What now? I’ve put off writing this article for a while. Like many of you out there I’ve watched the Dow retreat in huge, wealth-destroying, multi-hundred-point chunks. Every time it looks like the end is in sight it takes another single-day 5% lurch in the wrong direction. Not a pretty sight.

A couple of weeks ago I attended the annual meeting of the National Association of Business Economists in Washington D.C.. The event featured some interesting speakers, including recent Nobel laureate Paul Krugman and Fed Chairman Ben Bernenke. After a day of hearing smart guys w/ lots of letters after their name wax poetic about credit default swaps, mortgage backed assets, and government bailouts I came away with a single conclusion: no one knows how this thing is going to turn out. There was some suggestion in using the word “bailout” the Treasury did a poor job in selling the $700billion plan to the American public – perhaps “rescue” would have been more appropriate. Krugman added some levity by suggesting some media-friendly nicknames: how about “Bailie May?” Or perhaps “Hanky Panky” after Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

So I came away from the three day event with a more profound understanding of my failure to understand this whole mess; but I don’t feel particularly bad about it because no one else really understands it either. Bernenke’s reassuring message: we don’t really know how we’re going to price these distressed assets that the Treasury is gonna be buying with your $700 billion, and we don’t know who we’ll by them from or how we’re going to do it. This will be a trial and error process. But we’ll work it out.

Mmmmmkay. But Bernenke delivers the message with such an aura of academic cool that the audience seemed assured that he’ll succeed in making the best of a bad situation.

So, generally speaking, I’m not feeling to great about all of this. Basically I think we’re headed into one of two possible scenarios:

• Scenario 1: We’re already in a recession but we’ll muddle through. The market is cyclical. This is a particularly brutal cycle we’re dipping into, but fundamentally no different than those we’ve slogged through before. We’ll get some discouraging GDP numbers, the Dow with flit around 9,000 for a while, but eventually the market will give back some of that money it’s taken out of your 401k plan.
• Scenario 2: The wheels are about to come off. The banking system is not just in a superficial funk fueled by poor investor-confidence; it’s really in trouble. As banks write down toxic mortgage backed assets their balance sheets will be fundamentally damaged to the extent that credit will continue to tighten, consequentially decreasing spending, chopping profits, raising unemployment, and fueling foreclosures – which in turn worsens the state of the mortgage backed assets which started the whole mess. Repeat. Deflating prices, which initially feel kinda good (who can argue with $2.50 gas?) accentuates the woes of the business community which will be unable to justify new investments at lower revenue levels, further cutting business spending and jobs, pushing down demand, and deflating prices further. Repeat. Once you’re in this spiral it’s tough to engineer an exit.

Now I think (hope) that we’re in scenario #1. That’s the best case. I don’t think we’re headed towards the meltdown case, but it is something that I worry about. As further evidence that I believe in scenario #1 I recently made two long term trades, buying exchange traded funds (ETF) that track the S&P (RSU) and the Dow (QLD). Someday we’ll look back at 2008 and realize that the dow in the 8,000’s was a buying opportunity.

A few observations:

• You know this already, but if you’re going to need your retirement money in the next few years then you can’t have it socked away in the stock market.
• If your company 401k plan automatically loads you up with company stock, then you need to periodically go in and rebalance. I never cease to be amazed at smart, educated folks who have 40% of their wealth in a single stock. This is goofy.
• Rethink “diversification”. I have stocks divided between small-cap funds, large-cap funds, value funds, growth funds, and international funds. They’re all in the same toilet now. One lesson of the current crisis is that markets are now linked like they’ve never been linked before.

And yes, this is a real estate blog, so a few thoughts here:

• Hooray for Texas: We didn’t run up during the boom so we’re not getting whacked right now, but I’m expecting flat prices for a while. My strategy for finding and investing in long-term value projects is treating me pretty well right now. Plus, that’s a hunk of money I have in properties instead of in the stock market. This is effective diversification.
• Some markets really are feeling the pain. I was in Minneapolis last weekend, and as I walked the streets of some of these neighborhoods it seemed like every third house was a foreclosure. It’s gonna take a while for the market to absorb this carnage.
• All real estate is local – that is, unless the economy is melting down. I won’t be feeling so smug about Texas property values if we got into the doomsday economic scenario that I outlined above. If the banking system goes into the tank then we’re all gonna be in the same boat.
• A buying opportunity? I’m nervous about our economy, but I’m not quite ready to bury my life savings in coffee cans in my back yard. Investors who can still get loans should think about investing now, depending on how your local market conditions look.

Well we're a few weeks beyond Hurricane Ike, and our collective attention has turned from tropical storms to financial ones - a topic that I'll write about shortly. 

Most of Houston is back to normal.  Among the properties that I own we suffered a few downed fences and an uprooted tree or two, along with a tenant who appears to have disappeared and abandoned her lease (I'll write about that as well).  All and all I've been pretty lucky - and thanks to those of you who sent your best wishes. 

But take a look at the JPMorganChase tower in Downtown Houston.  Looks like they've cornered the local plywood market. 

My prayers go out to all those Houstonians riding out the storm.  I live in West Houston but decided yesterday to head up to my parents' house in Fort Worth. 

While our thoughts now are on everyone's safety, soon enough we'll be thinking about insurance, deductables, repairs and contractors.  No one buys an investment property with the expecation that it will get knocked down by a hurricane - but unexpected things happen, and when they do they're usually bad. 

Skimping on insurance is a way that some investors nudge a borderline property into positive cashflow territory.  Ask yourself about the risk/reward tradeoff.

Failure was not an option. The government finally stepped in on Sunday and unveiled plans to take over troubled mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, putting to rest fears that the two firms would collapse and send the housing market into a death spiral.

The housing market breathed a sigh of relief – but no cheers from the stockholders of the two firms. Fannie Mae [FNM] was trading at around $7.00 towards the end of last week and immediately collapsed to about a buck on news of the announcement. As of close today it’s hovering around $0.74.

For investors Fannie and Freddie have seemed like a pretty safe play for years. Stodgy, even. A publically traded pseudo-government entity which was crucial to the U.S. economy and backed by government guarantees seemed like a pretty safe place to stash away some cash that you didn’t want invested in risky stuff; let the day-traders mess with the bio-techs and dot.coms.

But what a difference a week makes.

A lot of investors took a bath on this one. We’re still in the shadow of Enron, WorldCom, Quest, Tyco, and others – but I never cease to be amazed when I speak to folks who have large percentages of their net worth tied up in a single stock. Sometimes it’s because it’s a “safe bet”, or because they’re comfortable and haven’t bothered to rebalance. But most often it’s because they work for the company in question.

This isn’t smart behavior. Real estate investors understand that there is no reward without risk, but diversification is the way that smart, tactical investors hedge their bets. Anything else is just gambling.

Contrast this to the advice that millions of Americans swallow then they read what is undoubtedly the worst personal finance book ever: Robert Kiyosaki’s Rich Dad Poor Dad. Diversification, according to get-rich-guru Kiyosaki, is for suckers. “Put a lot of your eggs in a few baskets,” he exhorts. “Do not do what poor and middle class people do: put their few eggs in many baskets.” A balanced portfolio “…is not the way that successful investors play the game.” These are quotes from the book; I’m not making this stuff up. The biggest problem with Rich Dad Poor Dad is not that it’s filled with vague motivational psycho-babble; it’s that hidden in the self-help hucksterism there are gems like this that are actually dangerous.

Kiyosaki is undoubtedly a smart businessman and has made millions of dollars selling his books and courses, but I’d encourage his true believers out there to take a critical look at some of the ideas that he’s promoting.

Related:

• Why I don't like Rich Dad Poor Dad
• The Black Swan :: The highly improbable and real estate
• Another bailout on the horizon?  Fannie and Freddie

Last year while big lenders like Countrywide collapsed and Wall Street took a beating on mortgage-backed securities, smaller banks weathered the storm pretty well. These guys seemed pretty stodgy while the market was racing along, home values were zooming, and investors were chomping at the bit to jump into the latest negative-amortization mortgage structure. But slow and steady wins the race, as it turns out. Smaller banks wouldn't touch this stuff with a ten foot pole. They looked like luddites a couple of years ago, but they're looking pretty smart right now.

When I started this website I funded it with the backing of Partners Bank of Texas, a small Houston based private bank with assets of less than $200 million. Last year Partners was acquired by Texas based Sterling Bank. Sterling is somewhat larger than Partners - with assets of around $4 billion - but they're very small when compared to, say, Wells Fargo, which has assets of around $600 billion.

In the past I've relied on companies like USAA ($68 billion in assets) and Wells Fargo, but Sterling is my go-to bank now. USAA is the financial institution dedicated to serving current and former members of the military community, and I've been a member for over twenty years, starting when I was a cadet at the United States Military Academy. I still appreciate their great customer service (although some of their lending practices have annoyed me). But even though I have a military connection with USAA, at the end of the day I'm just a number. No one knows me there. They put my data into a computer and it spits out an answer.

But when I talk to Sterling, I'm sitting across the table from the guy who is gonna make the decision. And I like that. When I trying to get this website funded I spent almost a year jumping through hoops for the guys over at Bank of America ($1.7 trillion in assets) and the venture capitalists wanted me to sign away my first born. But at Partners (now Sterling) I got to sit across from someone and pitch my idea; and the woman who I talked to was the same person empowered to make the decision.

I'll still shop the big boys for the plain vanilla deals I'm considering. But when I'm looking at some more challenging opportunities in this crazy market - raw land and multi-family - my first stop is Sterling. Real estate investing is all about relationships, and smart investors know that their reputation can be one of their most valuable assets.

The gaffe of the week goes to John McCain, when in an interview with Politico.com he was unable to remember how many houses he has.

Folks of all political stripes who read this blog will probably be willing to give Senator McCain a little slack on this one. We’re real estate investors and we buy and sell properties. We might not have married a $100 million heiress like Senator McCain (or made $4 million off a lucrative book deal like Senator Obama, for that matter) but we can understand how LLC’s and partnership purchases might turn a seemingly simple question into one that can be a little more tricky.

So my concern is not that Senator McCain was unable to rattle off the right answer. My concern was his startled, confused reaction. His rambling, mumbling response: "I think -- I'll have my staff get to you -- um -- its condominiums where -- I'll have them get to you.” In today’s complex world the ability to think on your feet and stay on message is an important prerequisite to being the President of the United States of America. The fact that Senator McCain was so visibly unhinged by this question will worry some voters.

I don’t’ think that the average American begrudges Senator McCain family their $100 million fortune; Americans don’t resent wealth – we aspire to it. But folks who are struggling to make ends meet want to feel that the President understands their challenges, and those who have invested in the ownership society want a leader who will get the economy back on the rails. When Senator McCain facetiously quipped last week that $5 million per year is the cutoff for being wealthy, a lot of folks felt left out of the joke.

I feel that we facing an immediate future of complex economic challenges – one in which prudent real estate investors will be comparatively well positioned. But in the end the returns that we realize will be linked closely to the fortunes of our fragile economy, which in turn will be heavily impacted by gas prices and – ultimately - oil.

Oil is an international fungible commodity, and therefore oil prices – the single more important driver in our economy – will be largely outside of our control. The biggest factor in what will happen with oil prices lies in direction of international stability, or lack thereof. Neither party talks much about this particular elephant in the room – the reason being that both parties realize, rightly, that there isn’t much that we can do about it. Our recent adventure to send our Armed Forces to the Middle East to spread freedom and democracy isn’t entirely to blame, but it has been an exacerbating factor that has undoubtably made things worse and weakened our influence, both politically and militarily.

In the future there will be a link between what we do overseas and our economic fate here at home – and it’s a new relationship that will be strikingly different from what we’ve seen in the past. As retired Army Colonel and Niebuhr scholar Andrew Bacevich writes in his excellent book The Limits of Power, our economy can no longer be sustained by expansion abroad enforced by our military. As a former military officer myself this is a new way of thinking. I now tend to put less of a premium on “experience” as traditionally defined; I want a leader who can see the new patterns as the world continuously rewrites the rules.

So while I can forgive Senator McCain the fact that he doesn’t know how many houses he has, I am more concerned about the prospect that having spent decades as a fabulously wealthy United States Senator has dulled his ability to identify the shifting currents of the new world economy.

Times are tough out there and a lot of Americans are getting caught in the squeeze. As real estate investors we feel this in a number of ways: bargain foreclosures to buy (good!), a glut of rental properties depressing rental rates (bad!), fewer competing bids for quality properties (good!), longer waits to sell properties (bad!)...and the list goes on.

One thing I’m noticing is the challenge to get quality tenants. I have some properties that rent like hotcakes w/ zero vacancy time. But others, for some reason, have been more challenging. Like most property owners, I have a number of rules-of-thumb that I follow when it comes to screening tenants. But rules of thumb aren’t written in stone; they’re just guidelines. Every now and then I come across an applicant who I think will make a great tenant, but there is something or other that makes me second guess myself.

The fact of the matter is that good people get caught in bad situations sometimes, and a quality applicant can sometimes appear brandishing a blemished credit report. Don’t get me wrong – my mantra #1 is that renting to a bad tenant is twice as expensive as sitting on a vacancy for an extra month – but what is a landlord to do when her gut tells her that she should take a chance on an applicant? Well here are three steps I sometime take::

• Ask for first and last months' rent upfront, plus one month’s deposit. This does three things for you. First, the applicant will have to cough up three months’ rent upfront before he moves in. If the applicant can do this it is an indicator that he’s not living paycheck to paycheck, a good sign that he will be responsible. Secondly, it mitigates your risk by ensuring the final month is paid. Lastly, that final month’s rent sits in your bank account collecting interest (or, better, is out in the market working for you) for the entire time the tenant resides in the property. I write the lease to state that the last month’s rent paid upfront will be credited to the final month that the tenant resides in the property.  PROs:  will scare off bad/risky applicants.  CONs:  may eliminate some good applicants as well. 
• Shorten the term. Write a lease with a short term; four months or six months. Agree to renew if the tenant pays each month on time; you can put this in writing in the contract if you wish. If there is a problem you’re still going to suffer, but you wont’ have a deadbeat sitting in your property with a contractual right to stick around for an entire year.  PROs:  limits the period you're at risk.  CONs: no financial benefit to the landlord, who is still stuck with evicting the tenant if he doesn't work out. 
• Charge a higher rent. This doesn’t do much for you in the risk mitigation category, but if you’ve trust yourself as a judge of character and you’re willing to rent to an applicant that other landlords have turned away, you should get compensated for the extra risk you’re assuming.  PROs:  higher return on the property, a good thing.  CONs: doesn't lower your risk.

Smart landlords use these strategies in combination. Increase the rent and offer a shorter term. Offer a shorter term w/ first and last month paid upfront (great risk mitigation).

I try to keep it simple, and for me that means keeping the clutter down. Whenever possible I opt-out of paper bills and receive notices via email. I make payments electronically in order to minimize the number of stamps I have to lick. I send my tenants directly to the bank to post their payments and check their timeliness from the comfort of my nearest web browser.

But I’m still getting a mailbox full of junk – mainly due to a daily avalanche of catalogs. Big box retailers. Pet shops. Travel agents. Watches. Cigars (I’m a non-smoker). Wedding supplies (I’m already married). I get it all. The photo shows the haul of stuff that I threw out today.

This is a) a pain, b) dangerous, cause it makes it easier to lose something important like a bill or a check, and c) shamefully wasteful.

But there may be something that consumers can do.  The vast majority of this stuff is sent out by a single outfit, the Direct Marketing Association. If you go to their website you can opt out – either online or via mail. The online option requires that you submit a credit card.

I don’t yet know if this works – I just tried it today. According to their website it takes up to sixty days for your new preference to be registered. I’ll post a follow-up in two months time to see if my situation has improved.

Addendum, 6 August::  EA from New Hampshire points out in the comments that Catalog Choice is another option for shutting off the flow of unsolicited mail.  The DMA is the industry advocay group, whereas Catalog Choice is a non-profit environmental organization.  You can sign up on their website and customize delivery options. 

Any more bright ideas out there?

In the American Revolutionary War Colonel William Prescott admonished his troops not to fire till they saw the whites of the enemies’ eyes. Bottom feeders in this tanking real estate market are trying to show the same discipline, but it’s tough. As early as mid 2007 we were reading all sorts of stories about vultures swooping into overheated markets like Miami and Las Vegas to gobble up properties that had tanked in value. Funny – we don’t really see too many stories about what happened next.

But we know what happened next – they continued to tumble, and the bottom feeders who jumped in too early took a beating.

Today Case Shiller reported a 15.8% drop in their housing price index. This isn’t really news, actually – it’s the twenty second consecutive month that the index is down. And if I were a betting man I’d count on it being down next month too.

Foreclosures are hammering the market as banks unload their inventory of REO’s, pushing down the averages. There are some indications that Congress and the Fed are ready to step in – witness this week’s housing bill. This will reassure Wall Street, but it remains to be seen if the positive impact that this has on credit liquidity is neutralized by banks reevaluating the risk of the government unilaterally resetting the terms of the loans that they make.

I’ve remarked in earlier posts that there is a difference between investing and speculating – and that either one may be ok for you, but the danger is when you think that you’re doing one but you’re actually doing the other. “Investors” out there who are trying to catch the bounce aren’t investors; they’re speculators. In my view it’s more important than ever for investors to evaluate the risks, take a sober look at a potential cashflow that an investment will produce, and ask themselves what kind of return their investment will yield if they’re forced to hold for a few years.

Today the Senate passed a $300 billion housing rescue bill aimed at turning around the flagging housing market, helping homeowners avoid foreclosure, and propping up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The fact that Senators came in on a Saturday to vote on the bill is an indicator of the importance that Capitol Hill places on the issue.

It remains to be seen who will benefit from this legislation, but one group of folks that surely are breathing a sigh of relief are the shareholders of Fannie and Freddie. It’s unlikely that these two publically traded stocks will return to their previous levels anytime soon, but this intervention at least makes it more unlikely that they’ll go belly-up.

Nationwide, foreclosure rates continue to skyrocket. RealtyTrac yesterday reported that foreclosure activity was up a whopping 14 percent in the second quarter, a rise of 121 percent over the second quarter of 2007.

It is hoped that the passage of this regulation will soothe Wall Street’s frazzled nerves. Oil prices (too high) and housing prices (falling too fast) are surely the two most troubling elements in our fragile economic situation. Both are complex and have deep reaching tentacles. The reassuring thing about the housing picture is that, unlike oil, it is an American market – therefore Congress may have some success in turning the ship. Washington hasn’t produced any legislation on energy– neither to curb speculation nor to increase offshore drilling. Lawmakers take some lumps from the public for their inaction, but it’s probably just as well since neither approach has the potential to improve the situation. The US controls a tiny percentage of global reserves, and traders move a small percentage of barrels traded, which leads us to a troubling conclusion: the U.S. economy is just one piece in the global puzzle, and things that happen outside of our borders are going to hit us in the pocketbook here at home.

But even if we’re struggling with our oil addiction, it’s hopeful that this piece of legislation might help the housing market. Much of the impact may be psychological, however. Democrats estimate that around 400,000 households might benefit from the bill, but last quarter alone saw almost twice that number of foureclosures – around 740,000 according to RealtyTrac. But we can hope that this bill shows that Congress is willing to act if necessary, and that might be enough to get banks lending again. And that might lead to fewer foreclosures, more buyers buying, more sellers selling, a shrinking housing inventory, and eventually a recovery in prices.