Christian's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/101109/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/71022-zillow-aims-to-disrupt-lending-market-with-its-mortgage-marketplace?source=feed#comment-152903 152903 Fri, 18 Apr 2008 10:52:45 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/71815-making-starbucks-exciting-again?source=feed#comment-150592 150592
But reading the previous post does have me agreeing: Starbuck's may have become too "fast food". I don't feel the magic I did long ago when I first discovered my "latte" fixation. I'm still a regular customer, but wonder where the brand is going. Maybe the stores get too crowded to deliver the "coffee shop" experience. Pleasantness aside, a really good barista ought to know your name and the details on the coffee nirvana they serve.

Too many stores - when there's three stores within eyeshot standing outside a Starbuck's at a mall in SoCal, there's no wonder the employees can't keep track of the regulars and the drive-by's. I do like convenience, but would not mind having to drive a few more minutes to get to a shop that can recollect who I am and what I love to drink.

The changes Howard are pursuing are good, and I'm willing to purchase shares this cheap to invest in the roadmap. Hopefully he can rediscover the small Starbuck's coffee shop "magic".

Think I'm gonna get me a grande white mocha...]]> Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:17:02 -0400
But reading the previous post does have me agreeing: Starbuck's may have become too "fast food". I don't feel the magic I did long ago when I first discovered my "latte" fixation. I'm still a regular customer, but wonder where the brand is going. Maybe the stores get too crowded to deliver the "coffee shop" experience. Pleasantness aside, a really good barista ought to know your name and the details on the coffee nirvana they serve.

Too many stores - when there's three stores within eyeshot standing outside a Starbuck's at a mall in SoCal, there's no wonder the employees can't keep track of the regulars and the drive-by's. I do like convenience, but would not mind having to drive a few more minutes to get to a shop that can recollect who I am and what I love to drink.

The changes Howard are pursuing are good, and I'm willing to purchase shares this cheap to invest in the roadmap. Hopefully he can rediscover the small Starbuck's coffee shop "magic".

Think I'm gonna get me a grande white mocha...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/70348-upside-to-falling-prices-housing-affordabilty-index-reaches-4-year-high?source=feed#comment-133876 133876
Not by a long shot - I live in SoCal.]]> Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:34:53 -0400
Not by a long shot - I live in SoCal.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/68049-the-real-issues-behind-declining-home-equity-levels?source=feed#comment-125286 125286
What I DON'T think is right is talk of "bailing out" the buyers who are in over their head. I'm sure there are some wonderful exceptions to this stereotype, but both the buyer and lender are a fault - bailing them out only ensures that the prudent public foots the bill.]]> Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:41:40 -0400
What I DON'T think is right is talk of "bailing out" the buyers who are in over their head. I'm sure there are some wonderful exceptions to this stereotype, but both the buyer and lender are a fault - bailing them out only ensures that the prudent public foots the bill.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/67272-bernanke-s-message-can-t-be-any-clearer?source=feed#comment-122628 122628
What is ailing the "industry" now is the consequences of these poisons. The ailing effects like massive inventory, drop off in sales, and people up to their arses in debt. To try and "cure" these consequences and not reinforce the proper loan processes is just as many people have said: you're giving a drug to a rehabilitating addict.

The Fed needs to guide the lenders (okay, the banks - lord knows where the mortgages have gone beyond that) on what it can do and what it can't do to work out this mess. It's going to get far worse in the coming years, but throwing money at the problem isn't the solution - that's just a "get out of free" ticket for those that just need to go to jail.

Hearing things like "principal write-down" makes me wonder why I stopped house shopping in the fall of 2006, deeming the market too expensive. I should have just purchased that overpriced home back then. The Fed would have my back, forgiven the price I paid - voila! "principal write-down", and I'll end up owning just the same amount had I purchased the house now, a year-and-a-half later.... except I would have lived in it since.

You sign on the bottom line - you're liable for it. Loan sharks of yore had a more colorful way of dealing with people that didn't pay up.]]> Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:10:49 -0500
What is ailing the "industry" now is the consequences of these poisons. The ailing effects like massive inventory, drop off in sales, and people up to their arses in debt. To try and "cure" these consequences and not reinforce the proper loan processes is just as many people have said: you're giving a drug to a rehabilitating addict.

The Fed needs to guide the lenders (okay, the banks - lord knows where the mortgages have gone beyond that) on what it can do and what it can't do to work out this mess. It's going to get far worse in the coming years, but throwing money at the problem isn't the solution - that's just a "get out of free" ticket for those that just need to go to jail.

Hearing things like "principal write-down" makes me wonder why I stopped house shopping in the fall of 2006, deeming the market too expensive. I should have just purchased that overpriced home back then. The Fed would have my back, forgiven the price I paid - voila! "principal write-down", and I'll end up owning just the same amount had I purchased the house now, a year-and-a-half later.... except I would have lived in it since.

You sign on the bottom line - you're liable for it. Loan sharks of yore had a more colorful way of dealing with people that didn't pay up.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/46773-outlook-for-the-market-the-fed-and-housing?source=feed#comment-95636 95636
Same thing with the housing market - it's 4%, yes, but the actions of that 4% and of the various speculators in the market will affect the rest of the homeowners across the country.

I'm sure homebuilders will do well long term - it's just a question of how long and how severe the intermediate trough will last while we slog thru this housing mess.]]> Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:35:23 -0400
Same thing with the housing market - it's 4%, yes, but the actions of that 4% and of the various speculators in the market will affect the rest of the homeowners across the country.

I'm sure homebuilders will do well long term - it's just a question of how long and how severe the intermediate trough will last while we slog thru this housing mess.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/45174-getting-the-real-estate-crisis-right?source=feed#comment-94227 94227
Fundamentally, what changed to cause the big run up? I don't think there was a massive "religous revolution" that 5-6% of the population all decided within a few years time that being in a house was the place to be. Something that this nominal percentage (4 million households?) hasn't even devoted a passing thought to in the last several decades. Low interest rates, and the classic: I gotta buy - housing's going nowhere but up. Supply was ramping up, but demand was enormous, the "next big thing."

In its nascent stages, it was quite fun. But as the prices ascended out of reach of pretty much everyone, more people had to resort to adjustables, so-called "liar loans", and (gasp!) option loans. I'm not sure why the comment was made about the U.S. being "different" with regards to adjustables. Many of my relatives still can't fathom why I'm planning to put 20% down (on a 30yr fixed) on my next home purchase (it won't be anytime soon).

Now the party's over, foreclosures are up, interest rates are up, and lending has pretty much ground to a standstill. Add to this mix people who we expect HAVE to sell their home (relocation, job loss, illness, etc.), we've got a very different supply/demand relationship.

What I submit is that we do have a correction, and this is in absence of an outright recession. Home values are coming down, and yup, it'll take some time. I don't think we'll reach huge levels of depreciation (maybe in some of the "bubble" markets), but there needs to be a reckoning between what's available, and what people want or can buy.

One more thing: a house shouldn't be considered an investment - maybe a commercial building is. In the past several years, yes - plunking down several thousand a month on a vacant place for 10-20% annual growth may be a nice "investment." But in the "norm" of recent decades past, a couple of thousand a month for an ROI that keeps in line with inflation ain't an investment - it a place you call "home."]]> Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:40:52 -0400
Fundamentally, what changed to cause the big run up? I don't think there was a massive "religous revolution" that 5-6% of the population all decided within a few years time that being in a house was the place to be. Something that this nominal percentage (4 million households?) hasn't even devoted a passing thought to in the last several decades. Low interest rates, and the classic: I gotta buy - housing's going nowhere but up. Supply was ramping up, but demand was enormous, the "next big thing."

In its nascent stages, it was quite fun. But as the prices ascended out of reach of pretty much everyone, more people had to resort to adjustables, so-called "liar loans", and (gasp!) option loans. I'm not sure why the comment was made about the U.S. being "different" with regards to adjustables. Many of my relatives still can't fathom why I'm planning to put 20% down (on a 30yr fixed) on my next home purchase (it won't be anytime soon).

Now the party's over, foreclosures are up, interest rates are up, and lending has pretty much ground to a standstill. Add to this mix people who we expect HAVE to sell their home (relocation, job loss, illness, etc.), we've got a very different supply/demand relationship.

What I submit is that we do have a correction, and this is in absence of an outright recession. Home values are coming down, and yup, it'll take some time. I don't think we'll reach huge levels of depreciation (maybe in some of the "bubble" markets), but there needs to be a reckoning between what's available, and what people want or can buy.

One more thing: a house shouldn't be considered an investment - maybe a commercial building is. In the past several years, yes - plunking down several thousand a month on a vacant place for 10-20% annual growth may be a nice "investment." But in the "norm" of recent decades past, a couple of thousand a month for an ROI that keeps in line with inflation ain't an investment - it a place you call "home."]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/44595-the-existing-home-sales-report-beats-expectations?source=feed#comment-93734 93734
The median skews the picture, as some people know, since it doesn't take into account the mix of homes sold during the period.

Last year, around this time, we were looking at 2500-2600 sq ft homes at the $700k to $800k range. Now you can routinely fine almost 3000 sq ft homes for mid $600's. It seems to have accelerated to the downside in the past few months.]]> Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:57:10 -0400
The median skews the picture, as some people know, since it doesn't take into account the mix of homes sold during the period.

Last year, around this time, we were looking at 2500-2600 sq ft homes at the $700k to $800k range. Now you can routinely fine almost 3000 sq ft homes for mid $600's. It seems to have accelerated to the downside in the past few months.]]>