Mark Hanson has an interesting post on
shadow-inventory and the housing market:
For years I have proclaimed that “no housing recovery will
ever occur — or no dead-cat-bounce will reach “escape velocity” or
become “durable” — unless the repeat buyer is leading the way.
This is because investors and first-timers are thin, volatile cohorts
who have been known over history to leave the market literally,
overnight.
Case in point, July Phoenix area home sales were down a whopper 22% MoM and 15% YoY
to multi-year lows for July…demand “recoveries” are not supposed to
come with that type of volatility. However, stimulus-driven short
squeezes and dead-cat-bounces are.
The problem is that the mortgaged homeowner has always been the
primary demand cohort. It’s not investors, first-timers or those who own
their homes free and clear. Rather, the mortgage-levered homeowner who
tends to move every 6 to 8 years who provides most of the historic
underlying support for macro housing.
This is a problem. Put simply, there are more houses today
then there were five years ago but a full HALF of the primary demand
cohort — repeat buyers — died due to negative equity, “effective”
negative equity, poor credit or legacy HELOCs, all of which
prevent sellers (repeat buyers) from paying a Realtor 6%, putting 10% to
20% down on a new purchase, and getting a mortgage for the remainder.
Put even more simply, housing “supply” has grown in the past 5 years and
ready and able buyers have been cut in half.
I don't know if Mark's analysis is correct, but the stock-and-flow dynamics are critical when looking at supply and demand and therefore, ultimately, prices. I wish Mark would quantify to what degree the mortgaged homeowner is actually the primary demand cohort, and more importantly, whether they are the primary demand cohort
on the margin (and therefore, the price-setter).
"the stock-and-flow dynamics are critical when looking at supply and demand"
ReplyDeleteMy problem: the economics profession, as far as I can tell, has barely even begun to theorize the notions of stock supply and flow supply, or their interelationships.
The only solid attempt I know of is Clower and Burshaw, from 1954. And it's only a first tentative effort.
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1907357?uid=3739960&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21101155859547
I am admittedly untutored, but I'm pretty smart and I try hard and read a lot. And no matter how hard I work at it, I can't understand how the concepts "supply" and "demand" can be used effectively or even coherently until this issue is worked out. 'fraid it's beyond my abilities...
Hi Steve:
ReplyDeleteI could only see the first page of the jstor article.
Nevertheless, I think this is usually managed by saying that price is set at the margin, so it would be from the most marginal flow buyer and seller who set the clearing price.