Indeed we are engaged in our own industry Cirque du Soleil, a kind of three-ringed act that pushes us to the limits of our economic envelope.

How long can we strike the pose? What series of events will begin the process of reversing the downturn and return some degree of stabilization to the economy. Our collective muscles quiver under the stress of our rigid contortions.

Not too long ago we mistakenly thought, although few will now admit to their acquiescence, that TARP, auto industry bailouts, AIG cash infusions, cash for clunkers, first time home buyer credits, bank loans and the like would magically restore the economy.

Even the National Association of Realtors (NAR), our beloved national union and lobby force, with enthusiastic recklessness, endorsed just about every form of redistribution of wealth forced down our throats by President Barack Obama’s misguided group of tax and spend advocates.

Yes, ours is an industry not too unlike a three ringed circus. There are jugglers, tight rope walkers, clowns, acrobats, lion trainers and bare-back horse riders, all entertaining us while we sit in the grand stands eating our Cracker Jack and cotton candy.

We love a good circus. A good circus takes our minds off the trouble we face. The acts bring momentary relief from the pain we must inevitably face when the show is over and the big tent comes down.

The reality we must face is the choice we made, repeatedly from 2000 through 2007 to made a series of choices that led us to depart from the traditional, sound economic principles that guided our industry in favor of massive personal, corporate and national debt. The circus is over and even the clowns no longer smile.

REALonomics has taken tough positions and we have always attempted to lend our voice to a call for temperance as the circus acts rolled into the big tent, one after another while our industry, clapped, laughed, cheered, jeered and refused to admit the depth of economic adjustment that was about to engulf us.

There is another message we have pushed into the industry for serious discussion and that is the need for top-to-bottom reform, beginning with an examination of the function of NAR, local Associations and indeed our very bloated labor force.

Not many will deny the circus is over. Fewer still will acknowledge the need for comprehensive analysis of the business structure of our industry and how it delivers economic value to entrepreneurs.

A remnant of hard-liners still delivers a false message of a restored economy that will support our 1,000,000± participants, an unbelievable membership count that has no relevance to sound economic and business reality.

Our economy is irrevocably tied to global networks. The real estate industry now has its best shot at reformation. Who will lead the transformation and what forms will it take? What transcendent person, group or entity will emerge with solutions to the complex problems we face as an industry?

How will technology, economics, localism, property data and global realities be bent and shaped to create new vibrant business models that can produce and sustain profitability required for the risks inherent in the real estate business.

After all, the show must go on!

Related posts:

1. Warning: RE Industry will be Harmed if Bailout is Backed by Us

Brokers, Boards, Books and Buildings remain the economic blocks that continue to drive our brokerage profit models. Three of the four are still alive and kicking. What are the Four Bs, how do they function and what, if anything, do they mean to us now? More importantly, how do they meet contemporary consumer expectations?

Broker/Owners are literally the financial backbone of the real estate industry. e-Partner and this blog, REALonomics, support the importance of sustaining the roll Broker/Owners play in perpetuating real estate transactions and indeed propping up the industry at large. It is Broker/Owners who literally guarantee the financial stability of the industry. They are real estate’s preeminent risk-takers.

They are almost always the sole guarantors of market presence and it is they who take most of the personal financial risk for the real estate organizations operating within thousands of communities.

Fact: Broker/Owners are losing their ability to produce and sustain profit for their local brokerage firms. The risks now out weigh the rewards, as many are discovering. TWe are facing the financial collapse of many Broker/Owners.

Broker/Owners have increasing lost their grip on the consumer due largely to (1) the widespread availability of property information to agents and consumers; (2) the industry’s empowerment of the vast numbers of agents with cutting-edge tools that tie them directly to consumers and (3) the irrelevance of their control over local Associations, formerly called “Boards of Realtors” and the centralization of power over consumer access to property by NAR.

Broker’s once maintain an iron grip on local property information through NAR’s establishment of Boards of Realtors owned by Broker/Owners. Broker/Owners still have stated authority over local Associations but their is little or nothing for them to control and their role is primarily administrative and therefore without economic benefit.

WATCH THIS PRESENTATION

Each local Board of Realtors (BOR) (now called “Association of Realtors”) once commanded total control over local property information on behalf of the paying members. It was the Broker/Owners that owned and controlled the local property information data, how it was received, formatted and distributed.

Through the BOR, Owners owned (no pun intended) and controlled ALL property information and ALL access to the information, whether by agents or the consumer. Therefore, they were assured of income and barring reckless squandering of funds they were also assured of a perpetuation of their profit and existence.

Through such property information control, Broker/Owners were able to set individual brokerage listing fees, control agent commissions and literally decide who could play and who could not play.

The union of Brokers and Boards coupled with geographic market definitions and control of property information meant that ALL consumers were required to work through one channel of expertise for any real estate investment, that being Broker/Owners.

Local BORs were compelled to comply with local Broker/Owners who were the ligitimate owners of property information within a specified regional area. All of this engineered and mandated by NAR.

WATCH THIS PRESENTATION

It might surprise many of our readers when we tell you that the primary technology used during the era of Broker and Board control was ink and paper.

The Board of Realtors’ MLS Book was the officially designated and exclusive repository for local property information. It was, in fact, the technology used by Brokers and Boards to distribute property information to consumers through the Broker’s agents.

To distribute new property information for use by agents, who were the monitors and purveyors of current property data to consumers, a new MLS book was printed at regular intervals. At the moment of printing, the data was defective, as some properties were sold and other listed for sale prior to print.

Data updates were facilitated through thousands and thousands of local MLS meetings held each week across the nation. At these ritual gatherings agents arrived, books and marking pens in hand, for the local property information “update” wherein properties were declared “sold” by agents and then robotically lined through in the MLS book.

Price adjustments were written into the margins of the MLS book along with other information verbally supplied by agents.

These meetings were quite the scene. Nonetheless, they represented the manner in which property information was collected, distributed, managed and updated for the ultimate end user, the consumer.

Let’s also remind ourselves of the operative phrase of that generation of Broker/Owners, Caveat Emptor, Latin for “Let the buyer beware.” In those days, the buyer was an unsuspecting consumer who was not at all represented in a real estate transaction but instead was told by us, “we only represent sellers but promise to treat all parties to the transaction fairly and honestly.”

WATCH THIS PRESENTATION

This brings us to the fourth “B” and the central pillar of the real estate business model used by Broker/Owners…Buildings.

The Brokers who owned the Boards published the Books that were placed in the hands of agents who were warehoused in Buildings in just about every market in the U.S.

The Buildings were the primary real estate market expression used by Broker/Owners. Bricks and mortar was the economic junction where consumers were provided with the most important and manditory requirement for acquiring relevant property information. Such information was only provides by agents in buildings owned or leased by brokers with books in hand that were printed by the boards.

In those days the components necessary for a real estate transaction to occur came together in a Broker/Owner’s office; these being buyer, seller, broker and property information. in those days we were the true “gate keepers” of the transaction.

Yard signs, newspaper ads, open houses and updesk calls were the path to consumer contact and ultimately a commission. These ingredients were the spider web designed to capture consumer buying leads in the local market.

Consumers had very little control over the process of buying real estate, a process completely controlled by Broker/Owners and their local marketing machines.

Circa 1970. Something began to happen in the late 60s and early 70s. National real estate franchising came into play and began to redefine a Broker/Owner’s market from local to regional and even national.

Franchising brought with it the first real attempt to provide Broker/Owners with a horizontal component to their business model, increasing their potential for referrals and relocation by means of national branding and networking with member of like kind.

During this same time frame, local Boards began to digitize property data and to generate computerized MLS systems that could deliver property data to a Broker’s office electronically. This would later prove to be the beginning of the end of one of the four Bs, the Book.

About 25 years after the first digitized MLS endeavors began . Computerized MLS, personal computers, modems and ultimately the Internet came into play and provided the empowerment of agents and consumers with ubiquitous real estate information.

In 1994, MLS property information became available on the World Wide Web (WWW), known then as the “Information Super Highway.”

Today, the MLS books are gone. Buyer beware is gone.

What still remains, hanging by an economic thread are the remaining three Bs; Brokers, Buildings and Boards (renamed Associations).

The total control of local property information by local Associations is being challenged and seems to be eroding.

Each of the remaining three Bs is now under scrutiny by an increasingly powerful consumer. It looks like the next “B” to fall is the notion of “Buildings” as an ultimate but now unaffordable retail expression of a Broker/Owner’s real estate market presence.

REALonomics, as a student, analyst, crytic and developer of concepts related to the real estate industry’s business models, can’t help but wonder which of the remain two “Bs” is most in jeopardy:

Will it be Broker/Owner or our local Associations of Realtors (Boards) that will be transformed or eliminated?

Your thoughts?

WATCH THIS PRESENTATION

Related posts:

1. Home Price Declines Hit New Records: What Can the Industry Do?
2. The Inman Comment
3. Our Genie is on the Loose & Fresh out of Wishes

President Obama flew into Arizona to announce his blueprint for a $75,000,000,000 mortgage bailout known as the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan.”

REALonomics has digested the preliminary outline of this program which claims to “…offer assistance to as many as to 9 million homeowners…” through a combination of loan modifications and propping up of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, support for state housing authorities and financial incentives for lenders to re-tool existing loans for a predefined set of homeowners whose mortgages fall into specific qualifying categories.

How does it Work and who are the Beneficiaries?

Will the President’s plan make a difference and if so, to whom and when? And, is the plan a sound economic model that will actually help homeowners facing foreclosure, as claimed by the administration? Is this another step in the direction of creating a dependency upon the federal government for and on the part of some Americans and lending institutions?

Let’s take a look at the plan and ask some hard questions.

The plan, set to kick into gear on March 4, 2009, uses carefully calculated qualifying formulas based upon principal mortgage balance ceilings, rigid LTV ratios and market value reductions. The result is yes, some homeowners will be assisted. If you own property in California where 60% of the mortgages exceed $417,000, you will not qualify.

At this point, it looks as if those with higher end home values and jumbo or super jumbo loans are not going to be granted any relief. Only first position mortgages qualify. If you have a second, its only value is to help justify a reduction of the first based upon its contribution to your debt to income ratio.

DOWNLOAD THE EXAMPLE DOCUMENT HERE.

What’s the Financial Carrot for the Lenders?

The plan states that “Treasury will partner with the financial institutions to reduce homeowners’ monthly mortgage payments.” In effect, the taxpayer will be matching the reductions lenders approve on a “dollar-for-dollar” basis to a write down to a 31% debt-to-income ratio for borrowers and lenders will be required to keep the modifications in place for five years.

We will all be funding cash payments to the lenders to pull off the Obama plan. Lenders will receive up-front fees in the amount of $1,000 for each eligible modification. Lenders will also receive bonus payments monthly as long as the borrower stays current on the loan. Are you in favor of such support to lenders?

There’s more! Lenders will be given $1,500 for taking action with those homeowners who are NOT in default or behind in payments and an additional $500 for servicers for modification made while a borrower at risk of imminent default is still current. Is this something you like?

Still more! The government (taxpayers) will also pay up to $1,000 each year against principle balances on loans where the borrower is current on their mortgage payments. This takes place each year the borrower is current for up to 5 years. How does this sound to you?

Are we actually creating a new hybrid sub-prime mortgage product that is simply financed by taxpayers with newly printed money backed by loans from foreign banks?

DOWNLOAD THE PROGRAM FACT SHEET.

Are the Capital Market Supporting Obama’s Plan?

In short, the financial markets have already started to reject the plan with CitiGroup stock dropping to less than $2 and Bank of America plummeting on fears of nationalization of their enterprises and indeed the government control of the financial backbone of the American economy.

Since the federal government started tinkering with banks, throwing our TARP money, setting forth plans to retool mortgages and delivering so-called bailout plans, the stock market has plunged to pre 2002 levels with historic losses, indicating a continued lack of confidence on the part of investors in federal bailout programs.

Another interesting question those of us in the real estate industry should be asking is whether or not this plan will actually stop the reduction of home values, open the credit markets for new sales and stop foreclosures?

What would happen if we just left the market alone? We are already seeing banks stepping up to the plate to solve the problem without taxpayer support.

Do we want our industry’s future to be predicated on total control of the lending and qualifying process, government determination of property values and a segmentation of homeowners into various classes and categories based on home values? Or, do we have more confidence in the free market to work its way through this problem.

REALonomics believes we have only seen the beginning of the creation of a “Nanny State” that may result in more damage to the economy. To top it all off, the CEO of Bank of America has been subpoena in an attempt to force disclosure of bonuses paid to bank executives prior to BofA receiving TARP funds.

Are we thinking long term? Should we back off and let the markets self-correct? Are we willing to take on massive personal obligations for government backed mortgage solutions? How will the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan” impact our children and grandchildren?

DOWNLOAD THE 14 QUESTION FAQ DOCUMENT.

Related posts:

1. The Federalization of our Financial System at your Expense
2. Home Price Declines Hit New Records: What Can the Industry Do?
3. Gekko was Wrong…Greed is Bad

This time around, however, NAR is getting it right and deserves the support of the industry…yes, I have already sent my letter to my elected officials supporting “The Four Point Plan” put forth by by NAR. REALonomics is endorsing this plan with comments inserted into NAR’s message that was emailed to members.

NAR has urged Congress to include the following provisions in any future legislation:

NAR POINT ONE: Make the $7500 tax credit available to all purchasers and eliminate the repayment requirement. The credit’s limited availability and required repayment terms have severely limited the credit’s appeal to potential homebuyers. As a result, the credit has not been widely used or proven effective at stimulating sales.

REALonomics: We concur. The tax credit should be a true credit against taxes, however, and at the descretioin of the buyer, be taken in one year or extended to up to three years of equal credit deduction. This would allow each consumer some flexibility in the application of the credit based upon income and other factors. In addition, we would like to see the deduction made available to investors who purchase in calendar year 2009.

NAR POINT TWO: Make the 2008 FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loan limits permanent. New rules for 2009 would significantly reduce the FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loan limit from their 2008 levels. Now is not the time to limit the availability of affordable mortgages.

REALonomics: This part of NAR’s plan needs further clarification for members. In general, we concur, but the devil could be lingering in the details on this one.

NAR POINT THREE: Get the Emergency Treasury bank relief program back on track by targeting more funds to mortgage relief efforts and increasing efforts to mitigate foreclosures. Don’t just give the banks unrestricted cash. Make the program work to improve mortgage and housing markets as it was originally intended.

REALonomics: Yes, NAR, this position is the correct one! We were all burned by the ambiguity of the emergency relief program and we, in fact, got hood-winked into believing that toxic mortgages were going to be purchased and sold to investors at discounts. In fact, the banks just banked (pun obvious) the bucks or, in some cases used the funds to purchase other banks. But the problem is also an empowered Treasury Secretary who could simply redirect the funds in just about any way he so desired. To date not a single mortgage has been purchased and resold. The mitigation of foreclosure loses is a tricky one and REALonomics takes a very conservative approach to how this should work. Consumers who are in default should not be rewarded without some additional tax incentives to those who are not in default. We cannot reward bad behavior. Leveling the playing field is going to require caution and discipline.

NAR POINT FOUR: Permanently bar banks and banking conglomerates from engaging in real estate brokerage and management. The banks have proven they have enough to do to simply properly manage their current lines of business. Do we really want them to manage the home buying process? Imagine what could have been the situation now if they already had the added ability to engage in real estate sales.

REALonomics: On this point REALonomics disagrees with NAR. Point four should not be on the table at this time. Although we are not yet convinced that we should advocate bank brokerage models, there remains a lot of room for discussion on how banks can collaborate in economic partnerships with real estate brokerage firms in order to shore-up the profitability of each to the benefit of the consumer. It’s understandable why NAR, as a preservation move, would call for this issue to be addressed and finalized. REALonomics still advocates streamlined and consumer-centric home buying/home financing models. Such models might be created out of financial partnerships that are carefully blueprinted so that banks and brokerage can maintain levels of expertise.

CLICK HERE to take action on the NAR Four Point Plan (NAR members only).

Related posts:

1. NAR Reports it’s Stimulus Progress

Unlocking Franchise Economics: Pt 3

This is the third installment of a three part post entitled Unlocking Franchise Economics (see Part 1, see Part 2)

Have we ever wondered how the consumer views our real estate industry franchises? If we are going to unlock franchise economics and truly understand the value propositions inherent in franchising we must also see them (franchises) as the consumer sees them and we must ONLY value them as does the consumer.

If you were to create a list of distinctions…real ones…dynamic ones…that separate one franchise brand from another in the eyes of the only true client, the consumer, what would those distinctions be and how are they manifest in the process of transacting business?

Enjoy the PhotoBlog below. Read it carefully and ask yourself what might happen if the consumer could place all franchises into one blender and extract the best. What would the “best” be? What are the clear distinctions between franchise A, B and C?

If franchises have any value, and REALonomics believes they do, what is the empirical value to the consumer? Is franchise value a black-and-white proposition or, will we see living color coming out of the recession in 2009 and beyond? What changes do franchisors need to make to create distinction in local markets? Can distinction even be created and sustained? Do we need to blend the franchises? Do we need fewer franchises? Will franchises be blended out of economic necessity and through mergers and acquisitions?

If a Broker/Owner adopts a franchise model what is the set of “measureable” distinctions derrived from the relationship that will impact the consumer? Specifically, how do franchise distinctions create revenue for Broker/Owners in the crowded marketplace?

Related posts:

1. Unlocking Franchise Economics: Pt 2
2. Unlocking Franchise Economics: Pt 1
3. REALONOPOLY – Does Anyone Still Wanna Play this Old Game?

The first camp’s position seems to be “I don’t do politics as a real estate professional, it’s personal and I don’t mix it with business…that’s what I pay NAR to do for me.”

The second camp takes a different approach which might be characterized as, “If not now, when…we need to start speaking up and letting our individual and collective voices be heard in order to impact decision-making.”

As we approach the election on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, REALonomics would like to encourage all real estate professional, regardless of which camp they reside in or what their political persuasions might be to vote.

Voting influences outcomes. A proactive real estate industry that votes is but the expression of choice on a single day. Beyond the ballot box we should be using our individual voices to influence opionion and stake our individual and collective places in the political process. Our individual voices form a type of collective concensus in the arena of public opinion and the national soapbox of ideas.

We can engage the voting public by exploring political social media opportunities that are outside industry, such as iVoteAmerica and other political blogs that reach the general public.

Let your voice be heard by voting and by blogging about the great issues of our day that are influencing the country today and into the future.

Related posts:

1. REALonomics Launches National Political Blog Network

It looks like Mr. Greenspan has finally started to step up to the plate with acknowledgements that his thinking was less that stellar.

Today, in a hearing before the House Oversight Committee Greenspan finally acknowledge, if only by innuendo, that his judgment fell short of what was needed to predict the housing market decline.

“Given the financial damage to date, I cannot see how we can avoid a significant rise in layoffs and unemployment.

With respect to Greenspan’s belief that banks would act in the best interest of shareholders, Greenspan said his thinking was wrong because there was, “a flaw in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure that defines how the world works.” The current crisis was referred to by Greenspan in his opening statement: “We are in the midst of once-in-a-century credit tsunami.”

In essence Greenspan called this a “mistake” in how he viewed the integrity of banks and mortgage companies. Makes us wonder if he just fell off the turnip truck.

Of the current financial crisis, Greenspan said that it “turned out to be much broader than anything that I could have imagined.”

Unfortunately, Mr. Greenspan has not yet acknowledged his “mistake” in his endorsement of subprime lending as something good for consumers. Perhaps another day.

Related posts:

1. Greenspan…Endorsement of Subprime?
2. Gekko was Wrong…Greed is Bad
3. The Inman Comment

EDITORIAL

REALonomics urged the real estate industry to reject the $700,000,000,000 government bailout program.

The National Association of Realtors (NAR) took the opposite position and even launched a national public relations campaign designed to convince us, the members, to support something that historically we have never supported, government interference in the private sector free market.

Well, here we are, a few days hence, witnessing the most massive loss of personal and real estate wealth in the history of the world.

Now let’s talk about the real estate industry specifically. The central wealth producing asset of most Americans is their investment(s) in real estate. Our industry has been dedicated to the creation of wealth through home ownership supported by one’s ability to qualify for mortgage financing and to service the debt based upon qualifying ratios.

It appears we have adopted a position that runs counter to our industry’s historical roots. But worse than that, through industry support of the bailout we have actually made a fundamental mistake in economic judgment and we may have harmed the ability of brokerage firms and agents to be effective ambassadors and cousellors to consumers.

Are we ready to exchange a long-held traditional and fundamental economic model for a new system where the notion of “bail-out” through subsidized real estate welfare is a valid competing model?

Should NAR have supported the $700 billion bail out? We don’t think so and we said so in our post entitled “Warning: RE Industry will be Harmed if Bailout is Backed by Us” on September 30th, 2008.

REALonomics calls on NAR to reverse its position and return to our historical position where we only believe in the American dream of home ownership where individuals and families, under the guidance of sound advice from Brokers and agents, purchase homes they can afford.

NAR’s support of the bail out was wrong and we should make that admission to the American people so that we can regain the trust of consumers.

Related posts:

1. The Great American Real Estate Alchemy
2. Obama, McCain and Real Estate
3. Warning: RE Industry will be Harmed if Bailout is Backed by Us

According to a recent Standard&Poors/Case-Shiller home price index of the top twenty metropolitan area home values, we are seeing record declines. Get a copy of the report.

Here’s the breakdown synopsis (source: Standard&Poors/Case-Shiller) (arrow highlights by REALonomics):

In these and hundreds of other markets, home value declines are taking a toll on individuals and families whose financial security is predicated almost entirely on home ownership.

There are at least three things local real estate companies in partnership with mortgage and title service providers could do for struggling homeowners.

1. Set up financial support workshops led by experienced brokers/agents designed to coach homeowners with respect to their property values, the current trends, their specific mortgage situation and how to take positive steps to stay in their homes unless they absolutely must sell at this time. Such workshops should utilize skilled mortgage service counselors (not loan officers) who can give them answers;
2. Real estate agents in troubled markets should be literally returning to the old practice of knocking on doors, not to get listings but to meet homeowners as “Property Consultants” to discuss specific home values within their neighborhoods and offer advice. In addition, brokerage firms should deliver resource information to homeowners that will advise them about market conditions, refinancing and other information they need;
3. Brokerage firms should turn a portion of their print media budget and Internet costs toward creating blogs that are specifically administered by trained “Property Consultants” who can interact with property owners and deliver solid advice in real time.

During the next 24-36 months brokerage firms who want to build and retain consumer loyalty and predisposition should take a serious look at engaging in the creation of a group of “Property Consultants” who engage homeowners who are facing uncomfortable times.

Such an emphasis sends a powerful signal to consumers that we are serious, skilled, well trained, competent and knowledgeable professionals who can and will assist them with any property question they have, including financial counseling.

Related posts:

1. Obama & a New Real Estate Industry
2. Biting the Hand that Wants to Feed Us
3. Home Real Estate – Model Perfect

REALonomics continues to take a position that the natural market cycles should dictate the recovery and that government sponsored bail out attempts will create additional long term issues and actually stall a real recovery.

Although many in the industry favor federal intervention we are hard pressed to find anyone setting forth specific rationale for doing so. We hear a lot of emotion but not much sound economic reasoning based upon our industry’s historical commitment to traditional capitalism as the driving force behind real estate home ownership.

Wachovia was snatched up by CitiGroup just days ago. According to the FDIC’s website, there have been 40 bank failures since 2000 and NONE of them…yes, that’s right…none of them was bailed out by taxpayers. At iVoteAmerica.com there are predictions of more bank mergers over the next several business days.

Failing banks will continue to be absorbed just as ALL of them have been absorbed to date. After all, the best investment good banks can make today is to purchase assets of failing banks for pennies on the dollar and delivering huge internal rates of return to themselves. Therefore, patience is called for and we ought not to allow ourselves to be influenced by knee-jerk politicians from either party. Forget the election for a moment! Forget your favorite party preference for a moment!

Yesterday, September 29, 2008, the stock market lost more than $1 trillion in value. REALonomics predicts that investors will surface, shifting their investment strategies to more conservative, traditional positions.

NAR is Wrong on Rescue Package

Furthermore, REALonomics believes that the endorsement of the bailout by the National Association of Realtors (NAR) is a dead wrong endorsement and a clear indicator of NAR’s desperation with the housing market and its departure from the traditional approach to real property investment where true equity was a necessity to home ownership.

Our core value has always been home ownership as the primary investment for individuals and families. Behind this core value we have heretofore (prior to subprime lending) advised our clients to utilize conservative strategies when purchasing a home, including establishing and NEVER compromising their equity position. Have we decided as an industry that this is bad advice and adopted a dangerous borrow-to-the-hilt value system?

Some of you will remember the days when we encouraged homeowners to build “true” lasting equity that they could rely on when it came time to retire. The home was a person’s primary savings and investment account. I have a question for the RE industry; “Have we decided to depart from this core value position?”

Danger, Danger and More Danger to Owners

What about real estate company owners, our favorite topic? If the bailout occurs with a massive amount of taxpayer dollars used to rescue the so called “toxic mortgages” most real estate company owners will be effectively out of business within a short time as home values will likely plummet to pre 2001 levels. The toxic loans will be discounted to unprecedented levels, impacting literally every property value in metro markets.

If a rescue occurs, all property values in the United States will immediately decline. In fact, the financial institutions are already cutting HELOCs and credit card amounts in a desperate attempt to ratchet the market downward.

If the rescue occurs as currently outline by the Senate and voted down by the House, the ability for the average American buyer to access available real estate investment capital will diminish the market by perhaps another 50%. Although REALonomics is not attempting to inject hysteria into an already highly charged situation, we believe it is important that Realtors® have a clear understanding of the potential long term risks of a bailout by taxpayers.

Just Plain Old Bad Business and Bad Policy

The rescue of bad loans is simply bad real estate business and bad real estate business is bad for the real estate industry and bad for real estate company owners.

Let the market fix itself. The market will repair itself and the results will be less painful than allowing the bailout to prevail. The fact is…actually, the truth is, we are going to be harmed. The only question is how much pain are we going to allow to be inflicted upon the industry?

If we do not allow the market to heal itself and we adopt a taxpayer bailout mentality we will be adopting a fundamental shift in the historical values espoused by the real estate industry and to a large degree we will have socialized real estate, diminishing the value of all Realtors® and the industry itself. Such a shift in policy will create a huge potential for government oversight of the real estate industry and create transaction liabilities for broker/owners, franchisors and let’s not forget appraisers and mortgage lenders.

We encourage you to think deeply upon these things.

Related posts:

1. Government Interference has Harmed American Real Estate Wealth
2. An all Carrot and no Stick Industry
3. Home Price Declines Hit New Records: What Can the Industry Do?