Showing posts with label cmbs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cmbs. Show all posts

Friday, June 26, 2009

There Goes The CMBS Neighborhood

Just when you thought S&P had received the Rattner-Emanuel tag-teamed phone call on their CMBS insurrection, they come out with this:



In a nutshell - the rating agency announced that it was likely to downgrade $235.2 billion in CMBS securities as it evaluates how these would fare in an "extreme economic downturn." And, as a reminder for those who may be confused why in a week the Fed will change inclusion criteria for CMBS in the TALF, Bloomberg does a good recap:
If the securities backed by hotels, shopping centers and offices lose their top-ranked status, they’ll be excluded from the Federal Reserve’s $1 trillion Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility, a setback for the government’s efforts to jumpstart lending. S&P expects to finish the review of the debt over the next three to six months, the company said.
Granted, Obama would never let that happen as that would put a major roadblock on the "Hope for an S&P" at 10,000 campaign.

Anyway, here are the main observations by S&P in their CMBS update report:

Some key findings of our analysis are as follows:
  • The projected impact is most significant on recent-vintage (2005-2008) CMBS. The percentages of 'AAA' classes—including 30%-enhanced classes ("super-dupers"), 20%-enhanced classes (AMs), and junior 'AAA' classes (AJs)—from these vintages that will likely be downgraded are 30% for 2005, 45% for 2006, 65% for 2007, and 60% for 2008, significantly higher than the levels for pre-2005 vintages, which will likely experience significantly fewer 'AAA' downgrades. [translation: Vinny, I am a size seller of a boatload of 2007 AAAs... hit the bid all the way down]

  • Transactions from the 2007 vintage will likely experience the most significant rating changes. Approximately 50% of super-duper 'AAA' tranches may experience downgrades. The weighted average rating of the downgraded classes would fall to 'A-'.

  • 10% of 2005 vintage super-duper classes would likely be downgraded to a weighted average rating of 'AA-', and 25% of 2006 vintage super-duper classes would likely be downgraded to a weighted average rating of 'AA-'.

  • 10-year super-duper classes have a higher potential for downgrades than those with a shorter weighted average life. As shown in table 1, 20% (2005), 60% (2006), and 95% (2007) of the 10-year classes are at risk of downgrades; these percentages far exceed the percentage of shorter-life classes susceptible to downgrades in their respective vintages.

  • The weighted average rating for the AM classes from the 2005-2008 vintages generally would likely be lowered to the 'A' and 'BBB' categories, and approximately 50% of the AJ classes would retain investment-grade ratings.
And this is what the pain will look like in detail:



Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Blast From Citi's Phenomenal Analytic Past

For a good flashback of what the massively overpaid analytical experts at Citigroup (which we all now own, thank you Mr. President) thought of CMBS in August 2007, please see below.
Outlook for 2007: Will Protection Buyers Finally Emerge?
The main unknown for the synthetic CMBS market in 2007 is the timing and extent of the emergence of protection buyers. Fundamentally, the synthetic CMBS market was expected to experience difficulties finding natural protection buyers. Since the synthetic CMBS instruments isolate the default risk from the other spread components present in the cash bond spreads, the synthetic market was forced to evaluate closely the actual credit risk of the various tranches. The market may have, therefore, come to realize several truths that seasoned CMBS veterans have pointed out for some time: there is little or nothing that could actually cause a principal loss on a super-senior triple-A CMBS, and even the subordinate investment-grade tranches are unlikely to experience severe performance issues in the first few years of the deal. Combined with the robust outlook for the commercial real estate market, investors were not keen to take on the negative carry that buying protection entails without having a clear view as to when spread widening and the materialization of credit events would justify the carry and turn the position profitable.
and also this
“When the music stops, in terms of liquidity, things will be complicated. But as long as the music is playing, you've got to get up and dance. We’re still dancing."
Chuck Prince, FT. July 10, 2007
Citi never sleeps... because it is always coming up with garbage such as this.

hat tip Andres and Steve
Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, June 18, 2009

AAA At +425 Bps Over

A very vivid representation of securitization for the Obama generation. When you see 4 different tranches, at spreads between +50 and +425, and all rated Aaa/AAA/AAA, (not to mention all using 12x taxpayer money as leverage) it would be simply criminal if you do not invest all your client's money in any/all of these completely risk free classes.

Oh, and just in case you are desperate seeking a broker with whom to place your all in TALF order, look no further than Citi. After all...
Citi is uniquely qualified to arrange TALF loans due to its relationships with the Fed, the rating agencies, and TALF investors
– Pricing and proceeds will be driven by underwriting, rating agency process and investors
– Proper underwriting is essential to execution since Fed has discretion to refuse securities [We can't wait to see the Fed refusing some pristine AAA-rated POS]
– Longstanding relationships at rating agencies and intimate knowledge of their models [just in case anyone thought there were no models at all]
– Access to broad array of 100+ TALF investors, critical to driving tightest terms and resulting in best TALF execution track record to date [Alas Citi's rolodex excludes CMBS investors, resulting in exactly 0 interest in yesterday's CMBS TALF auction]


Hat Tip ValueatRisk Sphere: Related Content

Friday, June 12, 2009

CBRE: This Has NOT Been A Liquidity Crisis, But A Crisis Of Bad Credit

Maybe the administration will finally listen when one of their own potential bailout beneficiaries tells them the sad truth about the inevitable CRE implosion. Surprisingly, a very good summary of the CRE debacle straight out of CBRE Partners (with $36 Billion AUM, it is just 3x larger than Cohen And Steers). Speaking of... Where are those CMBS downgrades S&P: getting some phone calls from the administration lately? Oh wait - looks like there is a backstop, and it is called Realpoint - in case you guys dont play ball it seems you will simply be taken out of the picture: after all just two AAA ratings are required, and looks like Realpoint is about to sell their soul to the devil. (Please say it ain't true Realpoint). From the Reuters article:
S&P shocked the the CMBS market last week by advising that its new models, if adopted, would likely prompt ratings cuts on 95 percent of top bonds issued during the peak of the real estate cycle in 2007 and 85 percent of CMBS from 2006. S&P is mulling responses from a formal request for comment.

Some 50 insurers have contacted Horsham, Pennsylvania-based Realpoint over the last few days, saying, "you guys need to get approved" by the NAIC, Dobilas said.

"Realpoint acts as a trump card to any action that S&P takes," he said. "We don't perceive any problem" getting approved by the NAIC, he added.

The NAIC, which represents all of U.S. state and territory insurance regulators, affirmed that Realpoint's application has been received by NAIC's Securities and Valuations Office.

Anyway, from the CBRE piece:
  • This has NOT been a liquidity crisis, but a crisis of bad credit
  • The system of human incentives and checks and balances was poorly thought out across the board: securitizers, banks, rating agencies, bond buyers, real estate investors
  • There was too much liquidity in the system, which led to rising prices, which led to relaxed underwriting standards
Also, Craig Schmidt should look at slide 6: "Valuing ’07 CMBS in an 8% Cap Environment: A Nightmare"

Must Read:


hat tip Rob Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, May 21, 2009

"Chasing Returns Regardless Of Valuation" And The Kneecapping Of CMBS Lockboxes

Some very fitting words from Mike Cembalest of JPM, putting the Green Shoots theory, and the irrational exuberance of the past 2 months, in perspective (highlights added).
People are now just beginning to grasp that monetary and fiscal expansion that is 10x what was done during the 1970s should give them pause to reflect about unintended consequences. The way investment advisory firms have been latching onto "Green Shoots" is astounding. Its not that Green Shoots evidence is non-existent. It's how they are ascribing almost a 0% chance to a negative reversal in activity or sentiment (e.g., April retail sales or Chinese exports), and have ruled out entirely that the bounce may just be a replenishment of a depleted supply chain, and not much more. Maybe they are simply tired of a bear market after 2 years, and just want it to go away. I am beginning to see counterfactual evidence (e.g., rising credit card losses, weakness in Chinese retail demand once you strip out government owned enterprises) selectively ignored by Green Shoots advocates (just like the old Pravda newspaper). And I read this today from an independent research shop: "Investors might have to chase returns over the next several months to stay ahead of their benchmark – a potentially bullish scenario for stocks, regardless of what the valuation picture looks like". Regardless of the valuation picture; gee, that was a great strategy for the LBO industry at 11x EBITDA.
More importantly, Mike provides some much needed color on the latest developments in the GGP bankruptcy.
As for the legal industry, they're on the soapbox as well. The following commentary was sent out by Cadwalader on GGP:
"Impact of the Final Orders. The final cash management and cash collateral arrangements in effect turn the Project-Level Subsidiaries into debtor-in-possession lenders secured by administrative claims and first liens on the Main Operating Account. In comparison with the CMBS lenders’ prepetition collateral, the post-petition position of the CMBS lenders ironically represents an improvement in situations where the excess prepetition cash flow was not being trapped.

The final cash collateral order characterizes the upstreaming of cash as loans rather than a capital distributions and gives the CMBS lenders a replacement lien on the administrative claims arising from the intercompany loans."
My personal interpretation: for clients who had no lockbox protections in the first place, they are now better off. Yes, a newspaper over your head is better in the rain than nothing. But the legal industry just spent the last 20 years creating an intricate web of procedures and waterfall arrangements that were supposed to protect secured lenders. Many of the GGP secured lenders WERE supposed to have cash flows trapped at the SPE in case of bankruptcy, either by the parent or at the sub. And here, at the first stress test of thousands of billable hours or work, a judge throws the lockbox protections out, declaring that advances to GGP being loans and not capital distributions is "adequate protection". The final orders could equally be interpreted as a repudiation of part of the underpinning of the entire structured finance business, but I would not expect to read that from any of the white shoe firms.
In other words, the entire CMBS legal framework is now undone and each bankruptcy will have to be resolved on a case by case basis, with case law interpretation provided by assorted Judges, some of who may not agree with Ropper's generosity. Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Fed Bends Over Backward For CMSA, Will Feed Inflation Capacitor With More Toxic Garbage

As Zero Hedge expected a few short weeks ago, the Fed realized that its TALF revision 364.5 for CMBS was worthless, so today, after many deep thoughts on how to force feed U.S. taxpayers even more toxic garbage, the wise and grizzled Ben Bernanke issued TALF directive 364.6 and decided to extend the acceptance threshold to all past legacy CMBS loans as eligible for TALF. While the original seniority has to be most senior, the following cryptic language was added with regard to current ratings:
Current Ratings: As of the TALF loan closing date, the CMBS must have a credit rating in the highest long-term investment-grade rating category from at least two TALF CMBS-eligible rating agencies and must not have a credit rating below the highest investment-grade rating category from any TALF CMBS-eligible rating agency. Eligible collateral will not include a CMBS that obtains such credit ratings based on the benefit of a third-party guarantee or a CMBS that a TALF CMBS-eligible rating agency has placed on review or watch for downgrade. See the “Frequently Asked Questions for Legacy CMBS” for further information regarding TALF CMBS-eligible rating agencies.
Following up on the FAQ, here is some of the salient additional garbage that will force future generations of Americans to pay off their credit cards to Bank Of China. What the Fed is really saying is provided below each respective FAQ section.
Which nationally recognized statistical rating organizations (NRSROs) are TALF CMBS-eligible rating agencies?
TALF CMBS-eligible rating agencies are DBRS, Inc., Fitch Ratings, Moody’s Investors Service, Realpoint LLC and Standard & Poor’s.
We do not believe in relying on someone who has something even remotely resembling half a brain - agencies such as Egan-Jones who have a verifiable and much better track record than the Big 3 will be forever forbidden from providing their correct insight on stuff and things.
Do CMBS (e.g., Class A-2) that receive principal later than the other most senior CMBS classes (e.g., Class A-1) but are otherwise pari passu with such other senior CMBS, qualify for TALF financing?
Yes, the exclusion of “junior” CMBS in the Terms and Conditions is a reference to subordination for credit support, not to a later position in the time tranche sequence.
Yes, we will gladly accept all crap. In fact, in 2 weeks, when we realize that we could be even more generous with other people's money, we will accept diarrhea, vomit and biohazard as well.

On what basis will the New York Fed decide whether or not to accept a CMBS under the legacy TALF program?
The New York Fed may reject a CMBS based on factors including, but not limited to, the following:

  • The CMBS does not meet the explicit requirements stated in the Terms and Conditions.

  • Unacceptable performance of the mortgage loan pool. CMBS that represent interests in pools with high cumulative losses, a high percentage of delinquent loans, loans in special servicing or loans on servicer watch lists or a high percentage of subordinate-priority loans may be rejected. The New York Fed may consider in its decisions forecasts of pool level losses under various stress scenarios.

  • Unacceptable concentrations. CMBS that represent interests in pools that, alone or considered together with loan pools backing other TALF-financed CMBS, possess one or more concentrations (such as borrower sponsorship, property type and geographic region) considered unacceptable to the New York Fed may be rejected.

The New York Fed will utilize the services of one or more agents in connection with the review of legacy CMBS and the loan pools that back them.

Don't ask, don't tell works well for the military. Going forward we will consult exclusively with PIMCO and BlackRock in determining which asset manager makes billions as the expense of taxpayers... We will start with PIMCO and BlackRock.

Are zero coupon ABSs eligible as collateral for the TALF?
No. Zero coupon ABS are not eligible as TALF collateral.

We need to make sure the "Private Investors" collect at least the 2-3 cash coupon payments that make them whole on their investments, otherwise they will balk if they stand to lose anything.

What happens if an ABS that was eligible for TALF financing is downgraded by an NRSRO?
Nothing happens to existing TALF loans secured by that ABS. However, the ABS may not be used as collateral for any new TALF loans until it regains its status as eligible collateral.

Why would anything have to happen if the piece of crap start being a very smelly piece of crap? After all it is other peoples' money at risk, not PIMROCK's... Since when do we actually care about the taxpayer.

And just so there is no confusion, here is CMSA's immediate response to the most recent TALF lunacy:

Commercial Mortgage Securities Association has regularly and vocally advocated for the inclusion of both legacy and new CMBS eligibility in TALF and the association continues to press forward for the revival of the credit markets and the larger commercial real estate market. CMSA looks forward to its ongoing conversations with the Federal Reserve and with policymakers to ensure that the TALF program and other relief efforts maintain a view toward providing liquidity and facilitating lending in the most efficient and effective manner.

Please, everyone, it is your moral duty to take your wallet out right now and hand over your money to the CMSA... All of it... After all, on a NPV basis, that's exactly what we are all doing.

hat tip Alex

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, May 10, 2009

RealPoint Downgrades Hundreds of CMBS Classes, CRE Deterioration Accelerates

Commercial real estate powerhouse RealPoint has downgraded several hundred deals and CMBS classes in its April evaluation of the sector.



















Realpoint CMBS zerohedge



RealPoint also provides a comprehensive April CMBS delinquency report. A must read for both our readers and Merrill Lynch REIT analysts. Main charts extracted below. Most notable is the explosion in 90+ day delinquencies for March relative to April. In fact the deterioration is accelerating across all metrics: no second derivative green shoots anywhere in sight in CRE land.


Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, May 7, 2009

Special Servicing Loans In CMBS Rise By $3.8 Billion, Hit $24 Billion, 3.1% Of Total

The pillaging in Commercial Real Estate has hit a new high. Real Point is reporting that CMBS loans are accelerating their special servicing deterioration yet again. The total amount of CMBS in special servicing has hit $24 billion, after a staggering $3.8 billion increase in April.
April marked the third straight month in which more than $2 billion of loans were transferred to special servicers, in a sign of continued market weakness. Loans get shifted when they become delinquent or are at great risk of becoming delinquent. With lending markets remaining muted, an increasing number of loans are being shifted because they're unable to refinance before they mature.

The number of loans in special servicing has also breached a milestone, hitting 2,062 loans last month, up 237 loans from the previous month.
Not surprisingly, the bulk of weakness continues to be in the 2005-2007 vintage (the very vintage that, to CMSA's chagrin, was excluded from the most recent amendment of TALF - but fear not Bernanke has got a few more aces up his sleeve).

Most frighteningly, the special servicer total excludes the impact from bankrupt GGP, which as Zero Hedge previously noted, put 164 properties in bankruptcy, and according to BofA, $14.8 billion of CMBS loans are backed by GGP properties. Assuming at least half of these loans become "special serviced" the CRE landscape is about to get a much more bloody shade of burgundy.
The roll of loans added to special servicing in April only includes one substantial General Growth loan, a $165 million mortgage on the 939,085-square-foot Jordan Creek mall in West Des Moines, Iowa. The loan, securitized through JPMorgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Trust, 2005-LDP5, matured in March. According to servicer data compiled by Realpoint, the property generated $19.6 million of net cash flow last year. That's 1.8 times the cash flow needed to fully service its amortizing debt.
Also notable in the Real Point data is the increasing weakness in hotel-based special servicing:
Among [the hotel special servicers] is a $100 million mortgage, securitized through Credit Suisse Commercial Mortgage Trust, 2006-C4, on the Dream Hotel, a 220-unit boutique property on West 55th Street in Manhattan. The hotel, like the hospitality industry in general, has suffered a sharp decline in business. Net cash flow, for instance, fell to $7.8 million last year from $10.7 million in 2006. Evidently, cash flow has fallen further as the loan, which doesn't mature until 2016, was transferred because of imminent default.

Also added was the $65.6 million mortgage on the Ritz-Carlton New Orleans, which matured April 4. The loan cannot be further extended and is senior to $57 million of subordinate and mezzanine debt. It was securitized through Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust, 2004-WHALE4.
Nonetheless, one should ignore all the facts and listen to Obama and Bernanke who said this morning that the CRE problem is contained.

hat tip Jon Sphere: Related Content

Friday, May 1, 2009

TALF v364.5, Now With Enhanced CMBS Dumping Provisions

Below we present the summarized term sheet of the most recent reincarnation of the TALF, compliments of the Federal Reserve.
Securitized Bonds: Created on or after 1/1/09

Underlying Loans: Created on or after 7/1/08

Collateral Type: AAA cusiped & cleared through DTC – required investment grade rating from minimum of 2 rating agencies

Haircut: 15% (85% leverage) for 5 year bonds to 20% (80% leverage) for 10 year bonds

Leverage Terms: Borrower may elect to index against either 3 or 5 year swaps

Spread: 100 bps

Bond Life: No more than 10 years

Prepayment: Par at any time

Early Collateral Prepayment: Flow’s through to pay down

Fed Rights: Throw out loans from prospective trusts (similar to b-piece) – NY Fed has right to engage 3rd party collateral monitors - influence structuring of hypothetical trusts (location-collateral type-etc.)
Amusingly, the Commerical Mortgage Securities Association (CMSA), better know as Chris Hoeffel (quite familiar to Zero Hedge readers) who has yet again reprised his role as the least conflicted person in the world through his positions as both Managing Director of foreign capital backed, CRE asset manager InvestCorp AND president of CMSA, had a canned, ready to print response to the Fed's actions (obviously somewhat priced into the market) which came out nanoseconds after the Fed's announcement and which we present below:
CMSA Applauds Federal Reserve on TALF Announcement

Lending Facility Extended to CMBS with Five-year Term

NEW YORK—May 1, 2009—Commercial Mortgage Securities Association applauds today’s announcement by the Federal Reserve Board to extend the Term Asset-Backed Securities Lending Facility to commercial mortgage-backed securities with an increased five-year term.

TALF is a central part of the U.S. government’s plan to encourage lending by restarting the market for various types of asset-backed securities. TALF recently became operational for consumer ABS with a three-year term for these assets.

The Federal Reserve in its statement today said that, starting in June, TALF loans with five-year maturities will be available for the June funding to finance purchases of CMBS, ABS backed by student loans, and ABS backed by loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration.

“The inclusion of CMBS as eligible collateral for TALF loans will help prevent defaults on economically viable commercial properties, increase the capacity of current holders of maturing mortgages to make additional loans, and facilitate the sale of distressed properties,” the Federal Reserve said.

The Federal Reserve also indicated that up to $100 billion of TALF loans could have five-year maturities and that the FRB will continue to evaluate that limit.

“Extending TALF to CMBS with five-year terms is critical to providing liquidity and facilitating lending in the commercial mortgage market,” said Christopher Hoeffel, President, Commercial Mortgage Securities Association. “CMSA has strongly advocated for a term of five years to kickstart investor demand,” he said.

“A five-year term is more consistent with the longer-term nature of commercial lending and will provide more flexibility to borrowers as they navigate the current real estate cycle,” he said. “CMSA and its members applaud the government and policymakers for extending TALF to CMBS and extending the term to five years,” Mr. Hoeffel said.

Since late 2008, CMSA has been in regular discussions with policymakers and has outlined the benefits for extending TALF’s financing term to five years. Those discussions followed CMSA’s formal recommendation to the government that the Federal Reserve extend the loan term and that it make legacy commercial assets eligible for TALF.

While today’s announcement by the Federal Reserve extends TALF to newly issued CMBS with a five-year term, CMSA anticipates that policymakers will extend TALF to legacy assets in the weeks ahead, as previously stated.
Maybe Chris, the CMSA, and all those investors who have been buying CMBS hand over fist will soon reevaluate their optimism one they realize that the July 1, 2008 cut off date for eligible loans means that essentially the entire pool of distressed assets is completely ineligible for participation in even this brand new revision. In all honesty, ZH was hoping that the Fed would open the new TALF to all securitizations created concurrently with the advent of the wheel or discovery of fire, and a rating of Default or above would have been perfectly agreeable to Bernanke. The fact that the Fed still has not grasped the true magnitude of the problem is indicative that over the next 2 weeks we should all expect version 364.6 of the TALF once Chris scratches his head and realizes he still can't offload his garbage heap of bankrupt mall loans to taxpayers. For now, unwitting taxpayers are still safe from owning a bankrupt 30 retail outlet mall in the middle of the Yucon, purchased initially at 500% LTV and a DSCR of -10x, a -$1 billion reserve, and with pro forma stats upon conversion to high priced multi apartment units for eskimos, replete with with Arctic explorers-cum-doormen, husky shuttles and frozen igloo statues. Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, April 25, 2009

The One Trillion Commercial Real Estate Time Bomb

Imminently, Zero Hedge will present some of its recently percolating theories about some oddly convenient coincidences we have witnessed in the commercial real estate market. However, for now I focus on some additional facts about why the unprecedented economic deterioration and the resulting epic drop in commercial real estate values could result in over $1 trillion in upcoming headaches for financial institutions, investors and the administration.

When a month ago I presented some of the projected dynamics of CMBS, a weakness of that analysis was that it did not address the issue in the context of the CRE market's entirety. The fact is that Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities (or securitized conduit financings that gained a lot of favor during the credit bubble peak years for beginners) is at most 25% of the total commercial real estate market, with the bulk of exposure concentrated at banks (50%) and insurance companies' (10%) balance sheets.

But regardless what the source of the original credit exposure, whether securitized or whole loans, the core of the problem is the decline in prices of the underlying properties, in many cases as much as 35-50%. When one considers that with time, the underlying financings became more and more debt prevalent (a good example of the CRE bubble market is the late-2006 purchase of 666 Fifth Avenue by Jared Kushner from Tishman Speyer for $1.8 billion with no equity down), the largest threat to both the CRE market and the bank's balance sheet is the refinancing contingency, as absent yet another major rent/real estate bubble, the value holes at the time of maturity would have to be plugged with equity from existing borrowers (which, despite what the "stress test" may allege, simply does not exist absent a wholesale banking system nationalization).

The refinancing problem thus boils down to two concurrent themes: The first is the altogether entire current shut down in debt capital markets for assets, which affects all refinancings equally (for the most immediate impact of this issue see General Growth Properties which was not able to obtain any refinancing clemency on the bulk of its properties). The government is addressing this first theme through all the recently adopted programs that are meant to facilitate general credit flow. Readers of Zero Hedge are aware of our skepticism that these are working in any fashion, especially with regards to lower quality assets. The second theme is the much more serious and less easily resolved issue of the negative equity deficiency on a per loan basis, which is not a systemic credit freeze problem, but an underwater investment problem. This analysis focuses on the second theme. The reason for this focus is that there seems to be an unfortunate misunderstanding in the market that lenders will simply agree to roll the maturities on non-qualifying loans, and that the expected percentage of loans that need special lender treatment is low, roughly 5-10% of total loans. In reality the percentage of underwater loans at maturity is likely to be in the 60-70% range, meaning that refi extensions could not possibly occur without the incurrence of major losses for lenders.

In order to demonstrate the seriousness of the problem it is important to first present the magnitude of the refinancing problem. To quote from an earlier post as well as data from Deutsche Bank, and focusing on the CMBS product first, there are approximately $685 billion of commercial mortgages in CMBS maturing between now and 2018, split between $640 billion in fixed-rate and $45 billion in floating rate. The figure below demonstrates the maturity profile by origination vintage. As noted previously, vintages originated in the pre-2005 bubble years are likely much less "threatening" as even with the recent drop in commercial real estate values, the loans are still mostly "in the money".



As Zero Hedge has pointed out previously, the biggest CMBS refi threat occurs in the 2010-2013 period when 2005-2007 vintaged loans mature. These loans, originated at the top of the market, of which the Kushner loan for 666 Fifth Avenue is a brilliantly vivid example, have experienced 40-50% declines in underlying collateral values, and the majority will have material negative equity at maturity (if they don't in fact default long before their scheduled maturity). Of these loans, only a small percentage will qualify for refinancing at maturity.

At this point cynical readers may say: well even if all CMBS loans are unable to be rolled, it is at most $700 billion in incremental defaults. Is that a big deal - after all that's what the government prints in crisp, brand new, sequentially-numbered dollar bills every 24 hours (give or take). Well, the truth is that CMBS is only the proverbial tip of the $3.4 trillion CRE iceberg. To get a true sense for the problem's magnitude one has to consider the banks and life insurance companies, which have approximately $1.7 trillion and roughly $300 billion in commercial loan exposure.

Banks have $1.1 trillion in core commercial real estate loans on their books according to the FDIC, another $590 billion in construction loans, $205 billion in multifamily loans and $63 billion in farm loans. The precise maturity schedule for these loans is not definitive, however bank loans tend to have short-term durations, and the assumption is that all will mature by 2013, exhibiting moderate increases in maturities due to activity pick up over the last 2-3 years.

Adding the life insurance company estimate of $222 billion in direct loans maturing through 2018 per the Mortgage Bankers Association, increases annual maturities by another $15-25 billion.

In summation as presented below, the total maturities by 2018 are just under $2 trillion, with $1.4 trillion maturing through 2013.





Combining all sources of CRE asset holdings demonstrates the true magnitude of this problem. The period of 2010-2013 will be one of unprecedented stress in the CRE market, and a time in which banks will continue taking massive losses not only on residential mortgage portfolios but also on construction loan portfolios, the last one being a possible powder keg: Foresight Analytics estimates C&L loan losses at a staggering 11.4% in Q4 2008.

And the bad news continues: there is a risk that commercial mortgages will under-perform CMBS loans, and delinquency rates for bank commercial mortgages will be magnitudes higher than those for comparable CMBS. The figure below demonstrates the undperformance of bank commercial mortgages: as of Q4 2008 the delinquency rate for CMBS was less than half of bank CRE exposure.



Reflecting on this data should demonstrate why the administration is in such full-throttle mode to not only reincarnate credit markets at all costs (equity market aberrations be damned) but to boost credit to prior peak levels, explaining the facility in providing taxpayer leverage to private investors who would buy these loans ahead of, and at maturity. Absent an onslaught of new capital, there is simply nowhere that new financing for commercial real estate would come from and the entire banking system would crash once the potential $1 trillion + hole over the next 4 years become apparent, as there is less and less capital left to fill the ever increasing CRE cash black hole.

An attempt to estimate the number of loans that would not conform for refinancing, based on two key criteria of cash flow and collateral presents the conclusion that roughly 68% of the loans maturing in 2009 and thereafter would not qualify. The amount of refinanceable loans is important because borrowers will either be unwilling or unable to put additional equity into these properties. Instead borrowers will be faced with either negotiating maturity extensions from lenders or simply walking away from properties. And despite the banks' and the administration's promise to the contrary, loan extensions will not provide the way out (see below), meaning losses taken against CRE is only a matter of time.

For the purposes of the refi qualification analysis, the criteria that have to be met by an existing loan include a maximum LTV of 70 (higher than current maxima around 60-65), and a 1.3x Debt To Service Coverage Ratio (equivalent to a 10 year fixed rate loan with a 25 year amortization schedule and an 8% mortgage rate).



The simple observation is that nearly 68% of loans in the next 4 years will not qualify for a refinancing at maturity putting the whole plan to merely delay the day of reckoning indefinitely at risk of massive failure.

The underlying premise of maturity extension as a solution to a loan's qualifying problem is that during the extension period the lender is either able to increase the amortization on the loan by some means (i.e. increasing the interest rate and using the extra cash flow to accelerate the loan's pay down), or achieve value growth sufficient to allow the loan to qualify by the end of the extension period. As the equity deficiency for many loans is far too large to be tackled by accelerating the amortization over any period of time, and as for "value growth", with hundreds of billions in distressed mortgage building up over time via these same extensions (even if successful), the likelihood of property price appreciation is laughable: the flood of excess supply of distressed mortgage to hit the market is about to be unleashed.

Then there is the logical aspect: maturity extensions merely delay the resolution and push the problem down the road. And as for CMBS, the issue of extension may be dead on arrival - not only are CMBS special servicers limited to granting at most two to four year maturity extensions, but AAA investors are already mobilizing to stanch any more widespread extensions as a means of dealing with the refi problem.

And, at last, there is the view that the refi problem could fix itself, based on the argument that CRE cash flows are likely to rebound quickly as the economy begins to improve due to pent-up demand. This argument is nonsense: even if cash flows recover to their peak 2007 levels, values would still be down 30% as a result of the shift in financing terms. Ironically, it would require cash flows rebounding far beyond their peak levels to push values up sufficiently to overcome the steep declines. This is equivalent to predicting (as the administration is implicity doing) that the market will be saved by the next rent and real estate bubble, which the U.S. government is currently attempting to generate.

In this light, anything that the government can try to do, absent continuing to print massive amounts of dollars, is irrelevant. The equity market can easily go up indefinitely, short squeezes can be generated at will, TALF can see 10 new, increasingly more meaningless permutations, the administration can prepare worthless stress tests that are neither stressing nor testing, and talk up a storm on cable TV to convince regular investors that all is well, yet none of these will do one thing to provide the banks and CMBS borrowers with the massive capital they will need to plug the value gap either during a CRE loan's term or at maturity. The multi-trillion problem is simply too massive to be manipulated and is also too large to be simply swept under the carpet for the next administration and generation. It is inevitable that the monster hiding in the closet will have to be addressed head on, and the sooner it happens, the less the eventual destruction of individual and societal net worth (however, it still would be massive). Delaying the inevitable at this point is not a viable option: Zero Hedge hopes the administration realizes this, ironically, before it is too late.

Gratitude to Deutsche Bank for data. Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Will TALF 3.0 Be Enough For A CRE Lazarus Act

Several reports came out today on CNBC and other MSM conduits about a brand new government effort which may consider expanding the already many-times revised TALF program to capture all sorts of commercial real estate securities, including the uber toxic ones, and extend the duration on TALF loans from the established 3 years to 5 or more years. First off it bears pointing out that as much as CNBC would like to make this piece of "news" into something phenomenal for the CRE market, it is not news, and was in fact reported by Bloomberg over a week ago. Just how many times can the market regurgitate the same piece of news and how many times can the same early am headline appear that xyz market is higher in early trading on recovery hopes. Doesn't the same story get old after a while? Apparently not - after all we are dealing with a market that has the attention span of tweaked out NYMEX trader on speed.

Aside from the fact the a CMBS lengthening may or may not occur, the (f)utility of such an action would be obvious upon further examination. The obvious reason why the CRE lobby is pushing for a 5 year period instead of 3, is because, as Zero Hedge pointed out, the bulk of CMBS and whole loan defaults are projected to really skyrocket in 2012/2013, just out of the current 3 year maturity horizon. Of course, purchasers of these TALF conduits are unlikely to be blind, retarded and illiterate at the same time and should be able to do the math for themselves (and if they can't, they can listen to Atlanta Fed president Lockhart, and if even that is too difficult they are more than welcome to peruse Zero Hedge analyses discussing the default cliff in CMBS). Lastly, the TALF has been a disappointment from the very beginning, as ZH speculated, and even if the 3-to-5 year extension is granted it is guaranteed to generate exactly 0 additional interest from potential investors (and probably negative interest, as with 3 years, at least the TALF loan matures inside the CRE default tsunami).

Now the real question is who is really behind the push for this amendment. As Bloomberg points out, the lobbying effort is spearheaded by one Christopher Hoeffel, who is president of the Commercial Mortgage Securities Association trade group. A cursory check of Chris Hoeffel, indicates that he is also a managing director at none other than Investcorp, a "leading provider and manager of alternative investment products, serving high-net-worth private and institutional clients." Investcorp, on its website indicates, that it currently has $13 billion in assets under management.

Chris is a managing director in Investcorp's real estate team, who joined "in 2008 and has senior level responsibility for sourcing, structuring, financing, underwriting, and closing new debt investments for the group. Chris joined Investcorp from JP Morgan / Bear Stearns & Co. where he was a senior managing director and global co-head of Commercial Mortgages."

It would likely be safe to assume that among the assets that Chris manages for his clients at Investcorp, the majority include commercial mortgages. Maybe Chris, Tim Geithner, or the Fed can provide a little clarity on just how much Investcorp would benefit if Chris (the non-profit guy) manages to convince the administration to provide these largely beneficial terms to CRE securities holders, and how much Chris (the for-profit guy) would benefit as a result.

But the plot thickens. Reading further down Investcorp's website one comes to the following blurb:
The success of the business is underpinned by Investcorp's unique placement capability in the six Gulf Co-operation Council countries of the Arabian Gulf, where we have focused on providing a high level of personal services to our investor base of high-net-worth individuals and institutions. Investcorp captures the growth dynamics of Gulf capital and of the alternative investment industry, combined with international best practice management disciplines.
As if there have not been enough rumblings that the bailout of the GSEs and of bank bondholders has been exclusively to the benefit of foreign investors, among them predominantly China and... Gulf sovereign wealth funds...

So let's recap: Gulf investors, commercial mortgage investments, JP Morgan, a trade group front... The list should probably necessitate some answers from someone before Geithner inevitably bends over backward and grants the TALF expansion, which, of course, like the current version of TALF 2.0 will be largely useless, but regardless U.S. taxpayers have a right to know who is conflicted in what and why.

As Chris was kind enough to personally submit a question to the FDIC regarding the yet another miserably planned wealth transfer initiative known as the PPIP (below), we can see that he himself is an inquisitive soul, and would not begrudge Zero Hedge readers the curiosity of explaining the motivations of his actions and his conflicts of interest (if any, of course).


hoeffel zerohedge
Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, April 11, 2009

The Imminent Disinformation Schism

With articles like this coming out of Time magazine, it is inevitable that in the immediate future, the United States will be split into two partisan camps. However, this will not be the traditional schism of republicans vs. democrats, contrary to Mr. Barney Frank's attempt to start ideological partisan warfare. The real split will be of naive, easily-manipulated, small-time mom and pop investors, who only care about looking at their daily yahoo finance screens and 401(k) statements, seeing more black than red, and only focusing on what happened in the immediate past, and the forward looking taxpayers, who see the upcoming budget deficit fiasco, the social security ponzi scheme, the Medicare/Medicaid debacle, the ridiculous underfunding in public and corporate pension funds, the rising city and state taxes, the shuttering factories, the rising unemployment, the plummeting American production base, the "seasonally" upward-adjusted economic data coupled with consistently downward revised prior economic releases, the increasing savings rate and the multi trillion discrepancy in consumer purchasing power. The taxpayers are becoming angrier and angrier at the net present value destruction of future opportunities of being a U.S. citizen, while investors cheer every piece of information (whether or not supported by facts) that provides a push to their current net worth, ignorant of what this may mean for the future. There will come a point where this schism reaches a boiling point, in the meantime, the paradox is that so many of the taxpayers are also investors, who are caught in a tug of war with themselves on what the proper response to the crisis should be: happy as a result of bear market rallies, or sad when they put the facts into perspective.

Speaking of facts, Time contributing author Douglas McIntyre may have considered presenting some to justify his thesis that the "the great banking crisis of 2008 is over." Pointless regurgitation of secondary viewpoints serves no purpose in the mainstream media, especially not in formerly reputable mainstream media such as Time (Zero Hedge's subscription is running out with no plans for renewal). It is even worse when the MSM represents as "facts" the disinformation by banks, who claim that the downward inflection point has been reached and ignore the full context: a much weaker mark-to-market methodology, the FDIC and SEC aiding and abetting wholesale "pennies on the dollar" blue light specials of bankrupt banks such as Wachovia and Washington Mutual, taxpayer funnels such as AIG being used to pad the top and bottom line, a financial system balance sheet which has over 70% of its assets guaranteed by the Fed and the Treasury, and lastly, a spike in commercial real estate deterioration to unprecedented levels. Mr. McIntyre's article is childish and unsubstantiated to the point of generating derisive laughter from his readers. Then again, a casual glance of his self-description in Seeking Alpha is enough to put his opinion into perspective: Mr. McIntyre "knows technology cold, has a sharp understanding of what's priced-in to [sic] stocks, and writes extremely well (as you'd expect)." How a self-ascribed technology specialist (who writes "so well" that he makes grammatical mistakes in the very same sentence making that claim) ends up stating "the financial crisis is over" is beyond Zero Hedge's meager attempts at comprehension. What Zero Hedge is not beyond, however, is presenting the facts and not perpetuating the disinformation fallacy.

The cold facts - "When you stare at the abyss, the abyss stares back at you."

Why is everyone so afraid to stare at the proverbial abyss? Readers of Zero Hedge know all too well, about my fascination with the economic fundamentals, and my desire to expose the real abyss in all its deep glory.

I dare anyone: McIntyre, Kudlow, Geithner, Obama, to look at the chart below and tell me we are in a V shaped recession. Yes, ISM may be bottoming (at record low levels which is not indicative of much), and unemployment may soon be bottoming (it has not, yet somehow the market believes it is just a matter of time), however one look at the chart of accelerating commercial real estate delinquencies and what they mean for the multi-trillion commercial real estate market should stop any V-recovery fans dead in their tracks.



I will present some more factual glances of the abyss, compliments to the good folk at Realpoint.

Through the February 2009 reporting period, the delinquent unpaid balance for CMBS increased by a substantial $1.2 billion, up to a trailing 12-month high of $11.99 billion. Overall, the delinquent unpaid balance grew for the sixth straight month, up over 244% from one-year ago (only $3.48 billion in February 2008) and now over five times the low point of $2.21 billion in March of 2007. While a slight decline was noted in the 30-day and 60-day delinquent loan categories, the distressed 90+-day, Foreclosure and REO categories grew for the 15th straight month – up over 216% in the past year. This increase took place despite another $53.9 million in loan workouts and liquidations reported for February 2009 across 20 loans. Ten of these loans at $19.1 million, however, experienced a loss severity near or below 1%, most likely related to workout fees, while the remaining 10 loans at $34.8 million experienced an average loss severity near 46%. As additional pressures are placed on special servicers to maximize returns in today’s market, loss severities are expected to increase while liquidation activity is expected to slow further as fewer transactions occur. This would be the result of reduced or distressed asset pricing, lower availability of funds, and increased extensions of balloon defaults through the end of 2009 and into 2010.

The total unpaid balance for all CMBS pools under review by Realpoint was $837.78 billion in February 2009, down from $842.8 billion in January. Both the delinquent unpaid balance and delinquency percentage over the trailing twelve months are shown in the chart above and the one below, clearly trending upward for the timeline.



The resultant delinquency ratio for February 2009 increased to 1.431% from 1.281% one month prior. Such ratios above 1% reflect levels not seen in since April 2005. What is more concerning, however, is that the delinquency percentage through February 2009 is more than three times the 0.399% reported one-year prior in February 2008. The increase in both delinquent unpaid balance and delinquency ratio over this time horizon reflects a slow but steady increase from historic lows through mid-2007.

Assumptions based on three-month historical data:
  • Over the past three months, delinquency growth by unpaid balance has averaged roughly $1.65 billion per month, while the outstanding universe of CMBS under review has decreased on average by $3.5 billion per month from pay-down and liquidation activity.
  • If such delinquency average were again increased by an additional 25% growth rate, and then carried through the end of 2009, the delinquent unpaid balance would top $32 billion and reflect a delinquency percentage slightly above 3.8% by December 2009.
  • In addition to this growth scenario, if one adds the potential default of the $3 billion Peter Cooper Village / Stuyvesant Town loan and the $4.1 billion Extended Stay Hotel loan, the delinquent unpaid balance would top $39 billion and reflect a delinquency percentage near 5% by December 2009.
"V-shaped recovery" indeed. But let's continue:

Special servicing exposure has also been on the rise, having increased for the 10th straight month to $17.11 billion in February 2009 from $14.38 billion in January 2009 and only $12.78 billion in December 2008. The corresponding percentage of loans in special servicing has also increased to 2.04% of all CMBS by unpaid balance, up from only 0.50% in both February 2007 and 0.67% February 2008. The overall trend of special servicing exposure since January 2005, by both unpaid balance and percentage, is presented in Charts 3 and 4 below.



Realpoint's default risk concerns for the more recent 2005 to 2007 vintage transactions relative to underlying collateral performance and payment ability are more evident on a monthly basis. Both the volume and unpaid balance of CMBS loans transferred to special servicing on a monthly basis continues to raise questions about underlying credit stability in today’s market climate for these deals, as evidenced by attached table. An additional 117 loans at $2.28 billion issued from 2005 through 2007 were transferred to special servicing in February 2009, mostly (but not only) for delinquency. Such figure reflected 71% of the current month’s transfers and 13% of total special servicing exposure in February 2009. Furthermore, over 51% of delinquent unpaid balance through February 2009 came from transactions issued in 2006 and 2007, with over 27% of all delinquency found in 2007 transactions. Extending a review to include the 2005 vintage, an additional 16% of total delinquency is found meaning over 67% of CMBS delinquency comes from the 2005 to 2007 vintage transactions. The chart below shows the increased delinquent unpaid balance relative to these three vintages over the past six months, clearly reflecting the increasing trends highlighted in recent months.



Throughout 2009, it is expected to see high delinquency by unpaid balance for these three vintages due to aggressive lending practices prevalent in such years. Also some loans from the 2008 vintage are expected to show signs of distress and default in cases where pro-forma underwriting assumptions fail to be met at the property level.

Focusing on deals that have seasoned for at least one year, the investigation reveals the following:
  • Deals seasoned at least a year have a total unpaid balance of $822.94 billion, with $11.661 billion delinquent – a 1.42% rate (up from 0.5% six months prior).
  • When agency CMBS deals are removed from the equation, deals seasoned at least a year have a total unpaid balance of $793.3 billion, with $11.656 billion delinquent – a 1.47% rate (up from 0.52% six months prior).
  • Conduit and fusion deals seasoned at least a year have a total unpaid balance of $701.2 billion, with $10.78 billion delinquent – a 1.54% rate (up from 0.54% six months prior).
Other concerns/dynamics within the CMBS deals monitored which may affect the overall delinquency rate in 2009 include:
  • Balloon default risk related to upcoming anticipated repayment dates (ARD's) or term maturity from highly seasoned transactions for both performing and non-performing loans coming due in the next 12 months that may be unable to secure adequate refinancing due to current credit market conditions, lack of financing availability, or further distressed collateral performance.
  • Refinance and balloon default risk concerns from floating rate transactions, as many large loans secured by un-stabilized or transitional properties reach their final maturity extensions, or fail to meet debt service or cash flow covenants to exercise such extensions.
  • Aggressive pro-forma underwriting on loans with debt service / interest reserve balances declining, more rapidly than originally anticipated, on a monthly basis.
  • Further stress on partial-term interest-only loans that begin to amortize during the year that already have in-place DSCRs hovering around breakeven.
  • The unpaid balance related to loans underwritten in the past three years with DSCRs between 1.10 and 1.25 is very high, and any decline in performance in today’s market could cause an inability to make debt service requirements.
  • A decline in distressed asset sales or liquidations as traditional avenues for securing new financing is becoming less available.
  • Additional stress on both the retail and lodging sectors as consumer spending declines and the U.S. economy weakens.
Monthly CMBS Loan Workouts and Liquidations


The rate at which liquidated or problematic CMBS credits are replenished by newly delinquent loans remains a concern, especially regarding further growth to Foreclosure and REO status (evidence of additional loan workouts and liquidations on the horizon for 2009). Through February 2009, newly reported CMBS delinquency continued to outpace monthly liquidations by a very high ratio, raising concerns for further deterioration in the market.

In February 2009, 10 loans for $34.8 million experienced an average loss severity near 46% - a clear reflection of true loss severity in today’s credit climate. Higher levels of loss severity will be the norm in 2009 for those loans that experience a term default where cash flow from operations is not sufficient to support in-place debt obligations.



Since January 2005, over $7.52 billion in CMBS liquidations have been realized, while 44 of the trailing 49 months have reported average loss severities below 40%, including 21 below 30%. While average loss severity increased slightly for the 12 months of 2007 when compared to 2006, monthly loan liquidations by unpaid balance declined significantly in 2007 when compared to 2006 (by 43% year-over-year). Liquidations in 2007 totaled $1.094 billion at an average severity of only 32.8%. Liquidations in 2006 totaled $1.93 billion at an average severity of only 30.2%, while 2005 had $3.097 billion in liquidations at an average severity of 34.2%.

Comparison by property type:
  • The highest loss severities in 2006 were found in healthcare (55%) and industrial (34.5%) collateral; multifamily collateral remained highest by balance before liquidation ($606.7 million), but reported the lowest severity (24.5%).
  • The highest loss severities in 2007 were found in industrial (50%) and healthcare collateral (44%); multifamily collateral was again highest by balance before liquidation ($356 million), but reported the fourth lowest severity (32.5%).
  • The highest loss severities in 2008 were found in mixed-use / other (36%) and multifamily collateral (31%); multifamily collateral was again the highest by balance before liquidation ($576.97 million).
Future Workouts – Delinquency Categories

The total balance of loans in Foreclosure and REO increased for the 16th straight month to $2.696 billion from $2.39 billion in January 2009, despite ongoing liquidation activity. These figures had declined steadily for some time through mid-2007, reflective of expedited loan work outs, but continue to be replenished with new loans due to aggressive special servicing workout plans. The chart below also shows the rapid growth of loans reflecting 30-day delinquency in the later half of 2008, transitioning rapidly into more distressed levels on a monthly basis, thus supporting the use of 30-day defaults as an early indicator of workouts to come in 2009.



Property Type
  • Multifamily loans remained a poor performer in January 2009, with over a 2.5% delinquency rate (up from only 0.9% in January 2008 – over a 177% increase).
  • Multifamily loans also are the greatest contributor to overall CMBS delinquency, at 0.51% of the CMBS universe and over 35% of total CMBS delinquency (but down slightly for the second straight month).
  • By dollar amount, multifamily loan delinquency is now up by an astounding $3.38 billion since a low point of only $903.3 million in July 2007.
  • As shown in Chart 7 below, multifamily, retail, office and hotel collateral loan delinquency as a percentage of the CMBS universe have clearly trended upward since mid-2008.
  • Only seven healthcare loans at 0.017% of the CMBS universe are delinquent, but such delinquent unpaid balance reflects 5.8% all healthcare collateral in CMBS.
  • As a percentage of total unpaid balance, year-over-year delinquencies for all categories increased by triple digits from February 2008 to February 2009.
  • In 2009 retail delinquency will increase substantially as consumer spending suffers from the overall weakness of the U.S. economy. Store closings and retailer bankruptcies will continue throughout the year.
  • In addition, the hotel sector will likely experience an increase in delinquency as both business and leisure travel slows further.



Geography

  • The top three states ranked by delinquency exposure through January 2009 changed as California surpassed Michigan in third position. This remained the same through February 2009. Together with Texas and Florida, these three states collectively accounted for 30% of CMBS delinquency.
  • Previously in November 2008, New York had passed Michigan and moved into third place in the rankings, following the reported delinquency of the Riverton Apartments loan at $225 million (CD07CD4). New York is now in the fifth position when ranked by delinquent unpaid balance.
  • The 10 largest states by delinquent unpaid balance reflect 62% of CMBS delinquency, while the 10 largest states by overall CMBS exposure reflect 53% of the CMBS universe.
  • The state of Texas remains a major concern at over 11.5% of CMBS delinquency, concentrated within the Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth, MSAs (almost 9% of CMBS delinquency); however, such MSAs reflect a fairly low percentage of total exposure in their respective MSAs (at less than 3.4%).
  • Four MSAs topped 4% of CMBS delinquency in February 2009 (up from three a month prior).
  • The 10 largest MSAs by delinquent unpaid balance reflect 37% of CMBS delinquency, while the 10 largest MSAs by overall CMBS exposure reflect 34% of the CMBS universe.

...And the facts go on and on and on... yet not one of them is mentioned in McIntyre's "analysis".

Commercial real estate is nothing more than a proxy for the intersection of the two historically core driving forces in the U.S. economy: real estate values and business conditions. And as the facts above indicate, the deterioration is only starting to pick up.

But what about all the stimulus programs skeptics will ask? The bail out packages? The constant funneling of taxpayer money into every underperforming segment of economy?

The truth is that the more taxpayer money is dumped to try to fill the abyss, it may become marginally shallower, but only at the expense of it geting wider. At some point soon (if not already), the U.S. economy will be unweenable from the trillions and trillions of taxpayer subsidies all the while it becomes more indebted to both its investors and taxpayers, further exacerbating the abovementioned paradox (presumably not without a motive). As the multi-trillion CRE crash continues to deplete the left side of the financials' balance sheet with an exponentially growing pace (and I have not even touched on the credit card topic), the banks will be left scratching their heads what accounting rules to bend, which insurance companies to implode and get another AIG-like piggybank, how to break REG-FD more and more creatively with select memo leaks, how to manipulate the market, and how to make the Tsy curve becomes even more upward sloping with the compliments of the Fed and the Treasury. In the meantime the disinformation rift between the American taxpayers and investors will keep growing until inevitably, one day, it will escalate to the point where empty promises on prime time TV by the administration's photogenic representatives will not suffice, and real actions that benefit future American generations will be demanded... What happens after I have no idea.

Sphere: Related Content