure rescue plan has been a complete unmitigated disaster.

1,000,000 applicants have applied for relief

Only 31,000 new loans written.

Less than 3% of homeowners in foreclosure actually qualify for the program.

So now, to snatch shameful victory from the jaws of defeat, the Administration has decided to pressure lenders to rewrite lots and lots of mortgage loans instead of actually taking steps that might raise real estate values and boost the economy.

On Christmas Eve 2009 the U.S. Treasury announced new regulations where borrowers who LIE on their applications and understate their income to qualify for mortgage relief still are eligible for the program.

These rules come right after yet another revision on November 30, 2009.

These new HAFA rules announced while most people were still digesting Thanksgiving dinner give lenders only TEN DAYS to approve or deny a short sale application.

The current time is between THREE TO SIX MONTHS.

Did anyone at Treasury ask WHY IT TAKES SO LONG for applications to be processed and approved before enacting yet another rule that attempts to stiff lenders and investors in mortgage paper?

The National Association of Realtors says that short sales now represent 10% of all real estate transactions. Lenders are FLOODED with applications, many of them fraudulent. This area has become the latest real estate get-rich-quick scheme with good reason.

And now, lenders only have TEN DAYS to decide how much equity in their paper to surrender or face Federal penalties. And even during those ten days if they discover that applicants are lying on their applications they still must be approved for relief!

As one of my mortgage lender friends said this morning when I discussed these new Treasury rules with her, and I quote:

"UN-fucking-BELIEVABLE."

These new rules don't go into effect until April 2010 and are designed to expire December 2011.

Yeah, sure. Just like rent control was designed to expire at the end of World War II. By the way, how is the war going these days? Are the Japanese still losing in the Pacific?

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

The Truth About Carleton Sheets


I think almost every living person on the planet, except perhaps some lonely hermits living in the wilderness like the Unabomber, has seen the late night informercials of notorious real estate guru Carleton H. Sheets and his "No Down Payment" real estate home study course.

Ever wonder who this guy REALLY is? Or how he REALLY made his money?

Read the excellent article from The New York Times reprinted below and get some answers.

The simple truth is that many of the so-called real estate gurus who sell home study courses and seminars sold on the Internet and late night TV got their start just like Sheets. Working as a salesman for some other guru. In Carleton Sheet's case he worked for "Nothing Down" guru Robert Allen.

One very famous creative real estate guru actually got his start working for his mommy, a real estate guru in her own right. (They actually still shill for each other all over the Internet, recommending each other's products on what seems like a million websites. Since they have different last names few people know the truth.)

I have previously reported in this blog that a number of these get-rich-quick real estate guru frauds who claim massive wealth in their advertisements are actually near bankruptcy in real life. Sheets is not one of them. He'll be back the moment the public catches the real estate fever again. So will all the others, I'm afraid, unless the Federal Trade Commission and state regulators takes note of how criminal their sales really are and prosecute them as I have urged FTC staff to do for years.

By the way, the FTC is listening to me...and what I have to say....

For the record, I actually recommend Carleton Sheet's home study course for BEGINNERS in real estate who want to know the basics. It's not a bad course. It's just not enough information for anyone to actually go out and make a fortune as a real estate investor which is what is promised in the sales pitch for buyers.

I bought a copy (2003 vintage) of Sheet's course at a thrift store for $10. It was definitely worth the price. Not all the information inside was accurate, in fact, some was out-of-date in 2003 which surprised me. Did anyone edit the course before it was sold? But if you can pick up one of these courses at a huge discount you truly can learn some real estate basics.

But then again you can go to your local public library and read fifty books that will teach you the very same information for free.

Your choice.

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

***************************************************************

When the Real Estate Game Cost $9.95

IN the alternate universe of late-night TV infomercials, Carleton H. Sheets once reigned supreme. Standing against a backdrop of tropical seas and gently swaying palm trees, he promised that viewers, no matter how down on their luck, could soar into the ranks of the super-rich by investing in that most bubblicious of assets: real estate.

“Even if you have no money, no credit and no experience in real estate,” you, too, could achieve financial freedom, he advised in a sonorous baritone that, after mesmerizing insomniacs for several years, gained even greater purchase with viewers during the recent housing boom.

All you needed was Mr. Sheets’s real estate course, available for the low, low price of $9.95. Only five minutes left for this trial offer. Call now. “Why not make this the moment you stop dreaming?” he intoned.

The dream that Mr. Sheets dangled in front of average Joes and Janes was a hand in the game, a piece of the action. When property values began soaring in the late 1990s, so did the frequency of Mr. Sheets’s infomercials. For millions of real estate wannabes sitting in their living rooms, he embodied the bubble as much as Citigroup or Merrill Lynch did.

“He was the king of the real estate infomercial,” says Sam Catanese, chief executive of Infomercial Monitoring Service, a research firm in Philadelphia.

Today, Mr. Sheets presides over some holdings of his own that appear to be troubled, his late-night profile has greatly dimmed, and the world that he so avidly promoted — easy real estate riches — is in shambles.

Even so, he retains a loyal flock of true believers.

“If you write the truth about Carleton Sheets, you’ll make a lot of people mad,” says David L. Hancock of Burlington, N.C., a Sheets devotee who credits his mentor’s training course for his start in real estate investing.

“The truth is, some people take the information and use it and some people are simply lazy,” says Mr. Hancock, who has also appeared in Mr. Sheets’s infomercials. “It’s just like any diet or exercise book out there. They probably work, but how many people are willing to stick to them?”

Some people say it’s a little more complicated than that.

“These guys all said, ‘I’m going to teach you how to get rich in real estate, even if you have no cash, no credit, no common sense, are unwilling to make any effort or take any risk.’ That’s literally their pitch,” says John T. Reed, who has written books about real estate investing and rates real estate gurus on his Web site, www.johntreed.com.

On his site, Mr. Reed has made a sport of ripping apart Mr. Sheets’s advice and techniques.

“Sheets targets beginners. The curriculum he devised for those novices is not what I think beginners need to know,” he writes on his site. “In fact, it appears to me that the topics he chose to write about were selected to maximize Carleton Sheets’ income, not to increase the incomes of his customers. The customers that most real estate gurus go after are relatively uneducated, inexperienced and poor.”

Mr. Sheets, after a brief telephone conversation from his home in Stuart, Fla., declined to be interviewed. “I’m proud of the life that I’ve led and what I’ve helped accomplish for a lot of people,” he says. “I keep telling people that I gave them the cloth but they were the ones who made the clothes.”

The Professional Education Institute, the Burr Ridge, Ill., company that is Mr. Sheets’s longtime partner, says its offerings have always provided value.

“P.E.I. and Carleton Sheets have received thousands of letters from satisfied customers praising Carleton Sheets’s programs. Last year alone, we received over 3,000 such letters,” the company said in a statement. “All P.E.I./Carleton Sheets products/programs meet the highest standards to ensure they provide tangible benefits to their students.”

Nor, says P.E.I., is it significant that portions of Mr. Sheets’s personal portfolio may be distressed.

“It is neither surprising nor noteworthy that some of the properties owned or partially owned by Carleton Sheets may have, at least temporarily, lost some value,” the company says. “Nearly every property owner in the U.S. today has experienced at least some — if not significant — depreciation in property values.”

And it may be that Mr. Sheets, who titled his 1998 book “The World’s Greatest Wealth Builder,” remains a true believer — as he was in early 2007, when, at the peak of the housing boom, he offered wisdom to real estate novices.

“I’ve been a successful real estate investor for 35 years,” he said in an infomercial that was shown that year. “History shows real estate is the most stable and consistently profitable investment people can make.”

INFOMERCIAL-LAND has always been populated by colorful characters, who pitched real estate techniques while wearing Technicolor shirts or, offered nuggets of advice while posing on yachts, surrounded by bikini-clad women.

Mr. Sheets, 69, entered the business more quietly. Having grown up in Delaware, Ohio — his father worked for Procter & Gamble — he marketed soft-drink bottle caps in one of his early jobs, and was later director of marketing for a Florida company that was a major processor of orange juice.

In the 1970s, he started investing in property, and in the early 1980s he slogged away as a pitchman for a company that represented the real estate authority Robert G. Allen, an early advocate of the “no-money-down” path to financial success. (There are different definitions of no-money-down strategies, but they all involve someone borrowing money — from a bank or a partner — rather than using his own funds to purchase a property.)

A few decades ago, before late-night cable infomercials burst onto the scene, real estate experts ran seminars early in the morning and at night so that aspiring millionaires could attend before or after their day jobs. The opportunity to sign up for more seminars was offered at tables in the back of the room, and Mr. Sheets proved to be an avid and dedicated seminar leader.

“We traveled 47 weeks of the year,” recalls Mr. Sheets’s third wife, Sue Blair. (Mr. Sheets is now married to his fifth wife.) “We would go in and do a 90-minute talk, a 90-minute preview, where we taught investors two or three techniques out of like 40. It was a teaser session to get them to sign up for more seminars.”

Ms. Blair says Mr. Sheets was broke when she first met him and had taken up teaching real estate courses in Miami after losses on Florida property investments. Things were so bad, Ms. Blair says, that she had to lend Mr. Sheets $500 for a mortgage payment.

All of that changed in the early 1980s, when two businessmen from Chicago — Mark S. Holecek and Donald R. Strumillo — were on the lookout for a real-estate pitchman to help market products. They teamed up with Mr. Sheets, and their venture, eventually named the Professional Education Institute, grew at a decent clip, according to Ms. Blair.

But when property values began to climb in the mid- to late 1990s, demand for Mr. Sheets’s investment programs soared. And he and his partners had found the perfect avenue for courting the masses, one more potent than road shows and seminars: television.

Mr. Sheets’s backers spent an estimated $280 million running ads on cable and network television between 1993 and 2007, according to Infomercial Monitoring Service, and his infomercials were among the most frequently shown of all infomercials during the frenzied real estate boom. The industry rule of thumb is to bring in at least twice in revenue what you spend on advertising.

P.E.I., which is privately held, raked in cash. In the three years ended in August 2005, the company’s revenue totaled at least $441.3 million, according to data P.E.I. provided to the research firm Gnames Media Group. The firm said that was its most recent data available because it stopped working with P.E.I. in early 2007.

P.E.I. had commissioned sales representatives working from a Salt Lake City call center to encourage people who had already bought DVDs to cough up an additional $995 to $5,000 for phone sessions with a real estate coach.

In theory, these coaches had years of experience buying and selling properties. In practice, according to a former employee, that wasn’t always the case.

“When things got really busy during the boom, I’m sure there were people hired that were not the company’s ideal candidates,” said that former employee, Bill Cox, who worked as a real estate coach for Mr. Sheets from 2004 to 2006 and says he personally does have years of real estate investment experience. “One of the criteria was that you had to have made at least one real estate purchase. That could have been their own home. That was O.K. because many of the students were first-time home buyers themselves.”

A spokeswoman for P.E.I. said that the coaches have, on average, 15 years’ experience in real estate and that they must complete 100 hours of training each year.

When Mr. Sheets signed on with Mr. Holecek and Mr. Strumillo, he received a fairly small stake in their company, maybe as little as 10 percent initially, Ms. Blair recalls. And in the infomercial world — filled with sizzle and va-va-voom sex appeal — Mr. Sheets, who came across in demeanor as a Mr. Rogers of real estate, was an unlikely star.

Tall and slightly paunchy, Mr. Sheets typically appeared on air wearing button-down shirts (often checkered), sweaters and khaki pants. He would furrow his brows and nod sagely as he interacted with others on his infomercials, an Everyman who generously courted his viewers.

“He’s a fatherly-looking type,” says Cliff Rose, who worked at P.E.I. in the early 1990s. An infomercial producer, Timothy R. Hawthorne, puts his finger on part of the Sheets mojo: “He was kind of like someone’s favorite uncle.”

Like nearly all gurus, Mr. Sheets embroidered his infomercials with the requisite rags-to-riches tale. In one installment, as black-and-white photographs of a young Mr. Sheets flit by on the screen, he describes in a voiceover how he was fired from his Florida marketing job in the 1970s. With no money, no credit and a young family to support, he started investing in real estate. Today — ta-da! — he is a success.

That tale ended, the screen fills with attractive individuals and couples who say they were scraping by but now, thanks to Mr. Sheets, are making money hand over fist. It’s easy. If we can do it, so can you! For some, Mr. Sheets’s inspirational and motivational message became a ticket to a better life.

“I saw him on TV one Sunday morning,” recalls Mr. Hancock, who was working in newspaper advertising sales at the time. “I had seen his commercials before, but this time I ordered the program, some CDs and a manual. I was interested in the financial freedom that real estate could afford.”

Soon, Mr. Hancock was hooked. Using some of the techniques he says he learned from Mr. Sheets’s course, he bought his first property in 1996. Today, he says he owns all or part of about $25 million worth of property, much of which he bought during the real estate bubble. Which means Mr. Hancock is in debt up to his eyeballs.

“When I say I have $25 million worth of property, I’m $21 million in debt,” he says, adding that rental rates are holding up O.K. “Do I ever sleep uneasy? No, actually, I don’t.”

Mr. Sheets’s programs are geared toward novices, but his advice sometimes veers into very sophisticated territory. (One DVD spends 11 minutes explaining cash flow analysis.) Other suggestions and information are so basic they come across as almost comical.

In his book, Mr. Sheets offers negotiation techniques (“teach yourself to ask for and remember the other party’s name”); discussions of mortgages and how to use leverage (“leverage is the very nucleus of creating wealth out of thin air”); as well as definitions of real estate terms (“puffery: exaggerated praise of a product or property”).

His students were obviously willing to leap into the frenzied real estate market, but some were likely to have found themselves in way over their heads.

“In one of the exercises I would do with students, I’d say, ‘Show me that you know how to use the financial calculator and calculate mortgage payments,’ ” recalls Mr. Cox. “With some people, it was like, boom, they could do it. With others, I’d spend 30 minutes with them, telling them how to, like, push the buttons. You would feel bad for those people.”

AFTER agreeing to meet for an interview, Mr. Sheets called a few days later and rescinded the offer.

“I don’t want to subject myself to a highly critical article,” he said. “I feel good about my reputation.” He later mailed an autographed copy of his book. (“You’re a great writer and sound like a very nice person! All the best! Carleton.”)

Most of his partners aren’t eager to chat, either. When Russell J. Knowles of Port St. Lucie, Fla., who runs a medical equipment service company, was asked how he met Mr. Sheets, with whom he has invested in commercial property in Florida, he responded: “I’ve known him a long time. He’s a great guy. You keep pounding the pavement and you’ll get that story.” Then he hung up.

A call to Mr. Holecek of the Professional Education Institute went unreturned. A spokesman said he declined to be interviewed.

“You won’t hear from them,” predicts Mr. Reed, the guru-rating author. “People have been complaining about the firm for years — how they signed up for a $9.95 offer and somehow their credit card got charged $36 a month.”

The Better Business Bureau has reported hundreds of complaints like those over the years from customers of Mr. Sheets and P.E.I., many of them contending that they were overbilled and had difficulties securing refunds. A few state attorney general offices say they have received a handful of similar complaints over the years.

A spokesman for Mr. Sheets and P.E.I. says that only a tiny proportion of its customers — an average of 9 out of every 10,000 — filed complaints with the bureau or authorities over the years. “Virtually 100 percent” of the cases were successfully resolved, he added.

APPARENTLY a more nagging problem for Mr. Sheets is that he, too, seems to have been caught in the real estate implosion. In the late 1990s, Mr. Sheets and a partner, Michael Maslak, began buying numerous condos and duplexes in and around Stuart, the Florida city where Mr. Sheets has a home in a luxurious gated community.

But the homes that the partnership bought during the real estate frenzy were considerably more down-market than Mr. Sheets’s own, according to county property records and interviews. The homes have declined in value in the real estate downturn, causing Mr. Sheets to lose “a considerable amount of money” in the partnership, according to his spokesman.

Mr. Maslak said that the partnership with Mr. Sheets was being dissolved, but he declined to speak about losses it had sustained on several properties it holds.

When the days of easy money in the real estate market disappeared sometime last year, so, essentially, did Mr. Sheets. His once-ubiquitous infomercials stopped running, according to Infomercial Monitoring Service, and Mr. Sheets now maintains a much lower profile on his Web site.

Still, he says that now is a great time for individuals to invest in real estate. In a recent videocast on his Web site, he suggests that lawmakers should extend tax credits for first-time homebuyers to real estate investors, “encouraging them to become more active in the market again.” (In another, he advises viewers to make property offers in “uneven numbers to make the seller feel like you’ve really done a lot of work.”)

But with some real estate investors being blamed as having played a significant role in the housing boom and bust, it’s going to be a little harder for Mr. Sheets to woo new students.

“The infomercials are off the air completely now, and that’s strictly due to the times,” says Mike Summey, author of the “Weekend Millionaire” book series and a longtime friend of Mr. Sheets. “Real estate has been tarnished so badly in the press and so many people have lost their shirts out there buying stupidly, it just doesn’t have the luster to it that it once did.”

Monday, December 28, 2009

Update on PennyMac: Once Again, I am Right


On July 29, 2009
in this blog I wrote about the IPO of PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust ("PMT") and its rich $20 per share offering price.

I said I liked the company---but not the IPO price. Way too expensive for a mortgage REIT at that particular time. I warned that investors would be buying either dead money or a falling knife.

Well, it's been almost six months. The S&P is ending near it's high for the year. Lots of joy joy joy in the stock market. The floor traders at the NYSE sang "Wait Till the Sun Shines Nellie" with much glee this Christmas.

So, how is PennyMac doing?

As I write this the stock is at $17.34 per share. In its first report to investors since the IPO, the company lost $730,000 or four cents per share.

I still think this is a fine company with capable managers who know what they are doing. I definitely am a buyer for this stock.

But not at $17.34 per share either.

The first quarterly loss for PennyMac as an IPO doesn't concern me either. Normal for new public companies. They actually did make a profit before administrative costs which are normally high for an infant REIT like PMT.

With all the modesty I can muster, with all the restraint I can summon, I just feel like saying this.

I am right once again.

I am tracking PennyMac for my own portfolio and will update you on events as they merit.

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Obama Administration Says Lying Borrowers Should Still Get Loan Modifications


The article reprinted below from the Washington Post is yet another illustration that the Obama Administration really does not understand the real estate industry or how it has come to be crippled these days. Given the simple fact that no one within the Administration actually worked in real estate makes all this comical---if it wasn't so sad.

Letting borrowers who misrepresent their income on loan modification applications actually get them is the height of absurdity. Why not just tell homeowners they can write down whatever income figures they want?

How about this idea? Tell applicants for payment modifications they can invent their income numbers. Just make them up. Pull whatever arithmetic comes into your head and write it down. Encourage creativity at the expense of accuracy and truth. Let the imagination run wild, statistically speaking.

In fact, why not throw a contest to see which mortgagor can misrepresent their income the most and give them a prize? Say a $25 gift certificate to Bed Bath & Beyond---as well as their mortgage modification, of course.

Excuse me, but wasn't part of the whole subprime mortgage meltdown mess caused by mortgagors getting loans they could not afford? Isn't that the real reason most loans go into foreclosure? Borrowers can't afford the payments? So now instead of inflating income to get a home, borrowers are intentionally underestimating their income to keep it. And getting a nice gift from Uncle Sam and the shareholders of banks who need to forgive loan interest or equity in mortgage debt in the process.

The Administration's foreclosure rescue program is a dismal failure and this is just one way the government is attempting to prop up a doomed public relations effort that is going nowhere fast.

Couple this boondoggle with the Obama Administration's Christmas Eve(!!!) decision to cover UNLIMITED losses at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and give each of these dinosaurs hundreds of billions of dollars of new capital to invest when they just lost hundreds of billions of dollars of old capital is stunning.

It is clear in Washington the inmates are not only running the asylum but have sold it to a timeshare developer.

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

*****************************************************

No consequences for lying borrowers

By RACHEL BECK
The Associated Press
Friday, December 25, 2009; 11:30 AM

NEW YORK -- The government shouldn't reward liars. But that's the effect of changes to the Obama administration's failing program to help homeowners modify their mortgages.

Until recently the rules were clear: if you grossly understated your income to qualify for the program, you had to restart the loan modification process. It made sense. After all, we got into this housing mess partly because too many people were dishonest about how much they made.

Fast forward to today. The federally funded Home Affordable Modification Program was aimed at getting banks to rework mortgages for homeowners in order to slow the pace of foreclosures. The government set a goal of modifying up to 4 million mortgages over the next three years.

The program isn't working like it's supposed to. Since March, just 31,000 homeowners have won permanent relief. One big reason why is that lenders are doing what they should have been doing all along - requiring things like proof of income.

How's the government responding? By letting homeowners who fudge their income numbers off the hook with little more than a wink and a nod.

"This isn't the kind of person the government should want to help," said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a left-leaning Washington think tank.

Under the $75 billion program, lenders are paid by the government to alter mortgages in hopes that cheaper loans will lead to fewer defaults. In most cases, modifications lower interest rates on home loans. Lenders also offer grace periods, longer repayment schedules or lower loan balances.

Borrowers say lenders are permitting trial modifications, but few are being made permanent. Lenders say borrowers aren't providing all the necessary paperwork to get loans permanently altered. Many lenders don't require documentation of income upfront. First, they'll make a verbal agreement with a borrower for a modification, and then verify the income once the trial period starts.

The government needs this program to work - and fast. That's the only way to explain the Treasury Department's waiver of a requirement punishing borrowers who understate their income by 25 percent or more when trying to get a modification.

That means a borrower who had told a lender he made $75,000 but was found to make $100,000 doesn't have to restart the modification process. Under the waiver announced Dec. 16, that person now gets to continue the trial period instead of being rejected immediately.

"During the housing boom, borrowers had every incentive to overstate their income to get a bigger mortgage," said Larry Doyle, who spent more than 20 years working in the mortgage business on Wall Street and now writes the financial blog Sense on Cents. "Now, they have every incentive to understate their income to get a bigger modification."

Treasury Department spokeswoman Meg Reilly says that discrepancies could be the result of mistakes or changes in someone's job or income during the trial phase. She also noted none of the eligibility, documentation and verification requirements for a permanent modification change under the new waiver.

Still, a difference in income of 25 percent or more is not a rounding error. The government should err on the side of caution with these people, not give them a free pass.

Doyle thinks that allowing dishonest borrowers to stay in the program sets a bad precedent. It also shows that lessons from the housing bust haven't been learned.

The housing market's collapse wasn't just caused by lenders issuing risky loans to borrowers who couldn't afford them. More than a third, or 4.3 million, of the home loans issued from 2004 through 2007 were for borrowers who provided no or little documentation of their income, according to real-estate data company First American CoreLogic.

When housing prices were rising, homeowners who couldn't afford their mortgages for whatever reason - lost jobs, wage cuts or a pileup of medical bills - could often sell their homes for a profit to get out of trouble.

It's a much different story today. About one in four homeowners are considered underwater, meaning their mortgage exceeds their home value.

That has led to a dramatic rise in foreclosures. About 2.2 million homes since July 2006 have completed foreclosure, according to foreclosure listing service RealtyTrac Inc.

The government knows that reducing foreclosures could go a long way toward stabilizing property values, which would help reverse the housing slump and ultimately aid the broader economic recovery.

Dishonesty fed the housing bust. Let's not let it ruin the chances for its repair.



Thursday, December 24, 2009

Home Sales Data Virtually Worthless for Investors


The data on new and existing home sales these days is so flawed the numbers are virtually worthless. I literally am laughing at how out of touch the reported data really is---and why.

Of course, this is all intentional. It's better for industries and the government to report good news than bad so anything that can be done to make Joan Rivers look like Megan Fox must be done so people can keep their jobs and make money without the annoyance of actually doing anything productive or useful.

If you want to know how silly these statistics have become just look at the November 2009 numbers.

The U.S. Census Bureau reported that new homes sales fell 11.3% in November over the previous month

At the same time the National Association of Realtors ("NAR") reported that existing home sales rose 7.4% in the same month.

HUH???

Are we to believe that home buyers preferred existing homes over new ones by a spread of nearly 20% of all home sales?

The basic reason the existing home sales figure looks so good is that foreclosure and short sales are counted in the existing home sales figures as "sales" compiled by the NAR.

These represent a full one-third (33%!!!) of all existing home sales. Factor these forced sales out of the statistic and what do you have?

Still declining sales volume, just like the new home sales numbers suggest.

So why not include forced sales as part of the existing sales data? For one obvious reason.

Forced sales are not voluntary sales. How can you judge home buyer and investor sentiment when a third of all sales are, so to speak, conducted with a gun at the seller's head?

A simple illustration demonstrates this point, reductio ad absurdum. Say all homes in the United States went into foreclosure tomorrow. In ninety days when all these properties started hitting the courthouse steps the NAR would report a massive, even astronomical, increase in existing home sales, just like they did when reporting the November 2009 numbers. ("A 44% increase over last years' sales! WOW!") But would this stratospheric jump in existing home sales REALLY be a good sign for the U.S. residential real estate market? Think about it. If all the homes in your town were in foreclosure would your local economy be doing great? So imagine all the homes in the United States the same way.

All the new and existing home sales numbers are also saddled with the economic distortion of the Obama tax credits for home buyers which merely shift sales from one quarter to the next. Look at the "Cash for Clunkers" fiasco if you want recent empirical evidence from the Obama Administration. The artificial and temporary stimulus of tax credits for buying a home, any home, will end and with it many of these sales. So you can't measure a trend when the stats are juiced from one month or quarter to the next.

The new and existing home sales figures being reported are just about worthless for investors. I read them and discount them faster than an Olympic sprinter on a amphetamine high.

What I see with my own eyes in my hometown of Seattle and hear with my own ears from other investors all around the United States on a daily basis are my guiding forces. The U.S. residential real estate market is weak and still has not found a bottom. Yes, there are pockets of strength due to microeconomic and local factors which the mainstream media will certainly highlight to prove the Moses-like wisdom of President Obama and his Seven Dwarfs and the genius of his economic program.

But in reality, I see MASSIVE, and I mean MASSIVE in 500 point type, hidden inventories of properties waiting to hit the market. I see desperate owners who wanted to flip and are now landlords eager to leave the business the moment the market rises. I see YEARS and YEARS of excess inventory still lingering, still haunting this market like Michael Myers in the HALLOWEEN movies. Just when you think he's dead and gone, sorry.

Read the home sales data. Then feel free to ignore them. Or better still realize if you run out of toilet paper you have an alternative.

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Tax Extenders Act of 2009 Doubles Tax on Carried Interest


Good old Charlie Rangel, the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, has given all investors in real estate partnerships and hedge funds a nice Christmas gift.

By his reputation, you guessed it.

A tax increase.

But not just a little one. A 100%+ tax increase.

The Tax Extenders Act of 2009 (HR 4213) is an amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that would more than DOUBLE the tax rate on carried interest received by general partners in real estate partnerships, hedge funds, and all types of investment partnerships.

Carried interest is currently taxed at capital gains rates of 15%.

The new rule would tax the carry at ordinary income rates which can be as high as 35%.

Mr. Rangel is not alone here. 241 of his associates in Congress also voted to support this nonsense.

The good news is that the bill is now in the Senate. It hasn't passed yet.

The bad news is that it is almost certain it will.

Everyone knows about the turmoil in commercial real estate and how this segment is still deteriorating. So how is doubling the taxes on the carry going to help?

HINT: It won't.

The U.S. Treasury doesn't think about such mundane matters as putting yet another financial burden on an industry buckling from bad debt, foreclosures, rising vacancy rates, and excess inventory when it dreams up new things to tax. It acts likes like a spoiled brat that wants a lollipop in a candy store.

With allies like Mr. Rangel in the House, I'm sure Uncle Sam will get lots of sweets in 2010.

By the way, Charlie Rangel should know something about real estate investment. He's currently under investigation by the House Ethics Committee for, among other things, failing to report hundreds of thousands of dollars on rental income he received on a beach property in the Dominican Republic, living in multiple rent controlled apartments in New York City while claiming a home in Washington DC as his primary residence for income tax purposes, using his Congressional letterhead stationary to solicit donations for a policy institute named after him at City College in New York, and many other "oversights."

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Capital and Operating Leases from an Investment Perspective


I received a very insightful (and lengthy, WHEW!) email from Josh in Louisville about the distinction between capital and operating leases and how investors should distinguish between the two.

Josh, as promised, here is your answer.

Accountants draw distinctions between capital and operating leases because of FASB rules, especially SFAS No. 13 (1976). To oversimplify the analysis it all comes down to whether an asset is "leased" or really is actually "sold" in some sort of delayed way, such as an installment sale or through a very cheap option price at the end of the lease term.

CEOs and CFOs of large companies also split hairs about the differences between the two types of leases, mostly because assets controlled under operating leases are not featured on the balance sheet and there is no corresponding liability attached. This allows for lots of accounting games, in other words, you can actually buy assets but not show any corresponding liabilities for the purchase on the balance sheet. These so-called "off-balance sheet liabilities" can often mean the difference between a positive or negative earnings per share number.

Many investors (like me) don't really care too much about the difference between capital and operating leases. Yes, there are certainly times when you need to capitalize the operating leases to get a better notion of how much a company really is earning and how much it is worth. After all, liabilities off the balance sheet do distort the genuine value of a company. A good example of this would be a company that leases many retail store locations for a very short period of time, such as only during the Christmas season.

But for me, in most circumstances, I really don't care.

The analysis here is easy.

Take, for example, a company that needs a machine or some property and is paying $5,000 a month to use it. Does it really matter that this $5,000 is an operating lease payment or essentially a disguised capital obligation? It is still the same $5,000 each month being deducted from earnings and cash flow. If you are measuring EPS or FCF per share does it really matter how the company spent this $5,000? It is still a cost of doing business no matter how you slice (or characterize) it.

For me, the distinction between operating and capital leases really becomes more of a credibility issue than an accounting one. When companies play lots of off-balance sheet liability games, such as through immediate sale/leasebacks of key assets, I get nervous. Why is it so important to keep all these liabilities off the balance sheet? What's really going on here? I like to see strong and clean balance sheets, not weak ones that just look strong and pretty.

This entire area of accounting involves lots of math, lots of rules, and lots of billable hours for accountants and lawyers. It is far more complex than it really needs to be and quite frankly, amounts to a hill of beans in most cases.

Fundamentally, I believe that all owners, CEOs, and CFOs should present the clearest and simplest picture of their company possible and generally this means if you lease an asset, you also have bought yourself a liability that should be disclosed on the balance sheet and not just as a footnote to the financial statements as is currently done with operating leases.

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Creative Real Estate Gurus are Suffering Financially


Despite all their whooping and preening about their million dollar real estate fortunes and their genius in creating wealth from nothing, I have it on VERY good authority that a number of major creative get-rich-quick real estate gurus are next to bankruptcy.

Broke, these fools still struggle to maintain the facade they are great financial wizards.

In reality, one guru can't even pay their printer bill.

The public has really begun to see behind the curtain and realize these phonies aren't wearing any pants. Real Estate Investment Association ("REIA") members and other newbie real estate investors, the target victim market for these scammers, are just sick and tired of the endless parade of slick gurus pitching yet another home study course or seminar event at their REIA meetings. People don't have the money now to buy them, and quite frankly they are just bored with attending a 90 minute event that has about four seconds of actual useful knowledge.

The rest of the time is just BUY BUY BUY from me.

Blah blah blah.

The REIA backlash against the get-rich-quick gurus is a welcome development. REIAs were not created as captive pools of prospective buyers so a shameless guru can invite two dozen of his guru friends to pitch courses to the shackled fools dumb enough to attend (and often pay money to hear!) worthless "lectures" so the gurus all can split the cash spoils later in some back room like thieves after a jewel heist.

REIAs were designed as places for investors to network and learn.

People join REIAs to MAKE money, not SPEND it.

You can be sure I will be reporting on each and every guru as they fall, much like trees in the forest, although you can be sure when these degenerates hit the dirt there will be a very big sound, amplified by me and many others with megaphones the size of skyscrapers and football stadiums.

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Book Review: 5 Big Lies About American Business by Michael Medved


I saw author and radio talk show host
Michael Medved speak on Thursday night in downtown Seattle at an event promoting his latest book, THE 5 BIG LIES ABOUT AMERICAN BUSINESS.

I am a huge fan of Mr. Medved's work and thoroughly enjoy his radio show and his books so this review starts with some inherent bias. Nevertheless, I did appreciate his latest book, although not as much as his previous ones, especially RIGHT TURNS and HOLLYWOOD v. AMERICA, which are just magnificent.

Medved's new book accurately makes the case that the mainstream media and Hollywood are certainly biased against business and the concept of making money. Non-profit work is given higher status in society than for-profit work. Small business is more "American and Apple Pie" than big business. Wealth is somehow "dirty" and those that accumulate it are evil. Remember Balzac's famous quip that "Behind every great fortune is a great crime"? Many take for granted the false perception that the "rich get rich and the poor get poorer" as if wealth creation in the world was a zero sum game.

There is certainly a great deal of analysis and research in this book. Michael Medved never fails if you are looking for substantiation on what he claims. But fundamentally there is not much original thinking or new ground broken here. After reading this book I was left with the conclusion that yes, there are five big lies about American business, but I knew what they were already and I don't have much new evidence to refute them, although I do have a nifty new resource to access when I need to.

Nevertheless, this is still a fun book I completely recommend to you. Michael Medved likes to entertain his readers and not just educate them. If you are looking for a solid treatise on HOW the American left hates American business and does its best to sabotage and undermine the success of American industry and entrepreneurship, this is your book.

If you want to know WHY, well, that's another book I guess. Mr. Medved, please start writing.

Overall, I can't recommend Michael Medved and his work more highly. His daily radio show is lots of fun regardless of your political ideology. You may disagree with him but you can't deny he's a smart, articulate, and funny guy.

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

Friday, December 18, 2009

Life Insurance Premiums Rising Due to Bad Real Estate Investments


For generations the life insurance industry was one of the largest single investors in real estate. The relationship for policy beneficiaries was almost perfect. Insurance companies needed a place to securely stash insurance premiums for years, even decades, awaiting the ultimate day when a death occurred and a payoff needed to be made. Investing in real estate provided an ideal vehicle.

Not anymore.

The slow-but-steady-and-predictable growth model of insurance companies investing in real estate long-term through purchases of properties or mortgages gave rise to the get-rich-faster model of real estate speculation. Buy and flip, instead of buy-and-hold.

Now, life insurance companies are looking at hundreds of billions of still unrealized real estate losses on their investment portfolios. Look at the list of companies and numbers below from Bloomberg.

You may be asking so what? Who cares? Unless you are a shareholder of these companies why pay attention to their losses?

Simple. Life insurance companies need to get the money they pay policy holders with from somewhere. If they are losing tens of billions on their investments, money they counted on through their actuarial tables to pay their policy holders when they all finally meet their Heavenly Reward, where do you think the money comes from to pay all the widows and orphans?

Easy answer.

From you, silly.

Life insurance rates are rising. Dramatically. Individuals will be paying hundreds of dollars more per year for a new term life policy, for example.

It also means that many insurance companies that looked solid on paper when you trusted them to pay your heirs may be not so solid anymore. If I was you I'd check my insurance company through the rating agency A.M. Best and really see how safe your money is.

As if death wasn't trouble enough....

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

********************************************************

Insurers May Lose $10 Billion on Commercial Property
By Andrew Frye

Dec. 16 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. life insurers, a group led by MetLife Inc. and Prudential Financial Inc., may post $10 billion in losses tied to commercial real estate over the next three years, Moody’s Investors Service said.

Defaults on property loans and declines in commercial mortgage-backed securities will “dampen earnings,” the ratings firm said in a statement. The loss estimate was increased from $7 billion earlier in the year, Robert Riegel, managing director at Moody’s, said in an interview today.

Life insurers use policyholder premiums to lend to property owners and buy commercial mortgage-backed securities. MetLife, which has about $50 billion of its $338 billion portfolio in commercial property loans and CMBS, and Prudential are bracing for losses as declining real estate values and occupancy strain borrowers. Life insurers have reduced their commercial property holdings and will record fewer losses than banks, Moody’s said.

“This is one of the key areas of concern going forward,” Riegel said.

North American insurers led by American International Group Inc. have posted more than $190 billion of writedowns and unrealized losses since 2007 tied to investments including securities linked to home loans and debt issued by builders and banks. Commercial mortgage losses tend to occur after homeowner defaults, MetLife and Prudential have said.

Allianz, Sun Life

Insurers based outside the U.S. are seeking to expand in commercial property and lending, and say distressed owners and lenders may lead to opportunities. Canada’s Sun Life Financial Inc. said last month was lifting its moratorium and may invest in commercial mortgages. Allianz SE, Germany’s biggest insurer, expects to find bargains in U.S. commercial property, finance head, Paul Achleitner, said in October.

The commercial mortgage default rate on loans held by U.S. banks more than doubled to 3.4 percent in the third quarter as vacancies rose and rents declined, Real Estate Econometrics LLC said Dec. 1.

Third-quarter defaults climbed from 1.37 percent a year earlier and 2.88 percent in the second quarter, the New York- based property research firm said. Default rates in the first three quarters of 2009 have been the highest since 1993, the firm said.

Insurance companies have been more conservative than other firms in their commercial property investments because they lost money during the market decline about 20 years ago, said Jamie Woodwell, vice president of commercial real estate research for the Washington-based Mortgage Bankers Association.

Lessons Learned

“They have learned from past missteps dealing with commercial real estate,” Moody’s Senior Vice President Jeffrey Berg said in the statement. Expected losses of $10 billion will be “manageable” and are unlikely to lead to many credit downgrades, he said.

Under a worst-case scenario, which Berg considers remote, losses may exceed $40 billion, which would lead to insurers having their grades cut by multiple levels.

Commercial real estate prices may fall as much as 55 percent from October 2007’s peak, Moody’s said last month.







Thursday, December 17, 2009

Get Rich Quick Real Estate Seminars are a Sure Way to Lose Money


The excellent article below by author Elizabeth Weintraub from About.com just about says it all on get-rich-quick creative real estate seminars and the gurus who teach them.

If you are considering attending one of these events, read the article below and stay home instead.

Legitimate real estate speakers do not make a living promising the secrets of unlimited wealth can be bought for $495 and $69.95 a month in a home study course or mentoring program.

Legitimate real estate speakers do not describe real estate deals they have never done, or will never do, using techniques that were ruled unethical and downright silly since the day Noah left the Ark and looked for some land to subdivide.

These so-called "real estate experts" are merely professional salesmen who travel from audience to audience proclaiming their vast knowledge of real estate despite the fact they have never flipped a property or actually made a REAL cash profit on any real estate deal, selling courses many have not even written themselves.

Don't believe me or my THIRTY YEARS of experience with this industry. Elizabeth Weintraub attended these seminars and what is her advice to you ?

And I quote:

Don't trust them.
Don't do business with them.
Run far, far away from them.

People do get rich at creative real estate seminars. It's the promoters, dummy.

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

********************************************************

Get Rich Quick Real Estate Seminars

Surefire Ways to Lose Money through Get Rich Quick Real Estate Seminars

By , About.com Guide

No money down seminar

Bring Your Checkbook to Real Estate Seminars

Big Stock Photo
Real estate seminar speakers and their ilk prey on the innocent, the greedy and the naive and, quite frankly, many of us, if we looked deeply inside ourselves, might find one or two of those targeted traits, so nobody is really immune from these shysters.

You've likely seen their full-page ads splashed in your local newspaper. They proclaim that the magical mystery tour is coming to your town, for one day only, and one phone call can secure your reservation, but hurry because seats are limited!

These masters of real estate secrets have a secret all right to share with you. It's called:"Buy my books, CDs and tapes." Moreover, what they're not sharing with you is if you follow their advice, you might get sued or land in jail, because more than half of them make up stuff that could get an unsuspecting follower into trouble.

You see, in the late '70s, early '80s, I regrettably represented a few of these real estate gurus as their real estate broker, many of whom are still in business today. I attended national real estate conventions to witness first-hand the activity behind the scenes. Among themselves, the promoters and speakers referred to these events as "dog and pony shows."

I'm saying:

  • Don't trust them
  • Don't do business with them
  • Run far, far away from them.

The truly dedicated and brainwashed followers will interpret my comments as heresy because these students / seminar attendees hang on every word their mentor tells them and, if given the chance, would rip the shirts off their backs to polish the ground in front of their worshipped god-like creature's feet. It's pathetic. I can't change those people's opinions, but I hope that my words will prod the rest of you to stay away these scam artists. Because they are charismatic, charming and quite believable until you scratch beneath the surface.

I swear, if P.T. Barnum were alive today, he would be a real estate seminar speaker.

Many Seminar Speakers are Unethical

One such speaker would set up real estate counseling sessions with hand-selected individuals in the audience, charging them a hefty fee for the session, in addition to representing them as a buyer's agent. He once confided that his goal was to "find out how much money is in my client's pocket and put it into my pocket." He wasn't joking.

Other speakers pre-screened audience members and placed colored dots on their name badges. This identified the financial situation of likely suspects by the seminar speaker's crew, as the various colored dots each represented a specific investment goal. For example, those with red dots might have $100,000 to invest; whereas those with blue dots might have less than $10,000 in the bank. The seminar company didn't want to waste time talking to those with the blue dots.

Seminar Gurus Fabricate and Stretch the Truth

At a luncheon one afternoon, I was seated next to a well known lawyer whom I used to respect. During the course of our conversation, I mentioned a specific method I discovered that encouraged tenants to buy real estate. Right after lunch I walked by this guy's seminar room and heard him sharing my idea with his class, claiming to have put together such a transaction himself, when in fact he had not. He lied. He could have easily told the truth, but apparently, as an officer of the court, little white lies didn't matter to him.

Another snake oil salesman often claimed that he owned property in 32 states. He repeated this statement over and over until he himself believed it, but the truth was he owned nothing. No real estate at all. But nobody ever questioned him. He's still selling real estate today.

Do the Money-Making Ideas Actually Work?

Yes. Some are feasible; some have never been executed; some are against the law. But can you tell the difference? Probably not. Can you do it? It's unlikely. The techniques are not geared toward the average investor regardless of the promises and hype. Want more information? John T. Reed maintains an excellent Web site that exposes seminar frauds.

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Romans, out. The Communist Manifesto, in.


The passage of Romans 12 from the Bible has always meant a great deal to me.

Beautiful prose should be studied regardless of its source. Let's not forget about the message either.

Too bad you can teach Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the public schools but not the apostle Paul. Who really needs a magnificently written and world famous 2,000-year old plea for peace when you can read about the dictatorship of the Proletariat? High school kids in particular really don't need to learn about ethics or forgiveness, right? Making sure they understand that democracy is the road to socialism is much more important.

By the way, this is a true story.

Romans, out. The Communist Manifesto, in.

I won't mention the school system near Seattle that wouldn't allow the NON-RELIGIOUS teaching of Biblical prose in an English class for 11th graders who are studying, guess what, the art and composition of poetry and prose, at the very same time they are studying Marx, Engels, and his successor-in-theory, the always cheerful and happy-go-lucky mass murderer Vladimir Lenin.

My solution and the opinion of most reasonable people would simply be to allow both literary works to be taught. I'm hoping this school system reverses itself very quickly and stops looking like a fool before the press gets wind of this nonsense.

In the meantime, guess which Founding Father is spinning fastest in his grave?

Robert J. Abalos, Esq.

**********************************************************

12I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. 3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly,[1] according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. 4 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: 5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. 6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; 7 Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching; 8 Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, [2] let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness. 9 Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.10 Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another; 11 Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord; 12 Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer; 13 Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality. 14 Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. 15 Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. 16 Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend [3]to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits. 17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. 18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. 19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. 20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. 21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.