Floyd Norris’ blog post gave me one of the more rare moments of clarity I have experienced in a while in his blog post: Ponzi Squared.
Sometimes we all get so close to following the housing market that we fail to see the big picture. The crazy illogical and insane lending practices that applied to subprime:
* No money down
* No documentation of income
* Initial below-market teaser interest rate
* Negative amortization
…effectively created calls and puts for fledgling homeowners.
Call option
The lender was merely allowing the buyer to have a call option on the house. If the market rose, the owner had a chance to sell. And of course we all know that real estate markets always rise. As markets continued to rise, the rating agency models showed this to be a good risk since the default rates were low (but it was really because the market continued to rise).
Exercising a put option
The seller, who has nothing to lose with their no money down payment, simply turns in the keys to the lender.
Wondering why banks are enjoying such large rate spreads despite the FOMC rate cuts? They need to offset financial damage and mitigate future hemorraging due to mortgage loan losses. And a bunch of it is will be caused by homeowners who should not have been homeowners in the first place by the very same lenders they are handing the keys to.
3 Comments
Comments are closed.
Well said and I couldn’t agree more.
I couldn’t agree more…I had a client who was told not to buy right by one of the big banks as we are considered to be in a depreciating market. However the same lender gave him a loan for a home when we were in a rapidly rising market where I had given him caution to go ahead.
The blog Housing Derivatives wrote about this Free Straddle in February 2008 (http://housingderivatives.typepad.com/housing_derivatives/2008/02/index.html#entry-46371284). It fits the picture of free options being granted from lenders to home buyers.