Archive for December 18th, 2008

Low-interest mortgages are the answer … Not !

December 18, 2008

Here’s the newest twist on how to stabilize the housing market: price fix the retail mortgage rate at 4.5%, with the government (i.e. you and me) subsidizing the rates for folks who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford the mortgage payments.  My suggestion for stabilizing housing prices is below.

* * * * *
Excerpted from WSJ, “Low-Interest Mortgages Are the Answer”, Hubbard & Mayer, December 17, 2008

The Treasury Department is considering a plan to offer a 4.5% mortgage for home buyers for a period of time. Let’s hope it does. It would help arrest the decline in house prices that is at the base of the ongoing financial crisis and recession.

In most markets house values are today lower than what is consistent with the average level of affordability in the past 20 years. Current futures markets suggest that house prices will decline by 12%-18% in the next 18 months.

Nonetheless, without policy action house prices are likely to continue falling. Conversely, we see little risk that increasing the demand for housing will touch off another housing bubble. While the economy is contracting, low interest rates would spur housing activity.

A 4.5% mortgage rate is not too low. The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield closed at 2.3% on Dec. 12, 2008. Hence a 4.5% mortgage rate is 2.2% above the Treasury yield, above the 1.6% spread that would prevail in a normally functioning mortgage market.

Recall that a mortgage can be thought of as a risk-free bond plus two possibilities that increase risk to lenders: default and/or prepayment. Historically, the risk of default adds about 0.25% to the interest rate. The remaining spread of the mortgage rate over the Treasury yield represents the risk of prepayment and underwriting costs. With falling house prices, the risk of default could indeed add 0.75% or more for a newly underwritten and fully documented loan.

Moreover, a 4.5% mortgage rate will raise housing demand significantly. A simple forecast can be obtained by applying the 2003-2004 homeownership rates to 2007 households. We use the 2003-2004 home ownership rates because those were the years of the lowest previous mortgage rates (the average mortgage rate was 5.8%).

An increase in the homeownership rate from 67.9 (third quarter, 2008) to 68.6 (the average rate from 2003-2004) would increase homeownership by about 800,000 new homeowners. A simple statistical analysis examining the impact of lower mortgage rates and higher unemployment rates yields an even higher, and firmer, estimate of 2.4 million additional owner occupied homes in 2009.

4.5% mortgage rate that the Treasury is considering also should be available for present homeowners who want to refinance, because of the benefits for the economy as a whole. We calculate that up to 34 million households would be able to do so, at an average monthly savings of $428 — or a total reduction in mortgage payments of $174 billion.

Research article:
http://www4.gsb.columbia.edu/realestate/research/housingcrisis/mortgagemarket

WSJ article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122948162452913103.html

* * * * *

Ken’s Way:

Eliminate capital gains taxes on all residential property that is acquired during 2009 and 2010, provided that the property is held at least 24 months. (Note: that the tax exclusion would depend on both the purchase date and the holding period)

The goal: get private investors — large and small — to buy residential property (i.e. houses) and rent them to folks who neither really can’t afford to buy a house on their own.  To sweeten the deal, let landlords depreciate the property on a highly accelerated basis for income tax purposes, and allow all current tax losses to offset ordinary income when calculating taxes.

It would be a win-win.  Investors would have a place to park their money; more rental housing would be available for non-owners; tax payers wouldn’t have to subsidize anything.  

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
  The Homa Files Blog

Majority Oppose Government-run National Health Plan … and only 45% of Dems favor it.

December 18, 2008

Excerpted from Rasmussen Reports, December 12, 2008

* * * * *

51% of U.S. voters oppose the creation of a single-payer national health insurance plan overseen by the federal government, 30%  favor it, and 19% are undecided.

45% of Democrats favor a government-run national single-payer plan;  74% of Republicans are against it.

55% of white voters oppose a government-run plan, while a plurality of African-Americans (44%) support it.

61% of liberals favor a national health plan overseen by the government, compared to 30% of moderates and 14% of conservatives.

Married voters — by double digits –are more opposed to a government plan than unmarrieds.

Full article:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/healthcare/51_oppose_government_run_national_health_plan

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
  The Homa Files Blog

Soup Isn’t Sexy, Its Effective

December 18, 2008

Excerpted from Brand Channel “Campbell’s Soup un-canny” by Adam Sauer, November 10, 2008

* * * * *  

Even before Warhol pointed out the obvious, Campbell’s was an iconic brand. From its humble beginnings as Joseph Campbell’s cannery of tomatoes, soups, condiments, vegetables, and mincemeat in 1869, it grew into a brand that identifies Americana as much as it identifies America.

While the popularity of the brand’s profile fluctuates over time—often depending on the economic health of its consumers—Campbell’s enjoys extraordinary brand recognition and an envy-inducing level of respect. For example, despite being the oldest of old-economy brands, a 2008 survey…found that Campbell’s was second on a list of the most socially responsible companies in the US, behind only Google.

Campbell’s owes a great deal of its success to technological innovation. Its turn-of-the-century breakthrough of halving water content to create a condensed soup helped to expand its wide popularity.

But just how does the brand fair online in the new economy?

Campbellsoup.com is the brand’s online gateway representing and linking to the brand’s stable of sites…

Much of Campbell’s online success can be attributed to what the brand hasn’t attempted to do. The brand, for example, understands the reasons to visit a soup website do not include Flash-based video games or social networking based on a love for chicken soup. (It should be noted that many similar consumer brands, or those brands’ agencies, are convinced otherwise.)

Also, Campbell’s realizes its brand’s place on the sex appeal spectrum; it knows it is not a high fashion label and it opts, wisely, to avoid flamboyance both online and on the shelf…

A final paradox of the brand is that while Campbell’s is known for the simplicity of its design and product (soup), the label is actually an umbrella for a conglomerate of products ranging from juice to seeds. The challenge is to differentiate the site enough to represent this family of brands without losing that simple Campbell’s iconography that captured Warhol’s attention.

Campbell’s likewise accomplishes this with links to its Pepperidge Farms, Prego and Swanson brand offerings… So, soup to nuts, Campbell’s online does all it should and none of what it shouldn’t. Simple. Effective. Just like the soup.

Edit by SAC 

* * * * *
Full article:
http://brandchannel.com/features_webwatch.asp?ww_id=406

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
The Homa Files Blog