Gretchen Skeaton

Path to $8000 Credit....Need to Get Moving

2009-08-12T17:36:00Z

Path to the $8000 Federal Tax Credit: On 12/2/2009 Credit is gone! Need to be in new home 12/1/2009!

10% of Sales Price of Your Primary Residence Up to $8000! (10% of Home Sold for $80,000 or Greater)


Buyer Qualification	Single Filer:$75,000 Joint Filers: $150,000 Reduced Credit for Single Filer: up to $95,000 Joint Filers: up to $170,000	Must be Primary Residence	Not owned a Primary Residence in the Past 3 Years Consult Tax Accountant
Seller Qualification	Seller not a Blood Relative	Step Relative does Qualify	Consult a Tax Accountant
Property Qualification	Type of Residence: -Detached Home or -Attached Home or -Condo or Co-Op Located in United States	Purchase between 1-1-09 and 11-30-09 Occupy/Occupancy Permit by 12-1-09 (Moved In)	Not a Second or Vacation Home Can not sell for 3 years without some Penalty. Consult a Tax Accountant
Apply for Refund	IRS Form 5405	Claim Credit with an Amended Tax Return or Claim Credit in 2010	Consult a Tax Accountant

Why Buy Now? Appears we are the point where Interest Rates, Home Prices, and Supply = Greater Affordability

At this writing the Fixed Interest Rate is 5.12% for Conventional loans and 5.24% for FHA loans.

Average Fixed Interest Rate over the last 30 years is 8.75%

Home Prices are approaching 2005 or 2004 prices depending on SW Washington or Portland, OR location. Inventory is beginning to decline when 2009 months of inventory is compared to 2008 months of inventory.

Gretchen's Good Home Buy of the Week of 1/5/2009

2009-01-04T12:52:00Z

I regularly preview homes to keep myself informed on the residential real estate inventory in the Vancouver Washington area and as I mentioned in other blogs, I am seeing some very good buys! So here is my good buy of the week.

This home is located in the Heights Neighborhood. This is how the Heights Neighborhood is described on the City of Vancouver's website on the its Communty section page:
"The Vancouver Heights Neighborhood, located in the south central portion of the city, feels like a comfortable “home town” within a big city. As a microcosm of the larger community, it includes over 1600 residences, 45 businesses, public facilities, and open spaces. Vancouver Heights was voted as the Neighborhood of the 150th in 2007 in a contest where residents voted on neighborhood association entries printed in The Columbian as part of Vancouver's 150th celebration."

The average price of a home in the Heights Neighborhood is $258,086 and the average year built for this neighborhood is 1977.

My pick for the week is priced at $199,900. MLS# 8101330
The lot size is almost a quarter of an acre, 0.21 acres which gives you space for a garden; gives you space for children to play; and you are not looking directly into your neighbor's home or feel like you are part of their summer barbeque. A yard meant to be enjoyed! Another plus is that it is located right across the street from a park.

This 3 bedromm, 1.5 bath 1028 sq. ft. well maintained home has
-three sided fireplace between living room and kitchen, warmth that can be shared and viewed from multiple areas
-hardwood floors, a popular feature you will love
-forced air gas heat, gives you great comfort
-large 2 car garage and a tool shed, storeage place for your projects

This home has been cherished for years and is looking to be cherished in the future!

Call me at 360-608-8541 or email me at GretchenSkeaton@comcast.net if you would like more information or a personal tour.

One of the top 10 of America's Best-Long Term Real Estate Bets...Portland, OR/Vancouver, WA area

2008-12-23T19:10:00Z

According to an article in Forbes.com written by Matt Woolsey on December 16, 2008, the Portland OR area which includes the Vancouver, WA area is the 9th best bet. The #1 Best Bet is Seattle, WA. Why? According to Woolsey, the top 10 best bets are such because they grew in value and avoided large swings of excess and stress, meaning these cities did not overbuild....were less volatile. Supply and demand was governed/managed. In some cities, the geography helped govern the supply, as he states of Seattle. In Portland, the areas' conservative building patterns and vacancy fluctuations make it a steady market, a kind of stability.

Job growth and construction rates are important determinants of an area's future health, he also states. For Portland/Vancouver area from Moody's Economy.com, the projected job growth for 2008-2017 will be 1%. As I read this article, it reinforced a document I read by John Burns that showed this areas' growth as steady with no large swings as is often seen in our Southern border state, California.

Woolsey states in the article that prices are likely to continue falling nationwide for at least a year as the mortgage and housing markets shake out of their hangovers. He further states that the cities on the best bet list possess the strongest fundamentals for when the market settles. If you want to read the full article go to http://www.forbes.com/2008/12/16/cities-ten-homes-forbeslife-cx_mw_1216realestate_print.html. In the article, click on In Depth: America's Best Long-Term Housing Bets to get the details on the 10 cities.

So buyers, the Vancouver/Portland area is a great area to buy and now is the time to buy before the Shake Out is complete. Look for a great home within your budget. There are numerous such homes...affordability is real. Do you have some savings, 3-5% of the sales price; have you reduced your debt,and have you been paying your bills on time, (those old fundamentals)? There are loans available. I invite you to attend the Home Buying Seminar scheduled for January 24, 2008 from 9 AM-2 PM. Call/email me for details.

And Sellers, it just might be a great time to move up, move on, or get more space or luxury. As long as those same fundamentals are in place, you can be set to make that move. If you have equity in your home and are willing to forget what the home sold for at the height of the boom...rather look at the unusal appreciation of approximately 5%. I'd be happy to work up some numbers for you.

Commentary on the Real Estate Market Trend for the Vancouver, WA and Portland, OR Areas

2008-12-15T20:04:00Z

My commentary concerning the December 2008 Real Estate Market Trends for the Vancouver, WA and Portland, OR:

It certainly is an interesting time for our country and maybe the world due to poor decisions made by many people during the most recent real estate boom! And as I mentioned in my last newsletter, I have decided to give little credibility to the real estate news reporting.

What I know, here in the Pacific Northwest:

1. Financing for homes is available and offered at a historically low interest rate!

Several loan consultants have been sending me emails saying they have loans available.

If I was considering purchasing a home, I would definitely purchase now!!

At the Home Buying Seminar of which I am one of the presenters, the loan consultant presented several programs.

2. Homes available to purchase (Inventory) is high!

Fewer homes are selling (4-8%/month).

Inventory currently includes short sales and bank owned properties impacting the homes available that have yet to sell.

Once the short sale and bank owed property inventory is depleted/reduced, the inventory picture will be more normal.

The reduction in inventory impacts that supply and demand factor that affects sales and especially prices.

As I preview properties, I have seen some really nice homes that are reasonably priced!!!

3. The 15%/year appreciation in the price of homes could not continue...homes would not be affordable at that rate.

I recall forecasters in 2006 saying the bubble would soon bust. It did bust in Pacific Northwest in Aug/Sept. 2007.

Looking back at the data, I see the August and September 2007 decline and not before and it felt like a bubble

popping.

4. The forecasters are now saying things are beginning to stabilize and with all the variables, when is hard to determine

The Pending Home Sales Index is a forward-looking indicator of homes sales and that indicator is showing an

index number improvement starting in August 2008. It's interesting to look at the index numbers starting in 2005.

In 2006 the index started to decrease, in 2007 it decreased more and 2008 the declining trend continued during

the 1st and 2nd quarters. These index numbers are for the Western part of the USA.

Price projections are challenging to predict with so many variables.And one commentator, Lawrence Yun of National

Association of Realtors, stated buyer pessimism could cause prices to overshoot the downward price correction.

I have seen the same commentary from others as well. The end of the bust may be as dramatic as the bubble bust.

I did a market analysis of my home and seeing the price reduction was not a comfortable feeling until I used a bit

of reason. Instead of looking at the impressive appreciation rate of the past, I looked at an average appreciation rate

of 5%. With that in mind, my home still was valued at approximately $50,000 over what we paid for the home in

in 2003.

Check out my Market Trend Reports for the Vancouver and Portland Areas which can be seen on my website:

(Take a Look and help increase traffic to my website) November 2008 Market Trend Reports

PS: The next WSHFC Sponsored Home Buyer Seminar is scheduled for January 24, 2009 from 9 AM to 2 PM.

Those attending the December 13, 2008 seminar said it was very informative.

Presenters besides Roger Pyles, loan consultant, Realtor, Gretchen Skeaton were

Norm Shakelford, inspector with Quality First, Brad Hill, an appraiser with Cascade Appraisal, Chris Kocalis with

AL Insurance and Angie Ashton, escrow officer representing Columbia Title Company.

Call/email me for details if you or someone you know would like to learn more about the home buying

seminar. Participants receive a certificate that can be used by those entities requiring attendance of a

home buying seminar.

Wishing you and yours a Christmas Holiday FULL of Joy!!

Gretchen Skeaton, MT (ASCP), MSM

GRI, CRS, AHS, e-PRO

Licensed in both Washington and Oregon

360 608-8541 or 503 750-3212

For more real estate information, check out my website, www.GSkeatonRealEstate.com

Call or Email me to discuss taking advantage of this Market.

Click here to get a Market Snapshot of Your Neighborhood

More on the Financial Challenges we are now experiencing

2008-11-24T23:03:00Z

In todays Inman News, 11/24/08, Patrick Duffy writes a book review of the book Financial Shock: A 360 degree look at the subprime mortgage implosion and how to avoid the next financial crisis by author: Mark Zandi

It is much more succinct than the article I posted of the NPR interview last week on my website blog.

Duffy states: "the book is so comprehensive, it still provides an excellent framework from which to understand the root causes of the crisis, from the mistakes made by Alan Greenspan to the rapid rise of irresponsible lenders who rewrote the rules of underwriting based on their own short-term interests.

And let's not forget a compliant political system and the home buyers eager to join the ranks of owners despite any potential long-term consequences of poor financial decisions.

Beginning with a chapter that explains just how subprime mortgages evolved, Zandi writes in plain English and manages to weave a story with its share of heroes-turned-villains, including politicians pushing for an "ownership society"; a Federal Reserve chairman enamored with deregulation; an enormous amount of global money in search of a big return; financial alchemists getting drunk on their own supposed genius; home builders who ignored the lessons of the past; and bond ratings agencies who kept the entire machine humming because the profits were simply too large to pass up."

Patrick Duffy further mentions Zandi's policies to address or prevent in the future:

"So now that we're in the midst of unraveling and deleveraging the system of subprime mortgages, complex securities and credit default swaps, how do we prevent a repeat of this ugly scenario? Fortunately, Zandi provides his own 10-step program of policies to address a host of issues: from tossing out shady brokers to providing basic financial education in high schools across the country. These steps include the following:

1. Adopt a voluntary mortgage write-down plan

2. Establish clear mortgage lending rules

3. License all mortgage brokers

4. Expand data collection by the government

5. Reform the fractured foreclosure process

6. Invest in financial literacy starting in high school

7. Modify mark-to-market accounting when price discovery is unreliable

8. Raise financial transparency and accounting

9. Overhaul and simplify financial regulation

10. Pay attention to asset bubbles and act accordingly

Seems to me this book would be a good read!

An explanation of how we got to the current challenges in our Financial System and the Real Estate Market!!

2008-11-18T21:17:00Z

This is the first logical explanation that I have seen explaining the current crisis with lenders and financial institutions and the need for the US federal government bail out. It is long and worth reading!

It all started with a giant pool of money in India, China, Saudia Arabia...to name a few and a decision by Alan Greenspan.

This is a transcript of an interview on NPR (National Public Radio) courtesy of Rich Levin

This American Life Episode Transcript
Program #355
The Giant Pool of Money

[Ambient sound of piano playing and crowd murmur]

Ira Glass: So Adam, where are we?
Adam Davidson: I recorded this at the Ritz Carlton in lower Manhattan. It’s a black
tie dinner, just a few weeks ago.
Ira Glass: And you, by the way, are NPR’s International Business and Economics
correspondent.
Adam Davidson: That’s right. I was there for my job. They’re giving out awards for
all these financial securities, including the one that nearly brought down the global
financial system. You know, the whole sub prime mortgage crisis.
Jim Finkel: This guy is a legend. He’s a granddaddy of our industry.
Adam Davidson: I’m sitting at this dinner with Jim Finkel. He’s kind of nervous
because he’s up for CDO of the Year for the CDO he created, Monterrey. Now, the
CDO, that’s what we’re talking about, that’s the financial instrument that was central
to this global credit crisis we’re in.
Ira Glass: And they’re giving awards for this? These guys are giving each other
awards for doing that?
Adam Davidson: Let me just say, they’re aware that there’s a certain irony, giving
awards to the instrument that almost destroyed the world’s economy. They did
consider canceling this year but it’s been a really tough year, it’s been really gloomy
for them.
Jim Finkel: Honestly, I know this sounds...I was happy to see there were no
major suicides, people weren’t jumping off bridges, there weren’t personal
disasters.
Adam Davidson: That same week, a few days earlier across the river in Brooklyn, I
went to a completely different kind of gathering. It was not black tie. It was put on
by the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America. It was people on the
opposite side of the mortgage crisis. People facing foreclosure, trying to figure out
how to keep their homes. I met this one guy Richard, he’s a Marine. This big guy,
over six feet tall. When he came back from Iraq a few years ago he bought one of
these fancy new mortgages with an adjustable rate. Recently his rate reset. It’s gone
up by more than $2,000 a month and he’s fallen behind on his payments.
Richard Campbell: At one point, my son had $7,000 in a CD and I had to
break it. That really hurt. I was saving that money for his college. I put
$2,000 back but it’s like you can’t have a future. They put you in a situation
where after a while you’re going to fail. It’s hard.

Adam Davidson: It’s clear these two groups are connected. Jim at the black tie
dinner and Richard the marine. The sub prime crisis has connected them.
Ira Glass: Right. And I know this is what sent you and one of the producers of our
show, Alex Blumberg, on a big reporting mission these last few months. You saw
that. That there’s this long chain of people that starts with these Wall Street guys
and ends with people who stand to lose their houses. All along that chain there were
bankers and brokers and investors and homeowners. Everybody deluded themselves,
thinking they could throw out the old rules of banking.
Adam Davidson: Right. In all the coverage of this we hadn’t heard much from the
people all along the chain. We wanted to know what where they thinking when they
were doing all this? And why did they think it would work? And simply, how did it all
work?
Ira Glass: So, this is what we’re devoting our program to today. From WBEZ
Chicago, it’s This American Life distributed by Public Radio International. I’m Ira
Glass. And today’s show is a special co-production we’re doing with NPR News – your
place of employment Adam.
Adam Davidson: Very proudly so.
Ira Glass: You and Alex Blumberg are going to be explaining step by step how this
all worked and we’ll meet some of the people who created this economic disaster.
Let me turn the show over to the two of you, which is great for me because I’ve
pretty much lost my voice anyway. Alex Blumberg will kick things off.
Music
Alex Blumberg: The thing that got me interested in all this was something called a
NINA loan. Back when the housing crisis was still a housing bubble. A guy on the
phone told me that a NINA loan stands for No Income, No Asset, as in, someone will
lend you a bunch of money without first checking if you have any income or any
assets. And it was an official, loan product. Like, you could walk into a mortgage
broker’s office and they would say, well, we can give you a 30 year fixed rate, or we
could put you in a NINA. He said there were lots of loans like this, where the bank
didn’t actually check your income, which I found confusing. It turns out even the
people who got them found them confusing. For example, a guy I met named
Clarence Nathan. He worked 3 part time, not very steady jobs, and made a total of
roughly 45 thousand dollars a year roughly. He got himself into trouble and needed
money, so he took out a loan against his house. A big one.
Clarence Nathan: Call it 540 for round figures
Alex Blumberg: And you basically borrowed that from the bank and they
didn’t check your income?
Clarence Nathan: Right. It’s a no-income verification loan. They don't do
that. It's almost like you pass a guy in the street and say: lend me 540,000
dollars? He says, what do you do? Hey, I got a job. OK. It seems that casual
even though there are a lot of papers that get filled out and stuff flies all over

with the faxed and emails. Essentially, that's ... that the process.

Alex Blumberg: Would you have loaned you the money?

Clarence Nathan: I wouldn't have loaned me the money. And nobody that I

know would have loaned me the money. I know guys who are criminals who

wouldn't loan me that and they break your knee-caps. I don’t know why the

bank did it. I’m serious ... 540 thousand dollars to a person w/bad credit.

Alex Blumberg: As it turns out, Clarence's friends, acquaintances and shadowy
criminal contacts would have been right not to lend him money. At the time I talked
to him, Clarence hadn’t made a payment in almost a year, and his house was in the
process of foreclosure.
Stories like this have been in the news for months. They often feature an innocent
homeowner who was duped by a lying, greedy mortgage banker. Or, if you’re more
of a Wall Street Journal editorial page type, an innocent mortgage banker who was
duped by lying, greedy homeowner. No doubt, both categories exist, but Clarence's
case is more nuanced...and much more common:
Clarence Nathan: Nobody came and told me a lie: just close your eyes and
the problem will go away. That's wasn’t the situation. I needed the money.
I'm not trying to absolve myself of anything. I thought I could do this and get
out of it within 6 to 9 months. The 6 to 9 month plan didn’t work so I’m stuck.
If somebody had told me I couldn’t borrow the money I probably would’ve
had to do something else more drastic and dramatic and not be in this
situation now. The bank made an imprudent loan. I made an imprudent loan.
We’re partners in this.
Alex Blumberg: This imprudent partnership is new, and is at the heart the current
housing crisis. For most of the history of banking, bankers wouldn’t have loaned
Clarence their money either. They didn’t let people like Clarence near their money, in
fact, people with part-time employment, and unpaid debts in their past. And then,
suddenly, in the early 2000’s, everything changed, banking turned on its head and
went out looking for partnerships with people like Clarence...loaning him half a
million dollars without even checking to see if he had a job. What happened?
Music
Alex Blumberg: To help explain out what happened, here's my partner for this
hour, Adam Davidson, the international business reporter for NPR. Hey Adam.
Adam Davidson: Hey Alex.
Alex Blumberg: So, I guess the first thing we have to talk about is the global pool
of money, right?
Adam Davidson: Right. The global pool of money. That's where our story begins.
Most people don’t think about it but there’s this huge pool of money out there, which
is basically all the money the world is saving now. Insurance companies saving for a
catastrophe, pension funds saving money for retirement, the central bank of England
saving for whatever central banks save for. All the world’s savings.

Ceyla Pazarbasioglu: It's a lot of money. It's about 70 trillion.

Adam Davidson: That is the head of capital market research at the International
Monetary Fund, the place to go if you want know how much money is in the world.
Adam Davidson: How do we pronounce your name?
Ceyla Pazarbasioglu: That will take two minutes at least. It's Pazarbasioglu.
Ceyla Pazarbasioglu. I'm very impressed.
Adam Davidson: And, by the way, before you finance enthusiasts start writing any
letters, we do know that 70 trillion technically refers to that subset of global savings
called fixed-income securities. Everyone else can just ignore what I just said. Let’s
put 70 trillion dollars in perspective. Do this. Think about all the money that people
spend everywhere in the world. Everything you bought in the last year, all of it. Then
add everything Bill Gates bought. And all the rice sold in China and that fleet of
planes Boeing just sold to South Korea. All the money spent and earned in every
country on earth in a year: that is LESS than 70 trillion, less than this global pool of
money.
Alex Blumberg: Wow, that is a lot of money.
Adam Davidson: It is a lot of money. And that money comes with an army of very
nervous men and women watching over the pool of money: investment managers.
This army is nervous because they don't want to lose any of that money and they
also want to make it grow bigger. But to make it grow, they have to find something
to invest in. So, for most of modern history, they bought really, really safe, really
boring investments: things called treasuries and municipal bonds. Boring things. But
then, right before our story starts, something changed, something happened to that
global pool of money.
Ceyla Pazarbasioglu: This number doubled since 2000. In 2000 this was
about 36 trillion dollars.
Adam Davidson: So, it took several hundred years for the world to get to 36
trillion. Then, in six years, to get another 36 trillion.
Ceyla Pazarbasioglu: Yeah. There has been a very sharp increase.
Adam Davidson: How's the world get twice as much money to invest? Lots of
things happened, but the main headline is all sorts of poor countries became kind of
rich making TVs and selling us oil: China, India, Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia. Made a lot
of money and banked it. China, for example, has over a trillion dollars in its central
bank, and there are office buildings in Beijing filled with math geniuses-real math
geniuses-looking for a place to invest it. And the world was not ready for all this
money. There's twice as much money looking for investments, but there are not
twice as many good investments. So, that global army of investment managers was
hungrier and twitchier than ever before. They all wanted the same thing: a nice low5

risk investment that paid some return.

But then something happened to make matters worse, at this precise moment, one

guy took one of that army's favorite investments and made it a lot less attractive.

Alex Blumberg: So, this is where we have to talk about Alan Greenspan, right?
Adam Davidson: We have to.
Alex Blumberg: Alright. But I'm going to promise the people here that this is the
last time you're going to hear Alan Greenspan in this story. So bear with us.
Adam Davidson: Here is one of his speeches that really drove that army of
investment managers crazy.
Alan Greenspan: The FOMC stands prepared to maintain a highly
accommodative stance of policy for as long as needed to promote satisfactory
economic performance.
Adam Davidson: You might not believe me, but that little statement: that is Central
Banker speak for “Hey, global pool of money - screw you.”
Alex Blumberg: Come on, that’s not what he said
Adam Davidson: It is! I speak central banker and that’s what he’s saying.
What he’s technically saying is he’s going to keep the Fed Funds rate at the absurdly
low level of one percent. It tells every investor in the world: you are not going to
make any money at all on US treasury bonds for a very long time. Go somewhere
else. We can’t help you.
And so the global pool of money looked around for some low-risk, high-return
investment. And among the many things they put their money into, there was one
thing they fell in love with. To get it, they called Wall Street - a guy like this:
Mike Francis: My name is Mike Francis. During the beginning of the mortgage
implosion, I was an executive director at Morgan Stanley on the residential
mortgage trading desk.
Adam Davidson: Mike was one link in a chain that connected the global pool of
money to its new favorite investment, these residential mortgages, the US housing
market, and guys like Clarence Nathan.
Think how attractive a mortgage loan is to that 70 trillion dollar pool of money.
Remember, they're desperate to get any kind of interest return. They want to beat
that miserable 1 percent interest Greenspan is offering them.
And here are these homeowners, they're paying 5, 7, 9 percent to borrow money
from some bank. So what if the global pool could get in on that action?

There are problems. Individual mortgages are too big a hassle for the global pool of

money. They don't wanna get mixed up with actual people and their catastrophic

health problems or debilitating divorces, and all the reasons which might stop them

from paying their mortgages.

So what Mike and his peers on Wall Street did, was to figure out how to give the

global pool of money all the benefits of a mortgage – basically higher yield - without

the hassle or the risk.

So picture the whole chain. You have Clarence. He gets a mortgage from a broker.

The broker sells the mortgage to a small bank, the small bank sells the mortgage to

a guy like Mike at a big investment firm on Wall Street.

Then Mike takes a few thousand mortgages he’s bought this way, he puts them in

one big pile. Now he’s got thousands of mortgage checks coming to him every

month. It’s a huge monthly stream of money, which is expected to come in for the

next thirty years, the life of a mortgage.

And he then sells shares of that monthly income to investors. Those shares are

called mortgage backed securities. And the 70 trillion dollar global pool of money

loved them.

Mike Francis: it was unbelievable. We almost couldn’t produce enough to

keep the appetite of the investors happy. More people wanted bonds than we

could actually produce. That was our difficult task, was trying to produce

enough. They would call and ask “Do you have any more fixed rate? What

have you got? What’s coming?” From our standpoint it's like, there's a guy

out there with a lot of money. We gotta find a way to be his sole provider of

bonds to fill his appetite. And his appetite’s massive.

Alex Blumberg: The problem was, to make a mortgage backed security, you
needed mortgages, lots of them. So for Mike Francis to satisfy his demand, and take
his quite hefty fee from the global pool of money, he needed to buy up as many
mortgage pools as possible.
And to do that, he called a guy one link below him, on the mortgage backed security
chain, a guy named Mike Garner, who worked at the largest private mortgage bank
in Nevada, called Silver State Mortgage. And to give you a sense of how fast this
business was growing, Mike got into the mortgage business straight from his
previous job as a bartender.
Mike Garner: One of my regulars in the bar, he actually hired me from the
bar. He said he needed some guys, and we started talking about how much I
made. He beat what I was making. I didn’t know anything about the
mortgage business. I was as green as you could be.
Alex Blumberg: Mike Garner’s job was to buy up individual mortgages, mainly from
brokers, bundle two or three hundred of them together, and sell them up the chain
to wall street, to guys like Mike Francis.

Adam Davidson: Too many Mikes here.
Alex Blumberg: So many Mikes. Actually just two. Mike Francis on Wall Street and
Mike Garner, the guy we’re talking about now.
Adam Davidson: He’s in Nevada.
Alex Blumberg: And in the beginning, he'd only buy mortgages that were pretty
standard and pretty safe. Mortgages where people had come up with a down
payment and proven they had a steady income and money in the bank.
And they sold so many mortgages that there came a point in 2003 where just about
everybody who wanted a mortgage and was qualified to get one .... had gotten one.
But the pool of money had just gotten started. They wanted more mortgage backed
securities.
So Wall Street had to find more people to take out mortgages. Which meant lending
to people who never would’ve qualified before.
And so Mike noticed that every month, the guidelines were getting a little looser.
Something called a stated income, verified asset loan came out, which meant you
didn't have to provide paycheck stubs and w-2 forms, as they had in the past. You
could simply state your income, as long as you showed that you had money in the
bank.
Mike Garner: The next guideline lower is just stated income, stated
assets. Then you state what you make and state what’s in your bank account.
They call and make sure you work where you say you work. Then an
accountant has to say for your field it is possible to make what you said you
make. But they don’t say what you make, just say it’s possible that they
could make that.
Alex Blumberg: It’s just so funny that instead of just asking people to prove
what they make there’s this theater in place of you have to find an
accountant sitting right in front of me who could very easily provide a W2, but
we’re not asking for a W2 form, but we do want this accountant to say yeah,
what they’re saying is plausible in some universe.
Mike Garner: Yeah, and loan officers would have an accountant they could call
up and say “Can you write a statement saying a truck driver can make this
much money?” Then the next one, came along, and it was no income, verified
assets. So you don't have to tell the people what you do for a living. You don’t
have to tell the people what you do for work. All you have to do is state you
have a certain amount of money in your bank account. And then, the next
one, is just no income, no asset. You don't have to state anything. Just have
to have a credit score and a pulse.
Alex Blumberg: Actually that pulse thing. Also optional. Like the case in Ohio where
23 dead people were approved for mortgages.

Adam Davidson: An interesting fact, here. Mike Garner's bank did not care how
risky these mortgages were. This was the new era: banks didn't have to hold on to
these mortgages for 30 years. They didn’t have to wait and see if they’d be paid
back. Bank's like Garner's just owned them for a month or two and then sold them
on to Wall Street. Wall Street would sell them on to the global pool of money.
Alex Blumberg: Which is how we get half-million dollar, no income, no asset loans.
Adam Davidson: And loans to dead people. So there's another thing going on:
housing prices were rising, fast. Lots of people in the mortgage industry had this
faith that housing prices, in the US, simply never go down. So, from the bank's
perspective, even if the worst happens and someone defaults, the bank would then
own the house which is now worth even more than when they gave out the loan.
So, All Mike cared about was whether or not his customers--the Wall Street
investment banks--would buy those mortgages from him. And he was under
pressure to approve more and more loans. Because other guys in his company--the
actual guys cruising strip malls all across Nevada buying mortgages from brokers,
their commission depended on selling more loans. And occasionally, those guys
would hear about some loan that some other mortgage company offered that they
weren’t allowed to offer. And they'd complain to Mike.
Mike Garner: Three of them would show up at your door first thing in the
morning and say, I lost 10 deals last week to Meritius bank. They've got this
loan. Look at the guidelines for this loan. Is there any way we can do this?
We're losing deals left and right. I'd get on the phone and start calling all
these street firms or Countrywide and say “Would you buy this loan?” Finally,
you’d find out who was buying them.
Alex Blumberg: So, Merrill Lynch would say no. And Goldman Sachs would
say no. And you'd finally hit on somebody and they be like “Yeah, we’ll buy
that loan.”
Mike Garner: Yeah, and once I got a hit, I'd call back and say, “Hey, Bear
Stearns is buying this loan. I’d like to give you the opportunity to buy it too.”
Once one person buys them, all the rest of them follow suit.
Music
Alex Blumberg: So, what were you thinking when you're turning around and
selling those to Wall Street. Were you ever thinking, “What are you guys
doing?”
Mike Garner: Yeah. And my boss was in the business for 25 years. He hated
those loans. He hated them and used to rant and say, “It makes me sick to
my stomach the kind of loans that we do.” He fought the owners and sales
force tooth and neck about these guidelines. He got same answer. Nope,
other people are offering it. We're going to offer them too. We’re going to get
more market share this way. House prices are booming, everything’s gonna
be good. And ... the company was just rolling in the cash. The owners and the
production staff were just raking it in.

Tape – Glen Pizzolorusso: At the height I was making between 75 and 100

grand a month.

Alex Blumberg: This is Glen Pizzolorusso, who was an area sales manager at an
outfit called WMC mortgage in upstate New York. Just to repeat, he was making 75
to a 100 grand a month. That's over a million dollars a year. Glen was just out of
college. His job was a lot like Mike Garner's, he was the same link in the chain, and
Glen loved his job.
Glen Pizzolorusso: What is that movie? Boiler Room? That's what it's like. I
mean, it's the cooling thing ever. Cubicle, cubicle, cubicle for 150,000 sq.
ft. The ceilings were probably 25 or 30 feet high. The elevator had a big
graffiti painting. Big open space. And it was awesome. We lived
mortgage. That’s all we did. This deal, that deal. How we gonna get it funded?
What’s the problem with this one? That's all everyone's talking about.
Alex Blumberg: And when Glen wasn't working, he was doing his next favorite
thing, spending ... preferably in the company of, and this is his term, b-list
celebrities:
Glen Pizzolorusso: We rolled up to Marquee at midnight with a line, 500
people deep out front. Walk right up to the door: Give me my table. Sitting
next to Tara Reid and a couple of her friends. Christina Aguilera was doing
some, I’m-Christina-Aguilera-and-I’m-gonna-get-up-and-sing kind of thing.
Who else was there? Cuba Gooding and that kid from Filthy Rich: Cattle
Drive. What was that kids name? Fabian Barabia? We ordered 3, 4 bottles of
Cristal at $1000 per bottle. They bring it out, you know hey're walking
through the crowd, they're holding the bottles over their heads. There's fire
crackers , sparklers. You know, the little cocktail waitresses. You know so you
order 3 or 4 bottles of those and they’re walking through the crowd and
everyone’s like: Whoa, who's the cool guys? We were the cool guys. They
gave me the black card with my name on it. There’s probably 10 in
existence. You know? And that meant that I spent way too much money
there.
Alex Blumberg: Glen had five cars, a 1.5 million dollar vacation house in
Connecticut, and penthouse that he rented in Manhattan. And he made all this
money making very large loans to very poor people with bad credit.
Glen Pizzolorusso: We looked at loans. These people didn't have a pot to piss
in. They can barely make a car payment and we're giving them a 300, 400
thousand dollar house.
Alex Blumberg: But Glen didn't worry about whether the loans were good. That's
someone else's problem. And this way of thinking thrived at every step of this
mortgage security chain. A guy like Mike Francis, from Morgan Stanley, he told me

he bought loans, lots of loans, from Glen's company, and he knew in his gut they

were bad loans. Like these NINA loans.

Mike Francis: No income no asset loans. That's a liar's loan. We are telling

you to lie to us. We're hoping you don't lie. Tell us what you make, tell us

what you have in the bank, but we won't verify? We’re setting you up to lie.

Something about that feels very wrong. It felt wrong way back when and I

wish we had never done it. Unfortunately, what happened ... we did it

because everyone else was doing it.

Alex Blumberg: It's easy to ignore your gut fear when you are making a fortune in
commissions. But Mike had other help in rationalizing what he was
doing. Technological help. Mike sat at a desk with six computer screens, connected
to millions of dollars worth of fancy analytic software designed by brilliant Ivy league
math geniuses hired by his firm, which analyzed all the loans in all the pools that he
bought and then sold. And the software, the data ... didn’t seem worried at all:
Mike Francis: All the data that we had to review, to look at, on loans in
production that were years old, was positive. They performed very well. All
those factors, when you look at the pieces and parts. A 90% NINA loan from
3 years ago is performing amazingly well. Has a little bit of risk. Instead of
defaulting 1.5% of the time it defaults at 3.5% of the time. That’s not so bad.
If I’m an investor buying that, if I get a little bit of return, I’m fine.
Adam Davidson: Wait Alex. I want to step in for a moment because this is a very
important piece of tape. A big part of this story, of this whole crisis, is that a lot of
really smart people, people who knew better, fooled themselves with this data. It
was the triumph of data over common sense. Can you play that tape again?
Mike Francis: All the data that we had to review to look at, on loans in
production, that were years old, was positive.
Adam Davidson: As we now know, they were using the wrong data. They looked at
the recent history of mortgages and saw that foreclosure rate is generally below 2
percent. So they figured, absolute worst-case scenario, the foreclosure rate may go
to 8 or 10 or 12 percent. But the problem with is there were all these new kinds of
mortgages, given out to people who never would have gotten them before. So the
historical data was irrelevant. Some mortgage pools, today, are expected to go
beyond 50 percent foreclosure rates.
Music
Alex Blumberg: To be fair, they knew there were risks. But investors have a system
to assess those risks. They’re these special companies. Credit rating agencies.
Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s, Fitch. Their job, their main job, is to assess risk for Wall
Street and the global pool of money. They rate every kind of bond according to its
risk. Triple A is the safest, then there’s double A, single A, all the way down to single
B and below.

And that’s all most investors look at - the letter grade. They trust the credit rating

agencies. And these agencies blessed most of these mortgage-backed securities.

Gave them AAA ratings - which means they were considered as safe as a US

government bond.

This was the magic of this whole system. You could take a pool of thousands of risky

mortgages, and create a security that was called money-good, as safe as any

investment out there. At least that's what people thought.

But now we know those agencies relied on the wrong data. That same historic data

that had nothing to do with these new kinds of mortgages.

Adam Davidson: And then things got even worse. The thing that took this problem
and turned it into a crisis was something else that was new, something called a
Collateralized Debt Obligation. A CDO. And that brings us back to the guy we met at
the awards dinner in the beginning, Jim Finkel.
Jim Finkel: We’re heading to the trading floor of Dynamic Credit, where we
have all of our mortgage analysts, our head trader, our CIO.
Adam Davidson: Jim Finkel runs this CDO shop, Dynamic Credit. It takes up three
modified apartments on the upper East Side of Manhattan. The trading room is like a
factory floor for CDOs, it’s where they make the things. And this is what it sounds
like:
ROOM TONE.
Adam Davidson: Maybe factory is the wrong term. But this is where he makes
CDOs. But what is a CDO? He shows us on a computer screen.
Jim Finkel: Here’s our deal Monterey...
Adam Davidson: To start with, every CDO has its own name. Finkel loves his
country house in the Berkshires, so he always names his CDOs after towns in
western Mass. Like Monterey.
Jim Finkel: Monterey CDO limited. 189 assets...189 tranches of different MB
pools
Alex Blumberg: Let’s translate some of that. A mortgage-backed security, you
remember, is a pool of thousands of different mortgages. These are all put together
and divided into different slices. Jim used the word tranche. Tranche is just French
for slice - some of these slices are risky, some are not. OK, a CDO is a pool of those
tranches. A pool of pools.

And Jim and most companies like his weren’t buying the top-rated tranches - the

safest ones, the AAAs. They were buying the lower-rated stuff. The high-risk stuff.

Jim’s company was buying tranches that came from Glen Pizzolorusso’s company.

The guy who hung out at nightclubs with B-list celebrities. The guy who said he was

selling mortgages to people who didn’t have a pot to piss in.

Adam Davidson: There's another term the industry uses, no joke, they call these
lower-rated tranches toxic waste. They're so high-risk, they're toxic.
Alex Blumberg: So, a CDO is sort of a financial alchemy. Jim takes that toxic stuff,
these low-rated, high-risk tranches, puts them all together. Re-tranches them, and
presto: he has a CDO whose top tranche is rated AAA, rock-solid, good as money.
If this seems too good to be true to you, you're in good company. Guys like
billionaire investor Warren Buffet said the very logic was ridiculous. But back in
2005, 2006, the global pool of money couldn't get enough of these things.
And the CDO industry was facing the same pressures everyone else was at every
other step of this chain. To loosen their standards. To make CDOs out of lower and
lower rated pools. This is Jim's partner, Tonko Gast.
Tonko Gast: In 2005, we had an internal debate here because there were
two banks coming to us, why don’t you do a deal with us, BBB securities, you
get paid a million bucks in management fees per year. Very clear, just like
that, in 2005. And we declined those deals. We just don't believe those BBB
RMBS assets are money-good. And we thought if we do a CDO of those, that's
gonna blow up completely. We were early in '05 by not wanting to do those
deals. People were laughing at us. Saying you're crazy. You’re hurting your
business. Why don’t you want to make ... Per deal, you could make a million
dollars a year.
Adam Davidson: Did someone do that deal?
Tonko Gast: Absolutely! Everybody. Not everybody, but a lot of people did.
Ira Glass: Coming up, how 5 million dollars can get you into 100 million dollars of
trouble. In a minute, from Chicago Public Radio and Public Radio International, when
our program continues.
ID BREAK
Ira Glass: Well it’s This American Life. I’m Ira Glass. And although I feel fine, I have
lost my voice this week. Today’s show, a special co-production with NPR news. A
step-by-step look at what exactly happened during the sub-prime mortgage crisis.
One of our producers Alex Blumberg co-reported this story with NPR reporter Adam
Davidson. The story continues.
Alex Blumberg: From 2003 to 2006, the housing market was in a classic
speculative bubble. Home loans were easy to get, so more and more people were

buying houses. The increased demand for houses caused the price to increase. The

rising prices created even more demand, as people started to look at homes as

investments -- investments that never went down in value. In 2003 and 2004, 2005,

they didn't. You could buy a house with no money down, turn around and sell it a

year later for in some areas double what you paid. People who'd never invested in

real estate before started buying multiple properties as investments. There were

shows on TV about how to do it. Here's a promo.

Tape: Promo from “FLIP THIS HOUSE” with song.

Alex Blumberg: This is A&E’s “Flip this House,” Discovery had the cleverly titled
“Flip That House.” There were other ones. “Property Ladder,” “Design to Sell.” Bravo
came late to the game, debuting their show, “Flipping Out,” in November of 2007,
well after the bubble popped.
Tape: more promo
Alex Blumberg: The problem was that even though housing prices were going
through the roof, people weren't making any more money. From 2000 to 2007, the
median household income stayed flat. And so the more prices rose, the more
tenuous the whole thing became. No matter how lax lending standards got, no
matter how many exotic mortgage products were created to shoehorn people into
homes they couldn't possibly afford, no matter what the mortgage machine tried, the
people just couldn't swing it. By late 2006, the average home cost nearly four times
what the average family made. Historically it was between two and three times. And
mortgage lenders noticed something that they'd almost never seen before. People
would close on a house, sign all the mortgage papers, and then default on their very
first payment. No loss of a job, no medical emergency, they were underwater before
they even started. And although no one could really hear it, that was probably the
moment when one of the biggest speculative bubbles in American history popped.
Strangely, the first people in the mortgage-backed security chain who noticed, were
the ones near the top. The people on Wall Street, like Mike Francis. He can
remember almost to the day:
Mike Francis: It would be somewhere around Halloween of 2006. We started
seeing our securities that were 6, 7, 8 months old start to perform poorly. We
started to dig into the details. Wow, property values stopped increasing.
Something is turning around bad here. What do we do?
Alex Blumberg: The problem was that once property values starting going down, it
set off a reverse chain reaction, the opposite of what had been happening in the
bubble. As more people defaulted, more houses came on the market. With no
buyers, prices went even further down, and as prices declined, Mike Francis cleared
up a mystery. Remember, even though he didn’t trust these NINA loans, the bonds
that he turned them into, they performed well. Well, there was a reason.
Mike Francis: it’s obvious that they performed well, now, because their
property kept increasing in value. Over time, they could take cash out to pay
the bill.

Alex Blumberg: In other words, they could take out another loan from the bank,
against the value of their house, which because of the bubble, was now worth more
than they bought it for. These loans, called home equity lines of credit, became very
popular in the early to mid 2000's. Partly because they were easy to get. But partly
because people needed them to continue making their original mortgage payments.
To pay off their debts, they went into more debt.
And in late 2006, early 2007, as prices began their plunge and alarm was spreading
across mortgage backed securities desks all over Wall Street, the people on Wall
Street, like Mike Francis, started backing away from some of the riskiest mortgages
that they would accept in their pools. Which had a devastating effect on the
mortgage companies, which had proliferated to sell them loans, a devastating effect
on people like Mike Garner, the mortgage banker in Nevada. For one simple
reason.
Mike Garner: All these mid-sized companies like us, we're not using our own
money to fund these loans.
Alex Blumberg: The way it worked was that a small bank, like Silver State
mortgage, where Mike Garner worked, would borrow money from a big bank, say
Citibank, or Washington Mutual. Silver State would use this borrowed money to buy
up a bunch of loans, and then pay back the big bank once it sold the pools to Wall
Street. Now these smaller banks were highly leveraged, in most cases 20 to 1.

Meaning, in Silver state’s case, even though it only had 5 million of its own dollars, it

could borrow 20 times that, 100 million, to buy loans with. So in late 2006, Mike is

busily at it, borrowing, buying, selling, paying back, and borrowing again, when the

e-mails started coming:

Mike Garner: We’d get an e-mail from a street firm, just say Credit

Suisse/First Boston. It’d say, after whatever date, “As of December 29th, we

are no longer buying Stated Income with a FICO less than whatever.” It’d say

“There will be no exceptions. Pleas do not call the pricing desk.” And you

just start flipping out. Can't just say you're not going to buy this with no

notice. Well, we're saying it and there's no notice. Then you start to scramble

trying to get this stuff out of the door as soon as you can.

Alex Blumberg: Because you’ve already been assembling a bunch of those

loans with those characteristics in place somewhere.

Mike Garner: You've got 20 million sitting there, and you say oh crap, I better

get those out the door. Within a week, you can expect to see the same email

from all them. A lot of time you’ll get two of those the same day. You're

scrambling to sell them, going off sheer relationships. Like okay, I’ve still got

10 million of these. I know you’re not buying them anymore. But come on ...

you can't just leave me like this. There comes a point where all of them said,

we’re not buying anything.

Alex Blumberg: For Mike and his company, that meant that they’d borrowed tens of
millions of dollars to buy loans, that now, they couldn’t sell. And since they had very
little of their own money, (just like the homebuyers whose mortgages they’d
purchased) they had no choice but to default on their loan. Silver State Mortgage's
nearly 600 employees were out of work. Quite suddenly.
Mike Garner: It was February 14th the email went out and said “Silver State
Mortgage might be going out of business, but we think we can work
something out so we’d encourage you to come in and work tomorrow and
give us one more day.” The next day, people came in and the e-mail went
out. “Unfortunately we were not able to work anything out. We’re closing our
doors today.” That's how most of these lenders go under. Everybody’s
working thinking everything’s great. Chugging along. All of the sudden, the
bank says you're done. People started grabbing their computers, copy
machines, started rolling them out the door. It was a mess. My thoughts were
“Holy crap. Everyone’s just stealing their stuff.”
Alex Blumberg: That happened on Feb. 14th?
Mike Garner: Yup. My boss calls it the valentine’s day massacre.”
Music
Alex Blumberg: For Glen Pizzolorusso, the mortgage sales manager who - not to
dwell on this detail - was living the live of a B-list celebrity, the end came more
slowly.
Alex Blumberg: So you’re at WMC, what was the turning point?
Glen Pizzolorusso: This sounds obscene, but it was first month I got a
$25,000 paycheck. That didn’t even cover my expenses.” So you’re sitting
here and you’re like I made 25,000 this month, which is more than most
people make in six months and that doesn’t cover my expenses. Now what do
I do? The next couple months I made 30 or 40 grand, then it went down to
10. You could just feel it winding down. The good old days were over. It was
scary.
Alex Blumberg: So give me your situation now. Can you pay all your bills
now?
Glen Pizzolorusso: Not really. I borrowed some money from friends...from
dad. Living in my house right now, we’re working with the bank to try to
avoid foreclosure. At this point I’m dealing with an attorney. Trying to figure
out if it just makes sense for me to walk away from the house.
Alex Blumberg: And have you made mortgage payments?
Glen Pizzolorusso: No. No.
Alex Blumberg: When was last time you paid your mortgage?

Glen Pizzolorusso: January? I’ve been making em spotty, as I can. Just

enough to keep them off my back. I have to watch every penny.

Richard Campbell: As you can see this is my living room, I have no furniture.

And it's either buy furniture or pay my mortgage.

Adam Davidson: This brings us back to Richard, the Marine we met at the very top
of the show. He, like more than 4 million Americans, at this point, is fighting to keep
his home. He's giving me a tour.
And I wanted to talk to him about what now? What happens next? Now that the
housing bubble has turned into a nationwide crisis.
If he defaults on his mortgage, nobody wins. He doesn't want to leave his house,
and the investors who own his mortgage, the last thing they want is to own a house
in East Flatbush, in a declining market with no buyers.
So you think it'd be easy for both sides to modify Richard’s mortgage, do something
he can afford. You’d be wrong.
Kerry Campbell: Hi I’m Kerry Campbell nice to meet you...
Adam Davidson: The offices of NACA, the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of
America, in Newark, New Jersey, are short on frills. Kerry Campbell, who’s helping
Richard today, is a counselor here.
The goal today is to figure out how big a mortgage payment Richard can actually
afford to pay. So, Kerry needs to know everything Richard spends money on. They
go through his medical bills, his clothing budget. Kerry gently nudges Richard to be
realistic. Like when he asks Richard how much he spends on gifts for his family.
Kerry Campbell: Gifts to family? How much would you say on average?
Richard Campbell: 300, Christmas time?
Kerry Campbell: January through December. Mother's day. Father's day.
Sisters brothers. Nephews, nieces? Significant other. If you celebrate
Christmas. Whole enchilada.
Richard Campbell: Around $1000.
Kerry Campbell: That sounds about right.
Adam Davidson: The process now, how does it compare to when you bought
the house?
Richard Campbell: This is totally different. Brand new to me. When I bought
the house, it was just your credit score and can I pull a credit report?

Adam Davidson: So in this whole process, when’s the first time someone

looked at your finances?

Richard Campbell: Today. Today.

Music

Adam Davidson: Not to say the original broker didn't have a process. It just had
nothing to do with reality. Kerry shows Richard the original loan documents, filled out
by his broker.
Kerry Campbell: Here it's saying your base employment income is 16,250 a
month.
Richard Campbell: Laughs. Wha?!
Kerry Campbell: That means your salary, on a yearly basis, would be
$195,000 to be exact.
Richard Campbell: I wish. In 2005, right, and they used my 2005 taxes, I
was making $37,000 that year.
Adam Davidson: Did you know that number until now?
Richard Campbell: no
Adam Davidson: To me, that is shocking. It's not shocking to you?
Kerry Campbell: That’s outrageous. But it's a common thing. It's worlds
apart, reality and what's on these documents.
Adam Davidson: Another thing the papers reveal: How much that creative broker
made. $18,500 dollars. As Kerry says, that's 18,000 reasons to falsify Richard's
mortgage documents and to put him in a house he can't afford. Richard actually
qualified for a Veterans Administration loan at a really good rate, and he had money
to put down, but the broker convinced him to take a mortgage that turned out to be
much worse, with a much higher commission.
Mortgage brokers were walking around East Flatbush, knocking on doors, telling just
about anybody: Hey, we can get you a house. If you have a house, we can get you a
big home equity line of credit. This happened in poor neighborhoods all over the
country. And, while the FBI and other law enforcement folks, say they don't have the
exact numbers, it's clear that fraud--like the fraud on Richard's application--was
ubiquitous.
At the end of Richard's budget process, the math they come up with is fairly stark.
Richard makes more money now--he got a new and better job, so he makes an
average, before taxes, of 8,000 dollars a month. Which means, after taxes, he brings
home exactly enough to pay his mortgage and nothing else. All of his living
expenses, he says, are paid with money he gets from his mom who is on public

assistance, his girlfriend, and his brother.

Kerry runs his software which says that if Richard is going to stay in his house, he

needs a much cheaper mortgage. The interest, currently at around 10%, would have

to be lowered a lot. To 3%. Kerry wants to propose this to whoever own loans the

loan. But this brings him to this peculiar problem mortgage owners now face: they

have no idea who that is. Richard's loan has been bought and sold, and re-sold and

put into one of those pools, owned by investors. Maybe an investor like Jim Finkel.

Jim Finkel: You know, 150 times, what did we say? 3000.

Alex Blumberg: So now we’re back in Jim Finkel's office. He's surrounded by
expensive computers, but he's typing on a cheap calculator. And he's trying to figure
out for us how many individual mortgages--how many homes like Richard's--does he
own part of. The calculator method fails him, and he turns to one of his number
crunchers, a guy named Alex.
Jim Finkel: I can't even imagine. Alex do you have any idea...
Alex Blumberg: Alex gets on the phone with Steve--the IT guy.
Alex: How many loans are you running in that loan performance? All
together? For all of our deals ... 16 million loans.
Alex Blumberg: This one CDO factory--this one office, owns a share of 16 million
homes. And each of those homes has lots of other owners--people in other CDO
offices around the world--there are lots of them. And other investors. You start to
see what a crazy web of confusing interconnections this whole process is.
Now, until this moment we had a theory that these two groups--the homeowners
and the people at the top of the chain, the investors--had no idea about each other.
We actually learned they know quite a lot about each other. They just see each other
through a computer screen.
TAPE: Hey Steve.
Adam Davidson: We find that out when we go downstairs to see Steve Pennington,
the IT guy. Steve’s actual title is the head of financial engineering. He's created his
own software program that actually looks at every one of the 16 million loans
Dynamic owns part of. It's a spreadsheet. Each line is one loan. It says how much
the house sold for, what the interest rate is. He points to one field--the most baffling
one--that is just twelve letters and numbers in a row. Every letter represents a
month.
Adam Davidson: What does the 9 mean?

Steve Pennington: It means they’re 90 days, basically delinquent on their

loan.

Adam Davidson: Is this the matrix? Where the guy is looking at the green

digits, and says there's the redhead and the blonde. Are you, Steve, seeing

lives here?

Steve Pennington: I definitely see lives.

Adam Davidson: For the record, I see cccc36c36. I do not see a human

drama.

Steve Pennington: The drama here is you have someone paying their loan,

then something happened. They’ve gone 3 months, delinquent...They got to

this point of 6, then fought back to current.

Adam Davidson: Now that I've learned the code, I see it. Like here, he was on

time for a bunch of months. This one, he was on time, 30 days, 30 days, then

he went two months behind, came back. And now he's just behind.

Steve Pennington: And what’s really hard about this, is you can watch people

cycle on and off.

Adam Davidson: You guys are more sympathetic. And maybe it’s just cuz

we’re reporters and you want to make us think you’re good guys –

Tonko Gast: We’re human beings

Adam Davidson: But these guys are hurting you. Their irresponsibility is

costing you money and work.

Tonko Gast: That was up to us to think about 3 years ago.

Adam Davidson: Do you have any anger when you look at this?

Tonko Gast: Not at all. This is pure sadness.

Alex Blumberg: This is where the partnership of borrowers like Clarence Nathan
and investors like Jim Finkel has ended up.
Tonko Gast estimates that most of AAA rated mortgage-backed CDO's that the
industry created since 2006, are now worth less than half their value. Some are
worth close to zero. But remember to all the investment managers in the global pool
of money who bought them, AAA meant safe as government bonds. AAA was called a
cash equivalent, money in the bank. It's as if the global pool of money put trillions of
dollars in a savings account, came back one year later, and found out that half was
gone. Put another way, it's as if the global pool of money thought it was putting
trillions of dollars in a savings account, but really, half of it was going into a furnace.
The money is gone, burned up, never to come back.
And that's what's led to the new term you've been hearing.

Adam Davidson: Maybe you've noticed that the press and others don't call it a sub
prime housing crisis as much anymore. They call it a credit crisis. The global pool of
money still has no idea how much money they lost. How much went into the furnace.
And because of that, they’ve totally changed their thinking. They used to be
obsessed just with getting some profit, trying to make a slightly higher interest rate
return. Now the global pool of money has the exact opposite obsession. It wants no
risk whatsoever. It just wants safety. Suddenly, those US government treasury
bonds--still near historic lows of 1 and 2 percent--are beautifully attractive. Because
they're safe. They won't blow up like sub-prime CDOs did.
The global pool of money is avoiding anything with even the slightest hint of risk and
that affects everybody, no matter who you are. It's harder to borrow money to buy a
house, or build a factory, or bring your country boldly into the 21st century. Take
Iceland. A year ago it was easy for them to borrow billions. Now, they're seen as too
risky. Their central bank has to pay more than 15 percent interest get anyone to loan
them money. They could do better putting their national debt on a credit
card. Hungary, Kazakhstan, Turkey, are all in similar situations. You might have
heard about problems in student lending. Companies that needed credit to survive
are shutting down. The US expects more than 1.1 million bankruptcies this year:
twice the 2006 number.
This freezing of credit all around the world is something new, the world has never
seen anything on this scale. When the crisis hit, last August, central bankers and
finance economists couldn't figure out how bad things might get. There was this
question people would ask: will things get like the 1930s or the 1970s? There was
real fear that, just like in the '30s, hundreds of banks would collapse, there would be
massive unemployment, there was talk of a new Great Depression.
Alex Blumberg: That talk seems to have faded and there's more talk that the next
few years will feel like the 1970s. There are lots of technical differences between
this crisis and Jimmy Carter's malaise. But for the average person, it could feel the
same. It's not an out-and-out depression. Everything's just kind of crappy. And not
just in housing or banking but for the economy as a whole. It’s barely growing. There
aren't a lot of new businesses, new jobs. Unemployment keeps creeping up. We're
just sort of stuck, in neutral, for a while.
Anyone under, say, 45 probably doesn't remember that 1970's malaise too well.
Anyone under 30 has barely known a US economy that wasn't growing. Now there's
a decent chance we'll all get to see what life felt like in the '70s. Which isn't great.
It's pretty bad, actually. Unless you're comparing it to the 1930’s.
END