Archive for November 30th, 2009

Filed under: Major movement, Forecasts, Good news, Options, Technical Analysis

VPRT logoVistaprint (VPRT - option chain) shares are rising today after the company announced this morning despite terminating a membership program that it still expects Q2 adjusted EPS of 55 to 60 cents on revenue of $167 to $175 million, roughly in line with analysts’ forecasts of 59 cents and $175.05 million, respectively. If you think that the stock won’t fall by too much in the coming months, then now could be a good time to look at a bullish hedged trade on VPRT.

VPRT opened this morning at $55.15. So far today the stock has hit a low of $54.87 and a high of $56.00. As of 11:55, VPRT is trading at $55.88 up $2.78 (5.2%). The chart for VPRT looks neutral and S&P gives VPRT a neutral 3 STARS (out of 5) hold ranking.

Continue reading Vistaprint (VPRT) reaffirms Q2 guidance

Vistaprint (VPRT) reaffirms Q2 guidance originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:40:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Add to digg Add to del.icio.us Add to Google Add to StumbleUpon Add to Facebook Add to Reddit Add to Technorati


Via [bloggingstocks]


Via [bloggingstocks]


The News is littered with horror stories of homeowners that have been taken for a red tape ride, paperwork is lost, or applications are dropped because a vital piece of paperwork that was never actually requested is missing, all while homes are ultimately and tragically lost.

What can be done to accelerate this process and avoid being a main character in one of these horror stories. The truth is that there are no magic solutions, in some cases loan modifications are simply not an option.

That said, lenders have come up with a kind of formula to speed up loan workouts. If you fit these standards you can get  relatively quick help, if you don’t you must wait for the traditional case by case process. Unfortunately there are no guarantees and seemingly great candidates have also been abused by the system, but knowing the system lenders follow to fast track loan modifications can only help.

So what are the requirements?

1)    Your loan must be at least 60 days past due. Some banks require at least 90 days. One of the reasons for this is that the bank needs to be sure you really can’t afford the loan. If you are struggling but can make the payments Banks are not going to want to throw money away at a loan modification.
This does not mean I am recommending you to not pay your mortgage payments. Every case is different and in some cases you have more leverage on your bank if you have a good record. Check out www.hud.gov to find out where your closest mortgage counseling office is to get personalized advice.

2)    You need to prove you can’t pay your mortgage. Your expenses must exceed your income. Be ready with pertinent paperwork, you will be asked to prove this.

3)    The loan modification must be a long term solution. That means the cost of the monthly payments must be under 38% of your monthly income.

4)    You can’t be in bankruptcy.

5)    A loan modification must be a good deal for the lender. That means that the cost of modifying your loan must be cheaper than what the lenders would lose if they went ahead and sold your home. For instance, if you live in an area where homes did not fall in price and there is a high demand of houses (not sure where that would be, but let’s imagine) then the lenders are very unlikely to accept your lower interest and reduced principal balance requests when they can simply foreclose on the mortgage and sell your home for the same price or even a potential profit.

6)    You need to be able to prove that you can make the modified payments and that you will not default again.

Again, these requirements will not guarantee an approval but will increase your chances. The main point you need to get across to your bank or whoever the owner of your loan is, is that you are a good investment. That you are worth more money as a client than your home is worth with a foreclosure.

Related posts:

  1. Loan Modifications, 3 Nightmare Stories You Don’t Want To Copy
  2. Loan Modifications Are They Just A Big Scam
  3. Loan Modifications: 3 Reasons They Are So Slow

Related posts:

  1. Loan Modifications, 3 Nightmare Stories You Don’t Want To Copy
  2. Loan Modifications Are They Just A Big Scam
  3. Loan Modifications: 3 Reasons They Are So Slow

Source [blownmortgage]

Filed under: Analyst reports, Deals, Rumors, Private equity, Amer Intl Group (AIG), Options

A Financial Times report indicates that American International Group (AIG) could soon receive an offer on its aircraft leasing unit, known as International Lease Finance Corp. (ILFC). The newspaper claims that a consortium of private equity investors, led by current ILFC CEO Steven Udvar-Hazy, “is close to making a bid for about half of the aviation-leasing business.”

The consortium reportedly includes Onex, Greenbriar and Canada Pension Plan. An offer could be made as early as this week, according to FT’s sources. AIG set a deadline of Dec. 3 for bids on the unit, in hopes of making a decision by Dec. 15.

Continue reading Put players target AIG after ILFC bid rumors, price-target cut

Put players target AIG after ILFC bid rumors, price-target cut originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:40:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Add to digg Add to del.icio.us Add to Google Add to StumbleUpon Add to Facebook Add to Reddit Add to Technorati


Via [bloggingstocks]


It has been a surprise to see the number of comments on this blog that have revolved around the issue of ethics in mortgages and loan modifications. A pleasant surprise, but a surprise nonetheless. It is the single most popular controversy.

Are easy roll-over Bankruptcies morally wrong?

When should someone default on their mortgage payments if he is unemployed and with an underwater mortgage but still has cash in his bank account?

How easy should banks make it for clients to get loan modifications, or how “troubled” should homeowners be before they “deserve” them?

And, finally, what is probably the queen of controversy in the mortgage world. Should the government bailout homeowners that can’t afford their mortgage or simply let the natural market forces do their job?

I doubt any two people would agree on all those issues which is what makes ethics and mortgages such a controversial issue. What makes it even closer to the heart of all of us is that mortgages deal with homes, a basic need for our families and symbol of our identity.

Benjamin, from the http://thephoenixrealestateguide.com for example, commented that mortgages are simple contracts and that much of the ethical issues built around mortgages and bankruptcy exist only in our minds. The comment was a reply to a rather angry man that disagreed with the advice another reader was offering to underwater borrowers to call it a day and strategically foreclose and declare bankruptcy to get a fresh start. This is his comment with some very gentle editing:

It’s hard to argue the ethics of making such a decision.  The fact is that when someone buys a home, they enter into a contract.  If they pay the mortgage, they get to stay in the nice home.  If they don’t pay the mortgage, they lose the house.  Those are the rules.  The bank agreed to them and the homeowner agreed to them.  If everybody agreed to them at the time of purchase, then a strategic foreclosure or default is still playing within the established rules.
Morals have nothing to do with it in my opinion. It is black and white. Imagine you rent a movie a movie from redbox. You spend $1 and enter into a contract to rent the movie for a night.
You decide to keep it for a week instead.  Redbox will charge you for every night you keep it.  It was in the contract that you originally agreed to. Walking away is simply a tool in the tool box.

I am not sure about the Redbox illustration, it would seem to me that those that are strategically foreclosing a mortgage and then declaring bankruptcy would be more like someone who rents a movie with Redbox never takes it back and cancels the credit card they used, when asked to pay for the rental sells the DVD on the second market and gives whatever he gets to Redbox.

Nevertheless the point is in my opinion well made. If foreclosure is an agreed consequence to not paying your mortgage then there is no moral issue. The bank knew it was a possibility when it agreed to provide the loan. I think most people would agree with that.

However the issue, as I see it is more to do with the effects of bankruptcies caused by foreclosures on unprotected (i.e. with no collateral) loans, and if this is fair. Our view of bankruptcies has changed through the years. In the middle ages up to the 18th century prisons were mainly for criminals waiting to be banished or executed and for people who couldn’t pay their debts.

Today we generally don’t feel debtors deserve prison unless they commit fraud. However bankruptcy has kept much of its stigma, associated with dishonest and untrustworthy people. This has changed with time, bankruptcy becoming in many cases a logical financial tool to be used when things go wrong. Some would argue that it has become too easy to “get out” of debt while yet others would point out that current bankruptcy rules are stringent enough to make it a final resort few are happy to enter.

Related posts:

  1. Loan Modifications No Match For Rising US Foreclosures.
  2. Loan Modifications No Match For Rising US Foreclosures.
  3. Despite Loan Modifications, Foreclosures Will Continue To Rise Through 2010

Related posts:

  1. Loan Modifications No Match For Rising US Foreclosures.
  2. Loan Modifications No Match For Rising US Foreclosures.
  3. Despite Loan Modifications, Foreclosures Will Continue To Rise Through 2010

Source [blownmortgage]


Via [bloggingstocks]

Attorney General Jerry Brown has most likely received a response from the top 10 option ARM lenders in California given that November 23rd was the deadline to respond to his initial request for data.  Hopefully we’ll have a better sense of how deep the mess goes in the state but given the massive amount of […]

Attorney General Jerry Brown has most likely received a response from the top 10 option ARM lenders in California given that November 23rd was the deadline to respond to his initial request for data.  Hopefully we’ll have a better sense of how deep the mess goes in the state but given the massive amount of shadow inventory, I can tell you that the rabbit hole is much deeper than you may think.  Yet some would rather wallow in denial and somehow expect that an economy with no job growth is suddenly going to reinvigorate home prices up to the bubble heydays.  I understand the nostalgia but that doesn’t mean we’ll be seeing peak prices any time soon.  The state of California is looking at $20+ billion deficits annually until 2015.  We have some serious rebalancing to do.   Household balances sheets are riddled with debt and the allure of real estate is forever shattered for a generation.

Ultimately property values need to reflect local economies.  This might be hard for some to grasp since we really haven’t seen this for over a decade in California.  But bursting bubbles have a way of unraveling the yarn.  If California has an unemployment/underemployment rate of 23 percent, it is important to correct the employment situation before thinking about rising property values.  That is why California has seen tax revenues plummet because in the reality based economic system most of us live in, incomes are tight, stocks have taken a hit, and real estate has seen values collapse.  So the negative wealth effect is in full force just as people load up on Thanksgiving dinners and gear up for the Black Friday hamster consumer madness.

Even with the rise in the stock market, negative equity has exploded:

negative-equity

The number of underwater homeowners is mind boggling and a recent report now has 1 out of 4 borrowers underwater.  Here in California with toxic Alt-A and option ARMs, we have so many people underwater that we might need some scuba gear to get out of this housing abyss.  Yet we are in the eye of the hurricane here.  This is what we know:

-Alt-A and option ARMs are imploding but not making their way to inventory.  The current state is see no evil, hear no evil.

-$8,000 tax credit has spurred home buying

-FHA insured loans now finance about 4 out of 10 California home purchases

-The Fed has purchased over $1.2 trillion in mortgage backed securities pushing mortgage rates to historical lows

-Fall and winter are seasonally weaker selling seasons

-Commercial real estate defaults expected to explode in the next few years

With that said, what happens if one of these factors is removed or turns out to be worse than forecasted?  In fact, as we have discussed many times with FHA insured loans, defaults are so high that the government is now forced to confront reality:

“(SF Chronicle) Higher down payments. FHA’s current minimum cash down payment is 3.5 percent. On a $200,000 house, a buyer can bring just $7,000 to the table, aside from closing costs. A purchase of a $500,000 house in a high-cost area requires only $17,500 in cash.

Critics say 3.5 percent does not force purchasers to have enough “skin in the game” to discourage them from missing payments or risking foreclosure. Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., introduced legislation last month requiring a minimum 5 percent down payment for all future FHA loans. Ed Pinto, who served as Fannie Mae’s chief credit officer in the 1980s and is now a mortgage industry consultant, says FHA needs to move to a 10 percent minimum.”

I agree with Mr. Pinto that we need to bump up the minimum down payment for FHA insured loans to 10 percent.  That is politically not likely in this crony banking and government environment.  But 5 percent is now on the table.  As the defaults rise and the FHA goes the way of Fannie Mae, people are going to need to start forcing actual change.  Otherwise the government is simply the new subprime lender.  So what that you have a strong FICO score?  Many of those no-doc folks had strong FICO scores and how did that turn out?

The Shadow Knows – Pasadena

Today we are going to spend some time looking at Pasadena.  I want to dig deep into this city because we can see many of the above trends in full force.  Today we salute Pasadena with our Real City of Genius Award.

Let us first look at the total listed MLS inventory:

519 MLS listings

Foreclosures 22

Short Sales 42

So this is an interesting perspective of the area.  519 properties listed with 22 foreclosures and 42 short sales.  12 percent of inventory is distressed.  Not bad right?  Well let us look at the overall picture:

In reality, there are 742 distressed properties in the city that break out as follows:

pasadena distress

Bank owned:                           101

Auction scheduled:                  349

Pre-foreclosures (NOD):           292

This is how the data breaks down:

pasadena inventory

Plus, how many other homeowners have stopped paying altogether and have no NOD filed?  That is another large part of the shadow inventory.  But you can see from this data that the actual MLS only has roughly 64 properties of the total distressed list of 742.  The 742 number that the public cannot see is 42 percent larger than the entire MLS data.  There are literally two markets running parallel to one another.  The façade world of everything is okay and smiles everywhere and the other world where properties are defaulting in mass and borrowers are simply not paying their mortgages.

The real action is going on in the pre-foreclosures.  Let us look at a specific example:

pasadena home 1

This home is listed as a 4 bedroom and 3 baths home.  The data has it at 2,763 square feet so it is a good sized home.  Let us look at the sales history:

Sale History:

03/23/2000:                        $245,000

Not a bad price for this sized home in Pasadena.  Yet the action is in the details:

pasadena note details 1

Another home equity withdrawal machine here.  The $245,000 mortgage in 2000 was modest.  Then in 2001 $345,000 in mortgages were secured by the property in what looks to be a major cash out deal.  In 2003, Wells Fargo graciously gave a $411,000 mortgage on this place.  Let the bubble continue.  In 2004 the property got another refinance up to $555,000.  Then in 2005, it was party time.  A $750,000 note and a $100,000 note making the value go up to $850,000.  Finally in December of 2006, a $925,000 loan was secured on the place almost getting to $1 million from $245,000 in 2000.  Sure seemed like a fun decade in this home.

But now this person owes $25,779 just to get current.  Even the optimistic Zestimate places the value of this home at:

zestimate home one

To be abundantly clear, someone is likely to lose a lot of money here.  But for the time being, they can claim this place is worth $925,000.  This is the kind of world California real estate is in.  This is a historical, once in a lifetime kind of bubble.  For example on this home let us assume it sells for the Zestimate.  You would naturally think that a $300,000 loss would be reflected somewhere and it will be.  Yet the Case-Shiller is going to see a sizable jump here.  After all, the last recorded sale was for $245,000 so a sale of $600,000+ is a giant leap.  The magnitude of this bubble throws so many metrics off that we have no historical parallel.  Yet anyone that claims things are going well simply is not looking at the more nuanced data and the building pipeline.

Today we salute you Pasadena with our Real City of Genius Award.

Did You Enjoy The Post? Subscribe to Dr. Housing Bubble’s Blog to get updated housing commentary, analysis, and information.

Post from: Dr. Housing Bubble Blog

Real City of Genius: Today we Salute Pasadena. When losing $300,000 is Actually a Gain for Housing Values. Shadow Inventory Twice as big as Public Data.

Via [DrHousingBubble]

Close
E-mail It