| Author |
Previous Topic | Next Topic |
|
QUANTAM
230 Posts |
 Posted - 05/25/2008 : 06:50:19 AM
|
"There's no need to blame anyone else"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080525/bs_nm/spain_buffett_dc |
|
homebroker@sbcgl
3527 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2008 : 07:19:41 AM
|
| Good to see this article. |
|
|
Scrooge McDuck
8837 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2008 : 07:24:45 AM
|
| i blame you quantum! you and those crappy loans you wrote. |
|
|
mortgagemessiah
8003 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2008 : 08:36:35 AM
|
| I blame you Scrooge! All those stated Option-ARMs you wrote in Boston. |
|
|
ritabradley01
3228 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2008 : 08:45:50 AM
|
| Buffet's so smart. Sometimes I think he would make a good president. He seems so wise and conservative in his business dealings. |
|
|
Scrooge McDuck
8837 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2008 : 09:04:17 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ritabradley01
Buffet's so smart. Sometimes I think he would make a good president. He seems so wise and conservative in his business dealings.
buffet knows that slow and steady wins the race. i would love to hear more on investing in german family owned businesses. what an odd niche. |
|
|
ritabradley01
3228 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2008 : 09:09:42 AM
|
| I had "slow and steady wins the race" on a sticky note taped to my computer monitor all year. Great advice. My new sticky note reads "I am a creator, not a competitor". I think I stole if from someone on BO. |
|
|
rtrefflich
3414 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2008 : 09:28:30 AM
|
Isn't it funny that the good ones never run.
At least its not the mortgage brokers fault
quote:
Originally posted by ritabradley01
Buffet's so smart. Sometimes I think he would make a good president. He seems so wise and conservative in his business dealings.
|
|
|
EMScommercial
5138 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 1:07:05 PM
|
I must admit... I blame myself.... I am a scum bag mortgage broker.... (isn't that what that poster with the crazy girlfriend said he was called?)...
|
|
|
CoolMtgGuy
3704 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 1:50:03 PM
|
| German family-owned companies tend to be very conservative, patient and profitable (eg: Bertelsmann, Boeringer Ingleheim, etc.). It is fairly easy for an American CEO to crank up profit of these types of companies. |
|
|
benjamin
2278 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 3:35:19 PM
|
| About time. |
|
|
brad.easter
696 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 4:19:27 PM
|
Buffett owns a big chunk of several banks, including Wells Fargo. Funny how he never said anything while they were raking in all that cash on the sub-prime business.
The blame, as usual, lies at the feet of the Congress. Banks were bad because they denied credit to people that didn't deserve credit. Congress "encouraged" the sub-prime and option ARM business. When the feces hit the fan they blamed everyone but themselves. |
|
|
maclin
645 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 6:14:28 PM
|
| In my opinion you have a situation whereby you have something for nothing(NO MONEY DOWN) loans and expect it to last forever. I think it was a little more than just the banks that are at fault here. America has the WANTSIES, average family has 14 credit cards, and alot of people are living in too much house, and driving BIG SUV's and gas is now 4 bucks a gallon. Pretty soon you'll need a mortgage just to fill up your hummer |
|
|
mojojojo_1
846 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 6:45:50 PM
|
he is just pointing out the obvious, if banks and mbs did not lower thier lending standards, none of this would have happened.
everyone else, congress, fed bank, rich dad poor dad, los, appraiser, RE agent, borrowers biting more then they can chew, all help facilatate.
just my opinion though, and sounds like buffet agrees... love that guy |
|
|
Hustler12
1293 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 7:04:29 PM
|
| Honestly, how can you not love the guy? Have you watched "Billionaire next door?" He has just a great outlook on life. You can say he is a hypocrite for owning Wells Fargo, etc or whoever posted about Coke and obesity, but to me that is called something else...capitalism. Give the consumer what they want. Let them decide if its right for them. (man, I am starting to sound like a Ron Paul fan) |
|
|
808
2597 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 9:30:58 PM
|
at least he didn't blame it on the Mortgage Brokers like the Wall St, the Banks, Attorney Generals and Congress did unless he was counting Correspondents as Bankers.
|
|
|
rtrefflich
3414 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 9:37:10 PM
|
Hasn't anyone noticed that the reason we are in this mess is not because of the programs, but because of the loans, if these people were given 30 yr fixed loans, with roughly the same payments they would not have lost their homes. Everything began to crash when the payments reset on the 2 and 3 yr subprime loans, the fixed at 6.5% for 2 yrs with the 6 margin. After they all foreclosed and prices dropped everyone decided to walk away.
We can blame the banks, but there are tons of people who are responsible for what happened, including the borrower who decided that the $100 a month savings was worth the risk in the adjustable mortgage. |
|
|
808
2597 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 9:58:07 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by rtrefflich
Hasn't anyone noticed that the reason we are in this mess is not because of the programs, but because of the loans, if these people were given 30 yr fixed loans, with roughly the same payments they would not have lost their homes. Everything began to crash when the payments reset on the 2 and 3 yr subprime loans, the fixed at 6.5% for 2 yrs with the 6 margin. After they all foreclosed and prices dropped everyone decided to walk away.
We can blame the banks, but there are tons of people who are responsible for what happened, including the borrower who decided that the $100 a month savings was worth the risk in the adjustable mortgage.
easy to say now but the reason those 2/28's, I/O's, 55%DTI and no money down programs were created was because people couldn't qualify w the extra 3/4pt rate hit of the 30yr. I can't tell you how many deals I had to go to a 40yr I/O to get the DTI to 49.99% or I had to have the AE give me a qtr pt off the rate to slide the borrower just under the guidelines. It had nothing to do w a $100/mo but rather a Fixed 30yr was not an option for a lot of borrowers.
|
|
|
rtrefflich
3414 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 10:01:46 PM
|
Sorry, they may not have been able to pay for it, but very few of those 2/28's were full doc loans. Income was stated on all of those and very few of them had the actual income. If they were able to qualify they probably would have gotten different loans. I had AE's change income on some loans so clients would qualify.
I sat down with numerous clients and told them their options, pluses and minuses and all most of them cared about was the lower payment. REALTORS told people not to worry because in six months they would be able to refi to a "better" loan.
Everyone was to blame.
quote:
Originally posted by 808
quote:
Originally posted by rtrefflich
Hasn't anyone noticed that the reason we are in this mess is not because of the programs, but because of the loans, if these people were given 30 yr fixed loans, with roughly the same payments they would not have lost their homes. Everything began to crash when the payments reset on the 2 and 3 yr subprime loans, the fixed at 6.5% for 2 yrs with the 6 margin. After they all foreclosed and prices dropped everyone decided to walk away.
We can blame the banks, but there are tons of people who are responsible for what happened, including the borrower who decided that the $100 a month savings was worth the risk in the adjustable mortgage.
easy to say now but the reason those 2/28's, I/O's, 55%DTI and no money down programs were created was because people couldn't qualify w the extra 3/4pt rate hit of the 30yr. I can't tell you how many deals I had to go to a 40yr I/O to get the DTI to 49.99% or I had to have the AE give me a qtr pt off the rate to slide the borrower just under the guidelines. It had nothing to do w a $100/mo but rather a Fixed 30yr was not an option for a lot of borrowers.
|
|
|
Hustler12
1293 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 10:01:51 PM
|
Keep in mind that when the 2/28 came out they were "credit repair" loans. Because of the unsustainable appreciation, the thought was, take this loan for 24 months and in two years your house will be worth more and your credit will improve with your new mgt rating....
|
|
|
Hustler12
1293 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 10:02:34 PM
|
| Richard - before you reply to my post. I agree. |
|
|
808
2597 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 10:23:49 PM
|
| As I remember, you had to have a min FICO of 600 for 100% stated so you cant blame it all on stated. Basically the banks wanted more and more borrowers because of all the borrowers they were losing due to refinancing so they got desperate and lowered their standards, kind of like the drunken guy who 'jumps the grenade'- I love that saying, at the bar when they announce last call and turn the lights on. Good things aren't gonna happen in either scenario |
|
|
Douggie
1367 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 12:56:44 AM
|
quote:
Buffett owns a big chunk of several banks, including Wells Fargo. Funny how he never said anything while they were raking in all that cash on the sub-prime business.
The blame, as usual, lies at the feet of the Congress. Banks were bad because they denied credit to people that didn't deserve credit. Congress "encouraged" the sub-prime and option ARM business. When the feces hit the fan they blamed everyone but themselves.
I agree on both points.
I may sound like a broken record but most of the loans I wouldnt do for people that didnt qualify over the years ended up getting done by other brokers. They allowed this to happen when they allowed the lenders so much slack in qualifying. Again, as I have said before. They should have seen this comming back in August of 06 and started new legislation preparing themselves for it. This all could have been avoided. Maybe prolonged but inevitably delayed until a working solution could have been drawn up.
|
|
|
homer5
363 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 07:24:50 AM
|
| I believe when Buffet is referring to banks, he is referring to investment banks not the BoA's and Countrywides of the world. |
|
|
Quicksilver
4630 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 07:29:05 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by rtrefflich
Hasn't anyone noticed that the reason we are in this mess is not because of the programs, but because of the loans, if these people were given 30 yr fixed loans, with roughly the same payments they would not have lost their homes. Everything began to crash when the payments reset on the 2 and 3 yr subprime loans, the fixed at 6.5% for 2 yrs with the 6 margin. After they all foreclosed and prices dropped everyone decided to walk away.
We can blame the banks, but there are tons of people who are responsible for what happened, including the borrower who decided that the $100 a month savings was worth the risk in the adjustable mortgage.
B/C they never did what they should have in the 1st place, they should have qualified off the actual rate to see if they could afford the loan after initial adjustment. I mean that is seriously pathetic that a nation as powerful as the US couldn't do the simplest thing as that, I mean for banks to qualify people off neg-am rate and not full was just plain retarded. We're seriously run by morons, and then people wonder why outside investors consider us so sleazy, the banks were friggen packing up their loans with bad mixed in that they knew about and sold as performing debt...and then the banks wonder why they can't get institutions to buy their paper....
Their way of doing things was like giving a loaded gun to a murder....its a guarantee to go off at some point |
|
|
EMScommercial
5138 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 08:10:23 AM
|
yes... 2/28 loans were supposed to help the consumer fix their credit with a new mortgage that they were to pay on time and escalate their credit, build equity and then turn around and redo the loans.... heck... i got one for myself after my divorce... and it worked!.....
i can recall a few dozen people that i actually steered away from financing at the time they wanted to (or tried to - got it off my chest) because they just couldn't afford it and they had BAD track records for paying their debts of any kind.... that honesty hurt me with the local realtors.... but helped my reputation with the 'people' and my ability to look in the mirror each day..... (most of those realtors are now working somewhere else right about now anyway!)
about buffett.... he's just a smart investor.... hard to beat he and his late wife's track record.... it is not his job to 'fix' all the woes of each of the companies he invests in..... people bring up wells.... obviously wells is a much more stable platform for an investment than say cw or indy.... wells is still standing and issuing loans.... all the mortgage companies were selling the loans that blew up in everyone's face (we hawked them, they financed them, the realtors counted on them, the politicians boasted about them - then the flame got just too darn hot)
but like i said before... blame it all on ME.... that way no one else has to feel bad... i can take it! |
|
|
dom80e
66 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 09:02:47 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by rtrefflich
Sorry, they may not have been able to pay for it, but very few of those 2/28's were full doc loans. Income was stated on all of those and very few of them had the actual income. If they were able to qualify they probably would have gotten different loans. I had AE's change income on some loans so clients would qualify.
This is just not true. Only 32.9% of subprime loans in the US were stated. The problem was the loan. 5% down, with a history of poor payments and a 50% DTI was the biggest cuase for the subprime mess.
Now if you are talking about Alt-A, 73% were stated. This is where the next big wave of foreclosures will come from. And it is going to hit CA hard. CA had 15% of all subprime loans, but they have 30% of the Alt-A.
Also some numbers for those bashing realtors for the subprime problems. 54% of subprime loans were cashout refi's.
All data is directly from the FED website. |
|
|
808
2597 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 09:35:25 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by dom80e
quote:
Originally posted by rtrefflich
Sorry, they may not have been able to pay for it, but very few of those 2/28's were full doc loans. Income was stated on all of those and very few of them had the actual income. If they were able to qualify they probably would have gotten different loans. I had AE's change income on some loans so clients would qualify.
This is just not true. Only 32.9% of subprime loans in the US were stated. The problem was the loan. 5% down, with a history of poor payments and a 50% DTI was the biggest cuase for the subprime mess.
Now if you are talking about Alt-A, 73% were stated. This is where the next big wave of foreclosures will come from. And it is going to hit CA hard. CA had 15% of all subprime loans, but they have 30% of the Alt-A.
Also some numbers for those bashing realtors for the subprime problems. 54% of subprime loans were cashout refi's.
All data is directly from the FED website.
thanks for the stats. Makes a lot of sense since Alt-A started at 620 then which made Stated Income pretty much the loan of choice espc w Stated Wage Earner and Stated Fixed Income available. I remember my ex owner buying only c/o refi leads in highly appreciating zip codes back then because of the number of 510 550 and 570 FICO mids we'd get on the credit pulls. I know I did twice as many full doc subprime vs stated. |
|
|
EMScommercial
5138 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 09:40:14 AM
|
| he has good points.... the alta folks were the majority of the stated people..... conforming didn't want to pay the higher rates.... and sub folks couldn't show strong enough credit to get by..... they won't all crash as much as the subprime did i wouldn't think.... |
|
|
lucky1s
3618 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 09:41:15 AM
|
That Buffet is amazing.
All this knowledge and he can sing to boot. |
|
|
| |
Previous Topic | Next Topic |
|
Search for: 
