Saturday, January 17, 2009

Resolve why homebuyers hold back!



ONE Solution

to the

New Homes Market?

Try taking different things out of the toolkit!



Based in Irvine, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, represents almost all of the major builders in the nation. They are a housing market analyst. The really don’t use the term “economist.”) Every week, they survey up to thousands of builders and sales platforms around the country. Because they are retained by so many, they get a high level of cooperation and consumer reaction.

It is worth seeing John’s webinar at:
http://www.realestateconsulting.com/video/housingrecovery.aspx

Their most current data show us that we are providing solutions to problems that don’t exist…and are ignoring some solutions that are available to us.

As reported by 240 nationwide housing executives, the reasons given for consumers not buying…

36% say concern about the economy and jobs
29% cannot sell their existing house
20% fear that home prices could decline further
10% worry about credit and qualification issues
5% lack the necessary down payment.

So, our attempts to solve the problem by creating more down payment assistance programs (DPA’s) will have a marginal impact, if any.

To many builders, DPA is the solution because it is something they understand. And, maybe because it is something where the cost can be off-loaded to someone else. Usually government.

Could home builders not follow the lead of Hyundai Motors?


Hyundai has a program that will protect its buyers if they lose their jobs and cannot make payments on a new car purchased from Hyundai. There is fine print, etc., but the essence is that you have coverage if you make the first two payments. If you lose your job after that, you cover the first $7500 of loss, turn the car back in and suffer no harm to your credit status.

As of New Year 2009, our unemployment rate was about 6.9%. It will certainly grow in the first half of 2009 and maybe beyond. But in the meantime, how many of the employed freeze their major purchases by wondering?

Some homebuilders had similar programs for homebuyers in the late 1990’s and it looks like they should come back. These are steps that builder associations could tackle, particularly if their member builders are too small to get decent pricing from insurance companies. Right now, builder associations don’t really need to spend political capital on holding back cities’ and counties’ regulation of new developments that may come out of the ground in five years.

We are trying to manage our way out of what we have. TODAY!

What we may build in a few years is a theoretical exercise. If we don’t solve our current problems, easier zoning, quicker building inspections, and contained permit fees are totally irrelevant. We may not be alive to see them.

Someone has to pay the “premium.” I believe it becomes a cost of the sale, borne by the seller. Builders would need to promote and advertise the program, but the best news is that only the successful sale needs to pay the premium. User pay.

And, there is some risk to the insurer, of course. But will our unemployment grow to 10%? 11% Perhaps. Will all of them be homebuyers…or even Hyundai buyers? The carriers can evaluate the risk and determine the premium.

So, the solution is to bring more confidence to the market, and more reasons to the lending community to provide purchase money loans.

Think about this.

If we/someone/someone ELSE/they provide(s) down payment assistance, we are asking a lender to make a loan to someone with an insufficient down payment. Pretty obvious. And, which lender wants to take on more risk with someone who has little or no skin in the game?

And, even at that, we MAY solve the purchase resistance in 5% of those presently looking at new homes.

However, if we provide some sort of job loss insurance, by definition, we are dealing with people that have jobs. And 36% of the people in sales offices who are not buying today.

We have come to the place that solutions shouldn’t (maybe musn’t!) be limited to one builder who looks at a competitive advantage. If many builders are failing, too often, the consumer reaction is to pause in the buying cycle. Pause from buying from ANY builder.

If the new home industry provides job loss “insurance” it will immediately gain a competitive advantage over existing houses. Standing inventory will be absorbed.

Neighborhoods will “gel.”

Please watch John Burns’ webinar for some macro solutions.

Think about flexing your muscle with politicians to use those ideas in resolving the housing market.

And, leverage the builder associations to find some job loss coverage and resolve the issues holding back 36% of the people in the sales offices.

Let me know if this is of interest to you.

I welcome your feedback.

HARD

Friday, January 16, 2009

Why Not #2: Fiscal Ideas for Government



Exactly six months ago, on July 16, 2008, I posted "Why Not."

It’s time for another.

All governments are short of money. Businesses are also strapped, but at least business can justify expenditures if they see a return. They can also operate more efficiently. And they can decide if they want to spend more private money to help public institutions. Maybe these ideas spur some thinking.


1. Why not co-locate all public libraries into schools? As we see in the Solano Beach branch of the San Diego library system, it’s a fabulous combination. It is multi-generational. It uses real estate more efficiently. It brings people to fewer locations. Siblings and parents can listen to a story, watch a movie, or check the online news while waiting to pick up the kids. Schools have plenty of parking and most of their facilities are unused on weekends. They still need to be chilled or heated so why not populate them?

2. Then why not sell off the free-standing library locations to generate cash for the various public entities? Isn’t the entire concept of “bricks and mortar” libraries giving way to “clicks and mortar” anyway? Will we need BUILDINGS to store and distribute books, magazines, movies, etc. forever? Won’t most go the way of the buggy whip anyway?

3. So, if we need the money now, and we have BUILDINGS now that we can dispose of, without harming our ability to store and distribute, why not sell them off and use the proceeds elsewhere?

4. Every library probably has a Gray’s Anatomy, a Blacks’ Law Dictionary and several hard copies of different encyclopedias, but do we need every one of them? Aren’t most of these also found in school libraries? Why not eliminate UNNECESSARY duplication?

5. Wouldn’t consolidation reduce the aggregate space needed and still provide excellent resources? So wouldn’t that mean less energy to heat and chill, less janitorial, less repairs and maintenance? Doesn’t that minimize enviro-impact? Why not take that approach?

6. Why not sell multi-year naming rights agreements for libraries to search engines? The YAHOO John Smith Memorial Library could still honor civic heroes. And, in return for naming rights, don’t we have the technology to use (e.g.) Yahoo search engines to the exclusion of Google? Wouldn’t that translate into advertising revenue to Yahoo allowing them to pay more for their naming rights? Or vice versa, Google instead of Yahoo.

7. Why not have all playground-parks wi-fi enabled? Then parents, nannies and babysitters could use their laptops while minding the kids. They would be more likely to linger at the playground, get more work (or social networking) done and the kids would burn off more energy.

8. If that makes sense, again, why not sell naming rights (to wi-fi operators or others) in order to get this service free to the users?

9. One bank used to have a program called something like “keep the change.” It rounded UP credit card purchases and put the change into a savings account. Why not have similar opportunities for charities? Why not for a political party? The technology is there to block political contributions above the legal limits. And, it certainly gives a good audit trail to the donor.

10. Why not follow the example of Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, AZ? Maricopa County was spending approx. $18 million dollars a year on stray animals, like cats and dogs. Sheriff Joe offered to take the department over, and the County Supervisors said okay.

The animal shelters are now all staffed and operated by prisoners. They feed and care for the strays. Every animal in his care is taken out and walked twice daily. He now has prisoners who are experts in animal nutrition and behavior. They give great classes for anyone who'd like to adopt an animal. He has literally taken stray dogs off the street, given them to the care of prisoners, and had them place in dog shows.


The best part? His budget for the entire department is now under $3 million. A couple who wrote me adopted a Weimaraner from a Maricopa County shelter two years ago. He was neutered, and current on all shots, in great health, and even had a microchip inserted the day we got him. Cost: $78. The prisoners get the benefit of about $0.28 an hour for working, but most would work for free, just to be out of their cells for the day. Most of his budget is for utilities, building maintenance, etc. He pays the prisoners out of the fees collected for adopted animals. Why not follow that example? Why not?

11. Why not follow the example of the Rancho Bernardo calculus teacher who sold advertising space on exams? Why not lionize Tom Farber rather than debate the issue? Not only did he raise new money, he did so from those who were willing. No tax increases. I would name a library after him for free since he showed such creativity. What a good example to politicians, bureaucrats, and students. (Predictably, those who never came up with this idea, (perhaps not any ideas) wanted to second-guess it! The Superintendent, one Don Phillips, “said district officials are weighing whether to set guidelines, especially for business ads,” according to CNN.

12. Why not trust Farber’s judgment on the matter? Why not? We trust him to educate our children. Why not trust him and other teachers to resist ads from drug dealers, coyotes and brothels? He first cleared the idea with parents. He encourages inspirational quotes as well as local “mom & pop” commercial ads. Why not recognize his good judgment?

13. And why not free up those district officials to do something creative and useful?

14. And, finally, why not get involved in finding solutions, rather than complaining? Why not…for all of us?

Thursday, January 15, 2009

HARDminute Factoid 17 Economical Cars

The HARDminute # 17

A Series of “Top Tens”

That Took Forever to Compile

But Requires Only Sixty Seconds

for You to Read.


TOP TEN
MOST ECONOMICAL
CARS to OPERATE

Last post, I distributed the top ten most EXPENSIVE 2008 cars to operate. (They are reproduced below.) According to Edmunds.com, the following are the most ECONOMICAL 2008 cars to repair and maintain. Their figures are based on 15,000 miles per year for five years.

(tie) Suzuki SX4; R&M $3211, &
(tie) Honda Element; R&M $3211
3. Nissan Versa; R&M $3241
4. Hyundai Accent; R&M $3293
5. Kia Sedona; R&M $3355
6. Honda Pilot: R&M $3381
7. Hyundai Veracruz; R&M $3398
8. Suzuki XL7; R&M $3403
9. Honda CR-V; R&M $3410
10. Mazda Tribute; R&M $3455

TOP TEN
MOST EXPENSIVE
CARS to OPERATE
Dodge Viper; R&M = $10,323
Jaguar XK-series; R&M= $9,449
Jaguar DXJ-series; R&M = 9449
Land Rover Range Rover Sport; R&M = $9227
Land Rover Range Rover; R&M = $8996
Mercedes Benz SL-Class; R&M = $8756
Mercedes Benz CL-Class; R&M = $8730
Land Rover LR3; R&M = $8637
Audi RS4; R&M = $8606
BMW Alpina B7; R&M = $8534

Please let me know if this is of interest to you.

I welcome your feedback!

HARD