The Norris Group Blog

California Real Estate Headline Roundup

Posts Tagged ‘FED’

The Norris Group Real Estate News Roundup 8/9/11

Tuesday, August 9th, 2011

Today’s News Synopsis:

Bloomberg reported that Goldman Sachs will possibly be facing a lawsuit from three big organizations, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG, regarding securities related to mortgages.  The recent Housing Scorecard for July showed a slight improvement in home prices but continued negativity for foreclosures and distressed homes.  Obama received a request from Realogy Corp. to hold a White House Summit on housing.   

In The News:

Housing Wire - “Rise in REO value cuts Freddie Mac holding expenses by 90%” (8-9-11)

“Freddie Mac reported $27 million in expenses for maintaining and reselling houses repossessed through foreclosure in the second quarter, a mere fraction of the $257 million the previous period.”

DS News - “The Future of Mortgage Interest Deduction Remains Unstable” (8-9-11)

“After much hype about the possibility of an elimination of the mortgage interest deduction (MID) as part of the debt ceiling agreement, the August 2 agreement included no such provision.  However, the new law does call for major deficit reductions – $2.4 trillion total – to go into place over the next several years.”

Bloomberg - “Goldman Sachs Says AIG, Fannie, Freddie Threatened to Sue Over Mortgages” (8-9-11)

“Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) said American International Group Inc. (AIG), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are among companies that have threatened to take legal action
against the firm over mortgage-related securities.”

Rismedia - “July Housing Scorecard Shows Home Improvement” (8-9-11)

“U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Department of the Treasury recently released the July edition of the Obama Administration’s Housing Scorecard—a comprehensive report on the nation’s housing market.  The latest housing data offer continued mixed signals as home prices improved slightly but showed continued strain from foreclosures and distressed homes.”

Inman - “Realogy calls for White House housing summit” (8-9-11)

“Realogy Corp. has sent a formal request to President Obama calling for a ‘White House Summit on Housing’.”

Los Angeles Times - “Feds sue Goldman Sachs over credit union losses” (8-9-11)

“Federal regulators have filed the fourth in a series of about 10 planned lawsuits against banks that sold questionable mortgage-related securities to big credit unions that subsequently failed.”

Housing Wire“CitiMortgage rebuilds executive team for global push” (8-9-11)

“CitiMortgage, the home loan origination and servicing division of Citigroup (C: 31.82 +13.85%), restructured its lineup of executives and is planning how to spread its Global Mortgage Community
to various regions beyond the U.S.”

CNN Money - “Housing recovery slips out of sight” (8-9-11)

“Any glimmer of hope that the housing market will stage a recovery in the upcoming months has vanished, thanks to the recent spate of bad economic news that has been making headlines over the past several weeks.”

NAHB - “NAHB Announced Call for Entries for the 2012 National Sales & Marketing Awards” (8-9-11)

“New home sales and marketing professionals are encouraged to submit entries for the 2012 National Sales and Marketing Awards, sponsored by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB)
National Sales and Marketing Council.”

Rismedia - “Second Quarter Commercial/Multifamily Mortgage Lending Up 107 Percent” (8-9-11)

“Second quarter 2011 commercial and multifamily mortgage loan originations were 107 percent higher than during the same period last year and 52 percent higher than the revised figures for the first quarter of 2011, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) Quarterly Survey of Commercial/Multifamily Mortgage Bankers Originations.”

Looking Back:

The percentage of American single-family homes with mortgages in negative equity decreased by 1.8% from the first to second quarter of 2010.  Freddie Mac requested $1.8 billion in federal aid after a $6 billion loss in the second quarter of 2010. Freddie Mac’s single-family inventory rose by 84.2% and its multifamily inventory doubled from 2009. PIMCO feared the U.S. would be entering a period of deflation, and JPMorgan Chase expressed concerns that our financial system may crash in 2015.

For more information about The Norris Group’s California hard money loans or our California Trust Deed investments, visit the website or call our office at 951-780-5856 for more information. For upcoming California real estate investor training and events, visit The Norris Group website and our California investor calendar. You’ll also find our award-winning real estate radio show on KTIE 590am at 6pm on Saturdays or you can listen to over 170 podcasts in our free investor radio archive.

231-TNG Radio – Mike Shedlock 6-25-11

Friday, June 24th, 2011

Mike Shedlock

Registered Investment Adviser Representative, Sitka Pacific Capital Management


(Full Bio)

streamitunesdownloadrss

This week Bruce is joined once again by Mike Shedlock.  Mike is a registered investment advisor representative for Sitka Pacific Capital Management. 

Mike’s blog, Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis, was started back in 2005.  Before, he had worked in the banking industry for over 20 years as an assistant vice-president for Harris.  He then became a consultant in 1999, but the consulting  jobs dried up after Y2K and 9/11.  For this reason he was out of work for almost 3 years.  He started his blog with the intent of being discovered, which originally he thought the odds were 0, but he proved himself wrong.  He now gets a million and a half to 2 million page hits a month on his blog.  He initially started writing about the things that he was going through at the time that a lot of people are going through right now.  I could see the bubble in housing building, and people were telling him “Cash is miss, cash is trash,” but when you are out of work cash is not trash.  Now, most of the people who told him this have actually lost money on their houses.  He wonders how many of them would like to have their cash back in their pockets now that they’re unemployed.  However, very few people listened.  Bernanke tried to claim the housing bubble didn’t exist, but it was very easy for Mike to see it did indeed exist.  He called the exact top of the housing market on his blog in real time in the summer of 2005.  Some people tried to say that Case-Shiller showed the peek was in 2006, but Case-Shiller only looks at re-sales and not at new home sales.  What started happening in the summer of 2005 that didn’t reflect itself in prices was huge incentives, whether it was free garages, free trips to Europe, free cars, free swimming pools, free landscape upgrades, free granite counter tops.  It actually started with the free granite counter tops, and then it went as big as free pools.  Case-Shiller never picked up any of this.  Housing peeked in 2005, and it took another year for things to start heading down in earnings.  The same type of thing happened back in 2006 when there was an 18% commission to sell a house in Phoenix. 

One of the things that was very difficult about picking a top accurately back in 05-06 was you would have really had to understand the way real estate was being financed, and very few people understood what a mortgage-backed security or a CDO or a fault-swap until around 2007.  Part of the problem was possibly a disconnection between the ways things were really being financed and how little the lender cared if anybody really could pay.  However, it’s really hard to say what was going on in Bernanke’s mind, but he certainly did miss the housing bubble.  He didn’t think there would be a recession and said, “The housing prices were supported by fundamentals” and mentioned there possibly being some “local froth.”  Neither he nor Greenspan saw the role of the Fed’s interested rate.  It’s interesting to ask how much of what Bernanke said he really believes or if he is simply trying to absolve the Feds’ guilt.  Last week he did a very self-serving speech where he praised the Feds for doing things that caused the recovery, but ignored all the things that the Fed did that caused the bubble in the first place.  Greenspan was a veritable cheerleader for housing, preaching variable interest loans, adjustable rate mortgages.  He was praising derivatives and all the things we would look back on as silly.  One did not need to understand credit derivatives or anything like that to know housing was in a bubble.  All one needed to see was how fast home prices were rising vs. how fast wages were rising.  Home prices were 3-4 standard deviations above rental prices and 3-4 standard deviations above wage growth.  It’s simply not sustainable.  That is how out of line home prices were.  We’re closer now to being back at the trim line, but we’re still a little bit above it. 

The tendency, however, is to overshoot to the downside.  Should that happen, there is a chance for some significant declines in places like California.  Home prices look a lot cheaper in Las Vegas because the bigger the bubble the bigger the decline.  Some of the biggest bubble areas were Las Vegas, Florida, Phoenix, and a lot of places in California.  California still has not corrected to where it needs to go to where one would say the valuations are reasonable.  California also has Proposition 13, which is putting a floor on home prices.  Some cities, such as Chicago, New York, and San Diego, are always going to have a premium because these cities are where there are a lot of jobs.  However, there is a difference between premium and 300-400% and 3 standard deviations like we were above norm.  A deviation is a mathematical function of a normalized curve that shows just how insane things are.  Three times normal is an extremely low probability event, and when you get into that condition, you know that you’re in a bubble.  Australia, Vancouver, Canada, and China are in this same situation right now. You can look at all these places and see that home prices are going up faster than rents and faster than wage growth.  It’s not sustainable.  The bubble in Australia has now popped, but all the mentioned countries were in a bubble longer than expected.  When Canada’s and China’s burst, we are most likely going to see some 50% declines just like here in the United States. 

There are a lot of smart people who disagree with the direction the market is going and believe we need to protect against strong inflation.  However, before you can hear their arguments and debate you have to know what the terms mean.  Mike defines inflation as an increase in money supply and market to market credit.  A common definition people use for inflation is prices going up, and they look at consumer prices.  Unfortunately, they ignore asset prices, which is one of the mistakes Bernanke and Greenspan made.  They absolutely ignored asset prices and did not consider home prices as part of inflation.  Had you taken home prices and put them in the CPI, then interest rates in the initial stages of the bubble popping were 5-6% too low.  You put housing in the CPI; the CPI would have been about 8 or 9%.  Instead, interest rates were 4 1/2%, so there should be no wonder that speculation in homes was running rampant when interest rates are that low.  On the contrary, people today say inflation is going through the roof, but you have to ask if it really is.  If you put home prices in the CPI, we now see something different.  The CPI would be barely flat here now.  This is what happens when you ignore asset bubbles and don’t put them in the CPI.  This is what happens when you only look at prices.  It’s not even really possible to measure prices.  If you take a look at the CPI, this is a basket of goods and services, and there is not one representative basket.  Take for example someone who is on fixed income and retired.  They are going to care the most about gasoline prices, their heating bill, property taxes, rent prices, the prices of food, and medicine if they are not fully covered by Medicare.  If also, for example, you take the basket of someone with kids in high school heading for college, you see the cost of college education has doubled in the last ten years or less.  Someone can easily rack up $50,000 a year in expenses going to college.  Kids are racking up $100,000 in debt.  These are two different kinds of baskets, not one representative basket.  Therefore, the whole idea of thinking you can measure the CPI is flawed. 

Mike has a letter on his website from a lady named Stephanie who is retired.  To Stephanie, inflation meant her fixed income bought less.  She said she gets $938 from Social Security, which is what she lives on every month.  She has a cd that has $16,000 in it, which she was getting $75 a month on the cd at one time.  Short-term interest rates are now down to nothing, so she is getting nothing on $16,000.  She wrote Mike asking him for advice, and he responded saying that she was being clobbered by the policies of the Fed.  Not only did the taxpayers bail out the banks at their expense, but the Fed continues to do so.  When Bernanke holds the interest rates so low, he is hurting everyone on fixed income that has savings in cds or receives a social security check every month that buys less and less.  These are the people that Bernanke is hurting.  Norio Rabini just came out with a statement that he thought there could be quite a shaking up of bonds and yields in the next couple years.  Mike mentioned this possibility too, although it is uncertain.  He received an email recently asking this very question, and they got upset when he didn’t know.  However, the real answer is anyone who thinks they know is probably lying.  No one really knows.  We can put together our guesses and make a case why we think something is going to happen, but when someone says they know, they really don’t.  We don’t know what the Fed is going to do, or what the ECB is going to do, or what China is going to do.  Everything is intertwined.  China is having a government change in 2012, something of which not many people are aware.  It is going to be a very significant one.  The current leadership in China is focused on maintaining growth at any price.  It is highly rumored that the next regime coming into China is extremely concerned about the property bubbles.  If they slow the Chinese economy, slow the prices of commodities, drop oil, drop the CPI, and if Congress sticks to its policies of being fiscally conservative, we may still be running huge deficits, but we’re no longer adding to it.  This is a change in the direction of downward pressure on the dollar.  Last year the ECB thought Jean-Claude Trichet was going to hike prices last month, and he didn’t.  If the ECB doesn’t hike, this is going to put upward pressure on the dollar and downward pressure on the Euro.  All of these claims are being put out there, but most of the claims are lies; the people don’t really know.  However, Mike is very supportive of what Rabini said about there being a legitimate chance of a bond market revolt.  On Yahoo Finance Mike talked about this very thing.  He was on the air with Aaron Task and Henry Blodget and had mentioned it two weeks before Rabini had even mentioned it.  He said if they get another round of QE out of the Fed, there is a real risk of a bond market revolt.  However, if he doesn’t and delays off on it, if there is a stock market plunge, if Europe delays hiking, if Australia does rate cuts, China slows, and commodities come down, then we can see a flight to treasuries.  As of which one of these things will happen depends on where all the variables fit.  It depends on what China does, what the ECB does, and what the Fed does.  Only then can we have a more definitive answer. 

The Fed will attempt to inflate, but it would be better for us to bite the bullet and balance the budget.  Otherwise, there is a very big risk of what happened in Greece happening in the United States if the U.S. does not address its budget deficit.  Interest rates do shoot up, and this is a very real risk.  If we want to get back to growth policies, we need to balance the budget.  We’re already spending $750 billion on defense, and we could probably spend $100 billion and have enough defense.  We could also allow drug imports to come in from Canada, get rid of student loans, or kill the entire department of energy.  There are a lot of things we could do that would get this country back on fiscal track.  We can’t balance the budget in one year, but it is possible that someone can do it in 5 years.  There is not really a choice here.  If we continue on the current path of not tackling the deficit, then what’s going to eventually happen is something similar to what happened in Greece.  The path we’re on is unsustainable.  The sooner the Congress addresses this, the better.  The sooner they address it, the sooner housing, commercial real estate prices, and the stock market will be negatively impacted.  No one wants to see this happen; no one wants to see the short-term pain.  However, the long-term pain gets greater and greater just like what happened in Greece if we don’t address the problem. 

The U.S. has been following the path of Japan, which has had a 20-year run with their housing market.  It seems we are still on this path, and even if the Fed does manage to obtain a little bit more inflation, home prices will probably not go anywhere for a decade due to the deleveraging of consumers.  All the people out there who are thinking housing is at a bottom and better buy now should forget it.  We are not going to have hyperinflation, and home prices are going to be stagnant for a long time.  

To learn more, you can view Mike’s website at globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com, or type Mish in a Google search.  He talks about housing, interest rates, Europe, gold, silver, and the global economy every day of the week. 

For more information about The Norris Group’s California hard money loans or our California Trust Deed investments, visit the website or call our office at 951-780-5856 for more information. For upcoming California real estate investor training and events, visit The Norris Group website and our California investor calendar. You’ll also find our award-winning real estate radio show on KTIE 590am at 6pm on Saturdays or you can listen to over 170 podcasts in our free investor radio archive.

230-TNG Radio – Mike Shedlock 6-18-11

Friday, June 17th, 2011

Mike Shedlock

Registered Investment Adviser Representative, Sitka Pacific Capital Management

(Full Bio)

streamitunesdownloadrss

This week Bruce is joined by Mike Shedlock.  Mike is a registered investment advisor representative for Sitka Pacific Capital Management, and he also has a fantastic blog site called Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis.  In his blog he talks about oil interest rates, housing, the IMF, Europe, gold and silver, and anything going on in the market.

Even though times are a little tough right now to be an investment advisor, Mike’s work is going very well as he says that they have a neutral market and a cautious stance.  Their mission at Sitka Pacific is to avoid the next decline.  They had a positive year in 2008, even though hardly anyone else did.  Even without being net short they had a positive year.  They don’t bet on the market going down, but rather they try to go to the sidelines, find some things they like better than others, and have huge cash positions.  This is where they’re at today.  For the last year the stock market has gone up, and they have more or less been on the sidelines.  NASMP was up 12-15%, while they were only up 6%.  They don’t really like the risk award setup, as they believe that the odds are good that another recession is coming.  They think the recovery is not real and is only based off of fiscal stimulus both from Congress and monetary stimulus by quantitative easing from the Fed that’s not sustainable.  Both are coming to an end, and the Republican Congress does not want to have anything to do with larger deficit.  Therefore, the fiscal stimulus is going to end unless things get extremely nasty.  Global growth is slowing everywhere.  In Europe, Australia, China, and the U.S. people need to be extremely cautious in terms of what they expect out of the stock markets.

Most of Sitka’s clients are in a capital preservation mode, as is Sitka themselves.  The few that aren’t have left, but in the downturn they actually added to their client database significantly because Sitka missed the downturn but no one else did.  They are starting to see a lot of things come together all at once.  Commodities are back into a bubble; housing still has a further ways to go down, and they have already seen housing programs established.  These include Cash for Clunkers and the various stimulus packages in housing.  As soon as the tax credits for housing ended, housing prices went back down.  To work with this, Sitka delayed things for a year expecting that home prices are going to fall to where they’re going to get anyway.  Prices are going to fall until price meets genuine demand, not artificial demand coming from Congress.  The very best thing that Congress can do for the housing market is to do nothing.  They need to let prices fall, let foreclosures happen, and let prices get to where there is genuine demand.  It’s then we can find a bottom.  The more Congress tries to delay this, the longer and further off the bottom is going to be.

According to Mike, “Things don’t get where they’re going in a straight line.”  This has a lot to do with intervention, which doesn’t change the ultimate direction but rather the timeframe in which something happens.  This is why being an investment advisor is very difficult with unknown intervention.  There are a certain set of people, for example momentum traders, who expect someone to catch every move in the market, both up and down.  This is not something Sitka can do and most likely cannot be done at all, but this does not stop people from trying to do it or wanting to do it.  The population tends to chase whatever the latest and greatest thing is right before it’s ready to plunge.  This happened with housing in 2005, and it happened with the NASDAQ in 2000.  Some people who were hesitant about NASDAQ all the way up from 1996 to 1999 decided right in 2000 that they were wrong and that the productivity miracle from the internet was real and they should get in before it was too late.  Too many people think this is what makes the top.  They think this is what made the top in 2005 in the housing market.  People believed that home prices only had one way to go.  Everyone had bought in.  Even people who couldn’t afford a house bought one anyway.  There was no one left to buy.  The pool of greater fools finally ran out.  This is one thing you have to be weary of as an investor.  The mood of a market can definitely be opposite of the future direction.  Things change very quickly.  In the aforementioned situations, it changed on a dime.  When it happened with housing in 2005, people were camping out and entering lotteries for the right to buy a condo.  This is how crazy things were.

Another topic is deleveraging, which is inherently deflationary.  Deleveraging means to pay down debt, so by definition deleveraging is deflationary.  At the same time, it also depends on your definition of deflation and inflation.  To Mike, deflation is a decrease in money supply and credit from mark to market, so according to this definition deleveraging has to be deflationary.  However, if someone looks at things in terms of prices and they ignore home prices, for example, seeing the price of crude oil and thinking there’s nothing deflationary about it at all, then they’re not seeing the whole picture.  Crude is rising because of peak oil, because of massive monetary stimulus in China, and also because of some quantitative easing by the Fed.  It’s only the last that’s inflationary.  What’s really funny is people complain about the price of a hamburger going up from $3 to $4 and look at the inflation, but they’re failing to look at what’s more important: the price of a condo falling from $200,000 to $35,000, or a hamburger going from $3 to $4.  It’s irrelevant compared to the drop in home prices.  Paying down debt is one part of deleveraging, but defaulting is also a huge part of it in real estate.  This is really where the deleveraging is happening because the lenders are not getting paid the amount they have on the books.  This is where Mike’s mark to market play comes in when he defines deflation as a decrease in money supply and credit mark to market.  For the last year, the banks have gotten away with keeping absurd valuations on the value of their assets on the books.  As long as the asset values on the books were rising, the junk bond market was going up and various things were happening that were inflationary.  Mike doesn’t think the market is going to let the banks get away with it forever.  The National Accounting Board, the Fed, and the FDIC have interfered with and delayed regulations 2 and 3 times now for the last three years on mark to market rules and valuing things on the books.  They have kept things on the books at inflated values.  As long as they were able to get away with it, we’re probably going to see another big credit scare where banks are going to have to mark some of the debt they’re holding on their books back to market.  The value is going to plunge; the ability of banks to lend as a result of that will plunge.  This is why banks are not lending right now.  Banks are capital constraint and capital impaired, and there is few worthy credit borrowers that want to borrow.  This is the deflationary backdrop; and we also have a deleveraging deflationary backdrop.  In a sense, it’s really about attitudes.  It’s the willingness and ability of banks to lend and willingness and ability of consumers and businesses to borrow.

There has not been willingness for businesses to borrow.  If businesses were expanding, we would see it in the job market and in loans increasing. Instead, what we are seeing is the value of the debts going up on the balance sheets of banks.  However, banks are not really lending and the market has temporarily suspended mark to market sanity.  Instead, we have a mark to nonsense prices that have inflated the value of the stock market.  For now, Mike believes that asset prices are going to plunge, commodity prices are going to sink, and housing prices have a further ways to decline.  Everything, including stock prices and junk bond markets, is back in a bubble.

One thing that’s also happening is consumers are becoming willing participants in deleveraging intentionally.  They have access to credit then look around and don’t want it anymore.  A lot of this has to do with people trying to refinance their homes at a lower rate.  They have to bring money to the table to get that lower rate because banks require a 20% down payment.  If they’re 35% in the hole and banks want 20% down, then they have to bring in 15%.  We’re actually seeing cash-in refinancing now rather than cash-out refinancing in homes.  This is another part of the deleveraging process that is voluntary.  People are doing it so that they can receive a lower interest rate on their house.  One of the statistics happening now in Riverside they have never had before due to never having encumbered owners is 71% of the transactions are either short-sales or lender-owned properties.  This means that 71% of the sales do not reproduce a buyer in the marketplace.  Out of 1,000 sales, we have lost 710 buyers for a period of time, buy you still have 1,000 houses to move.  This is the big challenge for California in that you have a lot of houses that should be on the market that probably can’t be placed on the market because there is not really an owner-occupant buyer.  No one’s willing to give financing to investors.  For example, Fannie Mae is not doing it, and banks are not doing it.  In some extreme cases, someone wanted to put down 60% or 80% down, and they could not get the financing as it was just not available.  It’s possible some small local bank might give financing, but the big banks are not interested.  This should tell you how capital constrained they are and how stuffed to the gills they are with mortgage debt that they actually want to get rid of but don’t know how.  We also have some new rules that say the banks have to take 5% of the mortgage and keep that at risk on their balance sheets so they can’t securitize all of it.  Banks don’t want any part of this either, so we have had an attitude change on the part of buyers and on the part of the lenders.  Lenders don’t want to lend, and people are waiting for cheaper prices because they think they’re going down.  It’s the confluence of these two attitudes and willingness and ability of banks to lend and willingness and ability of businesses and consumers to borrow.  If you were a business, you would have no reason to expand in this kind of environment.  Any business who wants to expand here should be turned away as a poor credit risk because they don’t know what they’re doing.

One thing that needs to happen is we need to get rid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  In the short-term, real estate will be affected by the cost of obtaining a mortgage being raised above a specific amount.  The amount that Fannie Mae would be willing to finance is going to go down.  Anyone who wants to buy a home above that amount is now in a jumbo loan instead of in a regular loan, and a jumbo loan has a higher interest rate assuming they can obtain it at all.  Withdrawing Fannie and Freddie from the marketplace will result in downward pressure on real estate prices, which is actually a good thing.  The sooner the prices get to where they’re going, the better off we are.  If this means that 30-year mortgages completely vanish, this is a tremendous thing.  People should not be buying houses unless they have an expectation that they can pay it off in ten years.  Obviously not many people have been able to do this and not at the prices that homes were at in the market.  Fifteen years is a more reasonable timeframe.  Instead, at the peak of the insanity, we were going into 40-year mortgages, others 50 and 100.  If you need a 100 year mortgage to make something affordable, then it’s not affordable.  Mike also feels the same way about 30-year mortgages.  There should not be any reason for there to be mortgages longer than 15 years.  If someone wants a 30-year mortgage, maybe they need to pay a lot more because there is a lot more risk.  With 30-year mortgages, people are not paying the principle back fast enough, so in any downturn that comes there is going to be less equity and more likelihood for someone to walk away from it.  Someone who had to pay the house back sale over 12 years, not counting those who bought right at the tip of the bubble, would have some equity built up.  In fact, over the course of ten years they would have had their house paid off.

In regards to accessing the equity for business purposes, Mike would tell people not to do it.  People thought there was free money available.  They thought since the home prices went up they should take the money out and invest in the stock market.  Very influential people actually advised others and wrote books telling people to take money out of their houses and invest in foreign equities because they only go up.  It’s all part of when you leverage in this way the risk goes up.  With the price destruction we have had in California, at some point the price of houses will be so far below replacement costs that there is no way to pencil in new construction.  We will probably have a double-dip in some of the inventory types because of the lack of buyers and the quantity of inventory.    Mike wrote a post three years ago titled “Structurally high unemployment for a decade,” which talked about how eventually when we get to the lowest possible price level, the job market probably will not return.  We will have consistently high unemployment for a long time.  At the height of the housing boom, we were creating about 250,000 jobs a month.  At the height of the commercial real estate boom, which lagged and kept the economy going due to the subdivisions and strip malls being built, they were only averaging about 190,000 jobs a month.  Unfortunately, the commercial real estate is not coming back as we’re not going to have another boom or another housing build out like we did originally.  It takes 125,000 jobs a month to keep up with birth rate and immigration, so even if we did keep up with it, we’re going to have an unemployment rate at 8% all the way up until 2014.  The unemployment rate right now would be 12% except for all the people who dropped out of the work force.  They dropped out a faster rate than was thought, hence why unemployment is not making new highs right now.  It’s at 9.1% right now and 10.1% at its high.  We have added hardly any jobs since then, so now oddly we are heading into another recession with no telling where it’s going to go.  We may not even lose that many more jobs.  Housing is already trailing towards the bottom, so there’s not much to lose if we head back into another recession.  However, you can still expect to see the unemployment rate shoot back to 10%.

To hear more from Mike Shedlock, you can visit his website at globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com.  For a quick search, type Mish in Google.

For more information about The Norris Group’s California hard money loans or our California Trust Deed investments, visit the website or call our office at 951-780-5856 for more information. For upcoming California real estate investor training and events, visit The Norris Group website and our California investor calendar. You’ll also find our award-winning real estate radio show on KTIE 590am at 6pm on Saturdays or you can listen to over 170 podcasts in our free investor radio archive.

165-TNG Radio – Peter Schiff 3-13-10

Friday, March 12th, 2010

Peter_Schiff

Peter Schiff

President of Euro Pacific Capital

stream

itunes

download

rss

Bruce Norris is joined this week by President of Euro Pacific Capital and author of Crash Proof 2.0, How to profit from the Economic Collapse, Peter Schiff. Peter is currently campaigning for the Connecticut Senate seat to replace Senator Dodd.

Europac.net is Peter’s website and the number to reach his group is 800-727-7922.

Mr. Schiff is one of the few non-biased investment advisors (not committed solely to the short side of the market) to have correctly called the current bear market before it began and to have positioned his clients accordingly. As a result of his accurate forecasts on the U.S. stock market, economy, real estate, the mortgage meltdown, credit crunch, subprime debacle, commodities, gold and the dollar, he is becoming increasingly more renowned. He has been quoted in many of the nation’s leading newspapers, including The Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, Investor’s Business Daily, The Financial Times, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The Dallas Morning News, The Miami Herald, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Arizona Republic, The Philadelphia Inquirer, and the Christian Science Monitor, and appears regularly on CNBC, CNN, Fox News, Fox Business Network, and Bloomberg T.V. His best-selling book, “Crash Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse” was published by Wiley & Sons in February of 2007. His second book, “The Little Book of Bull Moves in Bear Markets: How to Keep your Portfolio Up When the Market is Down” was published by Wiley & Sons in October of 2008.

Mr. Schiff began his investment career as a financial consultant with Shearson Lehman Brothers, after having earned a degree in finance and accounting from U.C. Berkeley in 1987. A financial professional for over twenty years he joined Euro Pacific in 1996 and has served as its President since January 2000. An expert on money, economic theory, and international investing, Peter is a highly recommended broker by many leading financial newsletters and investment advisory services. He is also a contributing commentator for Newsweek International and served as an economic advisor to the 2008 Ron Paul presidential campaign. He holds FINRA Series 4,7,24,27,53,55, & 63 licenses.

In 2007, the crash was not obvious to many, but it was to Peter. Peter thinks he understood the economy better than most of the people in Wall Street and the government. Peter was better prepared because he was writing books about the economy, and he was working in the brokerage industry. He received many emails from other people who agreed with his views.

Peter believes the problem is that too many people learned Keynesian economics, and as a result, they had no understanding of how economies truly work. It is hard to see a bubble when you are inside one. Peter saw people buying houses at prices they couldn’t afford. He knew that lenders were letting people buy homes with no down payment, they were letting people lie about their income, and they weren’t documenting their assets. He knew the government was guaranteeing all that debt through Fannie and Freddie, and he understood the moral hazard of that behavior. He knew the Federal Reserve had interest rates much too low. He knew that the economy was in a mess, and that we were simply inflating a bubble. Peter claims you didn’t have to be a rocket scientist to see this problem coming; you just had to be an idiot, or too immersed in the bubble to see it coming.

Bruce saw many of the people who Peter debated, and they were very confident when they claimed Peter was wrong, and they still do. Many of these people still think that the economy is recovering right now, and that Ben Bernanke made the right choice by stimulating the economy. Peter thinks Bernanke made the problem worse. We are trying to reinflate a bubble, but this behavior is just going to make problems worse.

Bruce asks Schiff what he would label his State of the Union speech, if he was to give one. Peter does not think that the Union is currently sound. Right now, he is running for Senate in Connecticut as a Republican nominee. Peter believes that Chris Dodd enabled the housing bubble by giving support for Fannie and Freddie while they were making bad decisions. Schiff thinks we need to restructure our government, because it is spending too much and it is too big. Right now, the government is actually trying to expand rather than shrink, and that causes an increase in spending. We need to change our tax policy. Right now we are punishing hard work, savings and investment. We need to raise revenue through consumer spending. We need to remove many of the regulations that are distorting the free market. We cannot pretend that we can buy everything from China and Japan, and then pay for those products by borrowing money.

For inflation to occur, you need to have a central bank creating a lot of money. Typically, the catalyst for inflation is government spending. When governments spend more money than they collect in taxes, they often get the difference from their central bank, and this is happening right now. Not only do we have all the ingredients for inflation, but we also have the ingredients for hyper inflation. Unless the government makes changes, we will have hyper inflation.

Inflation has not been a big factor yet, but Peter believes that this is because we cannot see it. We should be currently experiencing deflation but we are not. Prices should be falling, which would be helpful to the economy, but the government is preventing price reduction through inflation. One thing that Keynesians don’t understand is that high unemployment causes high inflation. Keynesians think there is a trade off between high unemployment and low inflation; this is actually the opposite of the truth. Generally speaking, most countries will low levels of employment have low levels of inflation. When you have fewer people working and producing goods, governments print more money to stimulate the weak economy.

In the 60s and 70s, we believed in the Philip’s curve, which got us in trouble. Bruce asks if the path to hyper inflation will take over a decade. Peter says it is up to the Chinese and Japanese. They have to decide when they will stop loaning us money that we cannot pay back. Peter doubts that this inflation process will take a decade. He thinks it will most likely happen over the next several years.

When the world stops buying our debt, we will either have the Federal Reserve print money to buy our debt, or we will make radical cuts in government spending. Peter hopes that we choose to cut our spending, but based on the current officials we have in congress, he believes we will choose to print money. Many countries throughout history have made the mistake of hyper inflation, and it has led them to disaster. Unfortunately, our government officials have learned nothing from history.

Peter does not think that our generation will see another politician like Paul Volcker; someone who is willing to take the necessary actions to save us from more trouble. In the 80s, we were lucky to have the support of Volcker and Reagan. Reagan understood that the government was too big, and he understood the importance of the dollar value. When Volcker was raising interest rates, politicians were calling for his resignation, but Reagan supported him. Right now, the person who occupies the White House is the complete opposite of Reagan. Obama believes that the free market is causing problems, and that the government is the solution. Bernanke is also the complete opposite of Volcker, because Ben supports mass amounts of government spending.

Home prices in California are firming, but this is occurring because the government is sustaining those prices. Right now, the government is actually making the problem worse. Builders are still making new homes, because the government is making it easy for people to buy homes with 3 percent down payments and low interest rates. If the market were in charge, prices would be falling so low that no one would want to buy and no one would be building new homes. What builders are doing is adding more homes to the incredible supply we already have. Once the government removes its influence, the collapse will be even bigger. We are still suckering people into buying homes that they cannot afford, and they are still able to extract equity from their homes which will soon disappear.

Peter believes that real estate prices need to fall, because the prices need to reflect a true market. In a true market, the average person should be able to put down 20 percent on a house, and then qualify for a mortgage without government guarantees. Also, people should have enough savings to pay for the other costs that come with owning a house. You need to have a reserve of cash for when emergencies, such as job loss, emerge. Prices need to fall to the point where people can do that, and Peter believes that this appropriate price rating is far away in California.

Keeping real estate prices artificially high is hurting the economy, because in order to inflate real estate prices, interest rates must remain artificially low. To do this, capital has to be sucked out of the real economy, which means that businesses cannot grow and expand. The more we keep home prices inflated, the more Americans will lose their job. Eventually, we will have higher real estate prices, but more Americans will be unemployed.

Right now, there are a lot of people who own houses who should not. For example, in California, renters were sucked into the market based on the expectation of making profit. The principal motivation for buying a house, for many of these people, was to make money. People will eventually realize that owning a home is not like owning a lottery ticket. There are many home owners who need to go back to renting. It is more flexible to rent, and it is typically less expensive.

Peter also thinks that many people bought larger homes they did not need during the real estate bubble, because they expected home prices to double. People expected their houses to appreciate to twice their purchasing amount. Once prices stop going up, people stop buying huge homes based on speculation, and they will simply buy what they need. Because of this market speculation, builders built too many mcmansions.

Peter also believes that California’s other big problem is that it is bankrupt. Companies are leaving, so the unemployment rate will be much higher in a couple years. When you are unemployed you cannot buy a home.

The only thing Peter believes will save California real estate is hyper inflation. However, Peter would not consider that to be a realistic solution. Hyper inflation may allow people to live in their expensive homes, but their other expenses, like air conditioning and eating, will become more expensive as well. Peter thinks that houses will still have their value, but people will be huddled in blankets; looking pathetic.

Bruce asks Peter, “When you get to the senate, can you change certain real estate policies, which will allow investors to receive financing? Investors are willing to put 20 to 30 percent down, but they cannot currently get financing for investing.”

This is because the government is directing all it’s financing to homebuyers and college student. Peter wants to stop the government from subsidizing anyone’s mortgage. This way, loans will go to the most credible borrowers, and the investors will surely be the most credible borrower. Peter would prefer to have an investor, who has the money, buy a property and maintain it, rather than keep an individual in his or her property when they don’t have the equity to maintain it.

Renting makes sense for a lot of people. Peter was a renter for nearly his entire life, because he made plenty of money and he felt it made more sense. In Florida, he rented a nice place for much cheaper than what he could have owned. He recently decided to buy for multiple reasons: 1) He was tired of moving around; 2) He paid 40 percent less than the owner who bought it in 2002. 3) It was 60 percent less than what the property was listed for 2 years ago. It would have cost him more money to build the home.

People ask Peter if they should buy real estate for financial reasons, and he tells them “absolutely not”. If you are thinking about real estate as an investment, then Peter thinks you should rent.

Peter believes that interest rates will increase at some point, because the government is artificially suppressing them right now. The longer we keep interest rates low, the higher they will end up. Many people feel encouraged to buy homes when interest rates are low, but Peter has the opposite perspective. Peter would rather buy interest rates when they are high, because prices are typically low when interest rates are high.

Bruce mentions that last time, prices did not decrease as the interest rates increased. Peter claims that this happened as a result of government interference. The Federal Reserve kept rates low in order to allow people to overpay for houses. Lenders also allowed people to buy a home without a down payment. These two factors encouraged people to buy, and as a result, people gained a positively speculative mentality towards real estate prices. The mania of real estate profit further encouraged home purchases.

You can no longer get an ARM, and only qualify at the teaser level. People were once able to get loans with 2 or 3 percent payments.

Peter’s website is www.europac.net

You can learn about his brokerage business at that website. Peter can help you invest your money around the world.

Peter’s recently published book is “Crash Proof 2.0”.

If you want to help Peter get to senate, his campaign website is www.schiffforsenate.com

The Norris Group Real Estate News Roundup 11/23/09

Monday, November 23rd, 2009

Today’s News Synopsis:

The NAR reports that existing-home sales increased by 10.1 percent in October. Statistics show that California workers, who earn the national median income, can afford 59.1 percent of the new and existing homes during the 3rd quarter. According to the MBA, multifamily lenders provided $88 billion in new financing for apartment buildings with 5 or more units during 2008.

In The News:

NAR - “Existing-Home Sales Record Another Big Gain, Inventories Continue to Shrink” (11-23-09)

“Existing-home sales – including single-family, townhomes, condominiums and co-ops – surged 10.1 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate1 of 6.10 million units in October from a downwardly revised pace of 5.54 million in September, and are 23.5 percent above the 4.94 million-unit level in October 2008. Sales activity is at the highest pace since February 2007 when it hit 6.55 million.”

CBIA - “California Housing Affordability Continues to Decrease, CBIA Announces” (11-23-09)

“On a statewide basis, the HOI found that a family earning the median-income could have afforded 59.1 percent of the new and existing homes that were sold during the third quarter, down from 62.7 percent in the second quarter.”

Mortgage Bankers Association“MBA Reports Multifamily Lending 40 Percent Lower in 2008 Than 2007; Market Remained Broad and Diverse” (11-23-09)

“In 2008, 2,877 different multifamily lenders provided a total of more than $88 billion in new financing for apartment buildings with five or more units, according to an annual report from the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA). The 2008 dollar volume represents a 40 percent decline from 2007 levels.”

Bloomberg - “Commercial Property Prices to Fall Up to 55%” (11-23-09)

“Commercial real estate prices may fall as much as 55 percent from October 2007’s peak and the recovery will be slow amid rising unemployment and tepid consumer spending, Moody’s Investors Service said.”

Inman - “Front-loaded loans: bad for borrowers?” (11-23-09)

“A necessary consequence of full amortization with equal monthly payments is that the composition of the payment between interest and principal changes over time. In the early years, the payment is mostly interest; in the later years, it is mostly principal. At 6 percent, it does indeed take 21 years to pay down the balance of the $100,000 loan to $50,000. This is the factual foundation of the front-end-loading argument.”

Orange County Register“Weakest home market in O.C.? Garden Grove” (11-23-09)

“How’d Garden Grove 92844 do so poorly? It ranked 82nd of 83 for pricing; 67th for sales; and 69th in terms of foreclosures frequency in the community. In the previous quarter, this ZIP ranked 56 of 83 overall.”

Orange County Register“Will ‘good faith’ be bad for borrowers?” (11-23-09)

“Another purpose of the GFE2010 is to ‘bring clarity’ to the market ‘through a simpler and better understanding of their costs.’ To do this HUD took the previous 1 page Good Faith Estimate that clearly delineates all charges and tailored perfectly into the HUD/RESPA required Truth In Lending disclosure (which discloses APR) and created a three page form that does not delineate any fees, lumps charges for non-related services together, separates out services required by the loan process from those the borrower can select and has no relation to the Truth In Lending disclosure or the Good Faith Estimate required under Reg Z by the Fed.”

Realty Times“Washington Report: Congress Pressures FHA” (11-23-09)

“Congressman Spencer Bachus of Alabama said FHA’s declining capital reserves, estimated by independent auditors as barely one quarter of the congressionally-mandated minimum, raises the possibility that FHA could come hat in hand to Congress seeking a bailout. ”

Realty Times“The Cost of the Home Buyer Tax Credit” (11-23-09)

“If the stats hold true, and that is about half of all buyers are first-timers, then there were 2.25 million buyers that qualified (assuming they didn’t go beyond the income limits – which many did). But for simplicity, we’ll say they all qualified. Simple math puts the tax credits at $18 billion for 2009 that doesn’t have to be paid back. For all the money that’s being floated out there to stimulate the economy, this is probably the best plan in play.”

Looking Back:

Wells Fargo made plans to cut 80 percent of all of its wholesale mortgage jobs. Citigroup’s year losses had reached $20 billion, and the company cut 52,000 jobs. A study showed that borrowers who attended home ownership education programs were 20 times less likely to foreclose.

60-TNG Radio – David Berson 3-22-08

Friday, March 21st, 2008

David-Berson

David Berson

Senior Vice President, Chief Economist and Strategist, The PMI Group, Inc.

stream

itunes

download

rss

Bruce Norris is joined by former Chief Economist with Fannie Mae and current Chief Economist with PMI Group, David Berson. Bruce and David discuss what PMI Group does, mortgage insurance, risk lenders are no longer willing to take, the size and scope of PMI Group and its services, risk averse lenders and how it all changed, practices of lenders and pushing the credit envelope in cycles, unsustainable trends and the end of subprime, lenders passing loans through new vehicles not previously available, mortgage-backed securities and CDOs, portfolio lending, expansion of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and what the effects will be, investors and their assumption of risk for mortgage-backed securities, credit ratings and how they misled investors, the issue of looking backward and not forward, why pricing inflation saved the day, if the worst over, home sales and price stabilization, California in a recession, the economic signs of a recession, consumer spending, what happens if consumer spending dwindles, unemployment rates and its importance to the market, what happens if wages decline, Realtors and jobs in California, impact on bond insurers if ratings are lowered, separating muni bonds from subprime bonds, what happens when insurers go out of business, mortgage defaults, unanticipated price drops, when Fannie Mae started to be concerned, the national scope of price drops, Great Depression talk and if it’s exaggerated, raising loan limits for Fannie and Freddie, the FED and their solutions, moratorium on foreclosures, what signs to look for in a recovery, bond yield spreads and what they might say about interest rate moves by the FED, stagflation, and the percentage of housing market for employment.

As Chief Economist and Strategist, David Berson’s responsibilities include domestic and global market research and planning, support of government relations and public policy, and strategic environmental planning. He also acts as a PMI spokesperson on topics related to global economic housing, and mortgage market conditions, prospects, and policy.

Berson comes to PMI from Fannie Mae, where he was Vice President and Chief Economist since 1989. At Fannie Mae Berson was responsible for advising the company on national and regional economic, housing, and mortgage policy and conditions, including forecasts and analyses of the economy, interest rates, and housing and mortgage finance markets. Berson was also a senior member of the corporate strategy group, where he provided alternative views and risk analyses based on economic and market changes.

Prior to Fannie Mae, Berson held senior management positions at Wharton Econometric Forecasting Associates overseeing domestic services, financial analysis, and modeling. As well, he has held several teaching positions at the University of Michigan, Claremont McKenna College, and Claremont Graduate School. Berson has published more than ten papers on the U.S. housing and mortgage markets.

Berson received a Ph.D. in economics and a M.P.P. in public policy from the University of Michigan, and a B.A. in history and economics from Williams College. He has a long history of civic activity and currently serves on the advisory board for the Middle Patuxent Environmental Area and the board of directors for Crossway Community, a transitional housing project for homeless families.

Listen Now

http://www.thenorrisgroup.com/

55-TNG Radio – John Burns 2-16-08

Friday, February 15th, 2008

 

John-Burns

John Burns

President, John Burns Real Estate Consulting

streamitunes

download

rss

Bruce Norris is joined this week by builder consultant and founder of John Burns Real Estate Consulting, John Burns. Bruce and John discuss how busy John has been consulting investors and builders who have never experienced a downturn, what industries these new investors are coming from and if it’s cyclical, if builders had a chance to do it over what they might choose to do differently, land shortages, debt strategies of builders, options versus cash, land value decrease in California, portfolio deals, supply of homes the builders are currently holding, construction starts, how lending has changed the game, who the typical buyer is in 2008, the possibility of builders constructing smaller homes, if the cities like that idea, why do builders repeat the same mistakes, are those in trouble the old or new companies, Northern versus Southern California market, affordability changes in the coming years, if affordability will help the housing market, if any of the FED actions will come to the rescue, how the freezing of foreclosure won’t change anything, how interest rates might help, the California employment picture for 2008 and its effect on housing demand, recession in California, migration, presidential elections and possible tax law changes, the state of the commercial industry, commercial foreclosures in 2008, and the new loan limits proposed by the FED.

Prior to founding the Company, John Burns was at KPMG Peat Marwick for 10 years, where he was a Senior Manager in the Real Estate Consulting group. He was also a Principal and Vice President for four years at a national consulting firm, where he completed custom consulting assignments and developed several market monitoring subscription products for the 75 largest housing markets in the United States.

John Burns is a frequent speaker, and has been quoted as an expert by CNN, ABC World News Tonight, The Wall Street Journal, The Associated Press, USA Today, Bloomberg, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, Builder magazine, and others. He designed and authored a weekly e-mail received by more than 25,000 industry participants, and authored the U.S. Housing Markets publication. He also created and edited several highly successful market research subscription reports.

John has a M.B.A. from the University of California, Los Angeles and a B.A. in economics from Stanford University. He is also a Certified Public Accountant. He is a full member of the Urban Land Institute and a board member of the Building Industry Association.

42-TNG Radio – Jack Kyser 11-17-07

Friday, November 16th, 2007

Jack_Kyser

Jack Kyser

Chief Economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp.

stream

itunes

download

rss

Bruce Norris is joined once again by Chief Economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC), Jack Kyser. Bruce and Jack discuss how California will deal with budget shortfalls because of real estate, California’s 10% budget shortfall, borrowing into the future, how the election year could affect us, possible changes in the bankruptcy laws, new Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loan limits, California real estate transaction numbers, recent auctions, California rental markets, interest rate hikes, tax law changes, what it could mean if a democrat takes office, and where California is at in the current market correction.

Jack Kyser is the Chief Economist on the staff of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC). Called the “guru of the Los Angeles economy” by the Los Angeles Business Journal, Mr. Kyser is responsible for interpreting and forecasting economic trends in the Los Angeles five-county area (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties), and for analyzing the major industries of the area. Utilizing this information, he helps develop job retention and creation strategies for Los Angeles County. Mr. Kyser’s advice is frequently sought by business, government and the media.

The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC) is a private, not-for-profit membership organization whose mission is leadership in the retention and creation of jobs and economic base in the Los Angeles area. Mr. Kyser’s analytical research work and insightful knowledge of the regional economy has helped to elevate the LAEDC to recognition as the pre-eminent source of economic information and forecasts on Southern California.

Prior to joining the LAEDC, Mr. Kyser was chief economist for the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Kyser has also worked for Security Pacific National Bank, First Interstate Bank (then United California Bank). Mr. Kyser later joined Union Pacific Railroad in Omaha, Nebraska, where he was transportation economist. He has also taught economics at the University of Nebraska–Omaha, and served as a business reporter and commentator for radio station KVNO-FM, also in Omaha.

A native of California, Mr. Kyser was born in Huntington Park and currently resides in Downey. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in industrial design and an MBA from the University of Southern California. He has also pursued additional course work at UCLA.

Mr. Kyser serves on the Economic Policy Council of the California Institute, the research and policy arm of the California Congressional Delegation. He also serves on the economic advisors panel for the California Chamber of Commerce. He is also a past president of the Los Angeles Chapter of the National Association of Business Economists; a member of Lambda Alpha–a land economics fraternity; and on the board of directors of the South Park Economic Development Corporation, and the Building Owners & Managers Association of Greater Los Angeles.

41-TNG Radio – Jack Kyser 11-10-07

Friday, November 9th, 2007

Jack_Kyser

Jack Kyser

Chief Economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp.

stream

itunes

download

rss

Bruce Norris is joined by Chief Economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC), Jack Kyser. Bruce and Jack discuss how global markets are important to the LA forecast, how forecasting has changed in the last 25 years, the huge role the entertainment industry plays in the Los Angeles economy, how different economists can come up with drastically different forecasts, the speculator vs. the investor, how less taxes will effect LA, if we’ll see a recession in California, interest rates, if the FED getting involved is helping, what other industries will see a decline in California because of real estate, and Jack’s outlook on LA commercial real estate.

Jack Kyser is the Chief Economist on the staff of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC). Called the “guru of the Los Angeles economy” by the Los Angeles Business Journal, Mr. Kyser is responsible for interpreting and forecasting economic trends in the Los Angeles five-county area (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties), and for analyzing the major industries of the area. Utilizing this information, he helps develop job retention and creation strategies for Los Angeles County. Mr. Kyser’s advice is frequently sought by business, government and the media.

The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC) is a private, not-for-profit membership organization whose mission is leadership in the retention and creation of jobs and economic base in the Los Angeles area. Mr. Kyser’s analytical research work and insightful knowledge of the regional economy has helped to elevate the LAEDC to recognition as the pre-eminent source of economic information and forecasts on Southern California.

Prior to joining the LAEDC, Mr. Kyser was chief economist for the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Kyser has also worked for Security Pacific National Bank, First Interstate Bank (then United California Bank). Mr. Kyser later joined Union Pacific Railroad in Omaha, Nebraska, where he was transportation economist. He has also taught economics at the University of Nebraska–Omaha, and served as a business reporter and commentator for radio station KVNO-FM, also in Omaha.

A native of California, Mr. Kyser was born in Huntington Park and currently resides in Downey. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in industrial design and an MBA from the University of Southern California. He has also pursued additional course work at UCLA.

Mr. Kyser serves on the Economic Policy Council of the California Institute, the research and policy arm of the California Congressional Delegation. He also serves on the economic advisors panel for the California Chamber of Commerce. He is also a past president of the Los Angeles Chapter of the National Association of Business Economists; a member of Lambda Alpha–a land economics fraternity; and on the board of directors of the South Park Economic Development Corporation, and the Building Owners & Managers Association of Greater Los Angeles.