Friday, January 28, 2011

foreclosure list

In the last week, several ideas for fixing the housing market have surfaced. One is the Third Way proposal, which appears to be an Administration trial balloon. Predictably, it is yet anther bailout, with plenty of smoke and mirrors to disguise that fact.

A second proposal, from Sheila Bair yesterday, is to establish a “foreclosure claims commission“. This is in keeping with the direction that Iowa’s Tom Miller has been pushing for with the 50 state attorneys general investigation. This scheme sounds more promising that the Third Way proposal, but is very likely to wind up in bailout territory.

Third is a not-widely-covered plan by Senator Jeff Merkley which has two provisions that would force banks to address the fact that mortgages are deeply under water. That makes it firmly anti-bailout (or more accurately, any resulting bailouts would be explicit as opposed to buried in various mortgage market gimmies to banks). It would thus speed recognition of housing market losses, force debt writedowns, and accelerate repricing and clearing of the housing market.

The Merkley proposal is pro consumer and pro investor; the other two are pro bank. Sadly, it isn’t hard to see which is likely to prevail in the absence of public pressure.

The Bair proposal was presented at the Mortgage Bankers Association meeting in DC, In addition to the not-very-fleshed out idea of a claims fund, she also proposed a list of fairly modest but still badly needed servicing reforms, the biggest being required write downs of second mortgages when the servicer is negotiating the first mortgage with a borrower, and a independent process for appealing loss mitigation turn-downs. The latter is useful but needs to be made broader. Borrowers still lack any recourse save costly and time-consuming litigation if they believe servicers have made errors, so independent review should include a disclosure and dispute process for routine servicing.

The restitution fund concept is worrisome. It is not yet clear whether it will be funded, which means it could be a joint private/public kitty. The provision of any explicit government funding in the absence of a serious investigation, including possible criminal action, is not warranted. The hallmark of this financial crisis is no perps, save some foot soldiers (the hapless robosigners, for instance) have been identified, much less held to account.

And even the private funding model is likely to prove unsatisfactory. HousingWire suggested that it might be based on the BP restitution fund. That’s a red flag. The BP fund was seen as a win for the embattled oil company, since BP was given several years to contribute money to the fund. In addition, even though the fund in theory did not limit BP’s liabilities, most investors reacted as if the damage had been capped. And given that any participant in the fund claims process had to waive his rights to litigate, the process did serve to limit exposure (particularly of the punitive damages sort). Moreover, many people who applied for damages were deemed not to be eligible because the harm they suffered was allegedly too indirect (think hotel owners in affected areas). Others were denied because they could not document revenue and expenses (many small fishermen run heavily cash-based operations that are not hugely profitable even in the best of times).

So it is also easy to imagine, as with the various government mortgage mod programs, that the banks will run the process and will use strict documentation requirements as a way to limit payouts, when their abuse of the documentation procedures they created is at the root of this crisis.

By contrast, there is much to like about the Merkley proposal, which was covered by Dave Dayen at FireDogLake. It has two mechanisms to force banks to recognize and realize losses on underwater mortgages, and thus put an end to “extend and pretend”.

First is a “national short refinance program”. Per Dayen:

When a bank sends a home into foreclosure, it becomes an REO property, to be sold at auction at a large loss for the investors. Instead of going through the long process of resale, with the attendant upkeep that has to be spent by the bank on the home, and the disruption to the property values from having a vacant home in their neighborhood, this short refi program would allow qualified families facing eviction to refinance to an FHA-guaranteed mortgage based on current property values and interest rates. In the interim the family could stay in the home during the appraisal, new underwriting and final resolution. Many families would be able to pay a reduced payment if the home was written down to real value. The investor would get a bigger payoff than selling a vacant home in foreclosure. Neighbors would see their communities stabilized without a vacant property in their midst. And the family would get to stay in their home.

The main effect of the FHA short refi program is likely not to be a wave of mass refis, but to force servicers to offer deep principal mods. If a mortgage leaves the pool via a refi, the servicer loses all of the fees associated with that loan. If the servicer concludes a mod, it still gets ongoing servicing income, but on a lower principal balance.

The second mechanism is judicial modifications, aka bankruptcy cramdowns. In pretty much every other type of secured lending, save for residential mortgages (which were exempted via legislation), when the borrower goes into bankruptcy, the secured debt is written down to the value of the debt, and any amount owing beyond that is added to unsecured debts. The idea is commonsensical: you can’t say a $200,000 mortgage is “secured” by a house now worth $160,000. The court process is well established and not controversial (as in you don’t see fulminating about abuses).

The scaremongering by the banking industry used to forestall judicial foreclosures is that every Tom, Dick, and Harry will run to the courthouse to get out of his mortgage, As anyone who has contemplated or gone though bankruptcy knows, it’s a very painful, humiliating, and disruptive process. And the widespread use of background checks as part of employment screening, with a bad credit record seen as a sign of bad character, is yet another deterrent. Correspondents of mine who would be ideal candidates (for instance, one is underwater due to investments gone sour and Chinese drywall making a sale of their home impossible, yet still have decent cashflow from their main business) are still loath to file.

Proof of the legitimacy of judicial mods as an option comes from the fact that most mortgage backed securities investors favor it, because they see it as a device for servicers to offer principal mods. With servicer fees and expenses coming first out of mortgage cashflow, the costly foreclosure process comes out of investors’ hides. All but a small percentage prefer principal mods because it will produce lower losses to them than costly foreclosures and sales of distressed property.

The Merkley plan has some other promising elements, such as requiring servicers to have a single point of contact (the Bair servicing reforms include this idea), a broad third party review process for mortgage mods (similar to successful programs at the state level) and the end of the “dual track” process (which keep the foreclosure process in motion while mod discussions are underway; this idea was present in a watered down form in the Bair speech as part of the foreclosure “settlement”).

Frankly, although individual borrowers may continue to suffer, the best prospect for an equitable long term solution is to let the wheels of justice continue to grind on. The outburst of reform ideas seems to be the direct result of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Ibanez decision. The terms of debate are, perversely, still very much skewed in favor of banks despite the considerable harm they have done to homeowners, investors, and communities. But judges are increasingly abandoning the assumption that banks must be right in foreclosure cases, and a more objective posture is sure to put the banking industry even more on the back foot. Letting the courts continue to do their work offers the best hope of exposing, and therefore ultimately remedying, large-scale misconduct by the securitization industry.

Through most of my adult life I’ve always believed that even though the country might be deeply divided about the direction of the county, there was at least one major party or movement sufficiently sane and principled to give us hope things could, with luck and effort, eventually work out. But not now.

Today, a Tea-GOPer group with the oxymoronic name, Republican Study Group, released a list of proposed spending cuts [complete list from Wendydavis]. which can be summed up in a few words: virtually every cut they want to make will make life meaner for everyone but the rich. We’ll have less public health research and care, more pollution, fewer public services, less science, less public art, more hardship for more people and less assistance for the poor, and on and on.

If we were a destitute nation, flat broke with no future for growth, one might accept some of this as regrettable but unavoidable, but we’re none of those. There is literally no rational barrier to spending the money on the things our society needs. The Tea-GOPers, with framing assistance from the President and very foolish Democrats, just want us to behave as though we’re an impoverished nation and so they’re willing to impoverish the nation’s spirit and cripple its governance to prove it. It’s as though a hostile enemy had put the nation under economic siege, and we’d decided to let them win.

If only there were at least one opposition party to call out these medieval nihilists and crackpots. But alas, we’re stuck with a party that foolishly allows itself to be led by an Administration with no respect for its roots, little vision and even less courage. Every day, Team Obama makes up a fresh excuse for not confronting the nation’s needs, or even describing them honestly, while pretending they’ve done everything they can think of that won’t upset the 60th Senator. Why did these people even want the White House?

And we’re told the Administration’s primary message is to endorse the enemy’s view of America’s economic helplessness and the necessity of making things worse for the most vulnerable in our society.

Yet today, the latest polls tell us Mr. Obama’s and Democrats’ approval ratings are up. Is it because despite his other priorities, Congress managed to adopt several clearly liberal policies in December? Or is it that voters are simply more optimistic about the economy even though they still have a dim view of the direction of the country?

I predict this momentary spurt will collapse. The country faces a related set of crises:

– 15 million unemployed, with millions jobless for more than six months; there is no apparent, dependable engine of growth to reverse that soon;

– a huge collapse in aggregate demand coupled with a deleveraging process after homeowners lost trillions when the housing bubble burst; with depressed demand, businesses have little reason to expand;

– a resulting severe mortgage crisis made even more cruel by pervasive fraud on the part of banks and their servicing entities, with negative implications for the housing market, underwater owners, bank insolvency and the integrity of the foreclosure/judicial system;

– massive budget crisis in many states, forcing layoffs and declining public services, including cuts to safety-net programs whose needs mushroomed because of the recession;

– an out of control financial/banking sector that continues to loot consumers and run an unregulated casino with nearly free money from the Feds;

– a mind-numbing denial about the dangers of global climate change, as its consequences literally begin to flood vulnerable parts of the planet;

– debilitating wars that continue to drain the US while destroying or destabilizing countries we presume to be helping;

. . . and on and on.

Now match that list of actual problems against anything we’ve heard from the Obama Administration or the new Tea-GOPer Congress about their priorities. There’s almost zero overlap. There’s no jobs program, no mortgage solution, no state budget rescue, no reining in the financial sector before the MOTU tank the economy again, no end to wars, no restoration of the rule of law. In short, we see nothing even remotely helpful coming from Washington.

Instead, the DC/Third Way’s top agenda is to cut Social Security, as though the problem with America is that our elderly, having seen their home or market savings wiped out, have too much economic security. Then they want to cut federal spending at the same time state and local governments are contracting and consumers are deleveraging, which can only reduce the country’s standard of living further. And to finish the demolition, they want to cripple government’s ability to address any of the actual problems.

Shouldn’t we be protesting in the streets? These people are trashing the place, but there are no grownups in charge, and as far as I can tell, none waiting in the wings, not even a government in exile, if the whole structure crashes again. We look like early Tunisia, only less aware.

John Chandley

dpsoulja

ndwbmkddqkcb

fsyranftnyict

lionessmom

mamalionlov

juliichan

fulfreez

ingridcont

bossmackto

katiethecloud

gvaxpkvijjezyqdu

denzillacey

jbismylife

szuwimvvausan

dunzobonzo

car insurance online

krazyz5sk8a

flowergirlajg

Monday, January 24, 2011

Most Businesses Can Use online reputation management

When businesses or men and women fall prey to unfair opponents, irate ex-employees or disgruntled buyers, then a SERM gets to be crucial inside economic survival of a enterprise.

Firms like SERMs are vital in keeping, and in some situations salvaging and restoring firms or person's reputation and wonderful name.

Online searches are one particular of the to begin with important things that modern day day consumes do prior to shelling out moolah having a enterprise or person, and a single awful click can mean economic disaster to get a organization, specially in this ever developing cyber overall economy. Recognition for these SERMs are boosting by leaps and bounds with all the realization it isn't prudent to attempt to conduct internet business on this cyber age rather than have a SERM on retainer together with your accountant and your legal professional.

Businesses are also appreciating the collateral advantage of obtaining a Popularity Management agency on-board as an integral a part of their business model, its wonderful advertising! Even while securing a company's wonderful status and identify on-line, it generates superior press and constructive exposure that ultimately adds substantially for the bottom line of a company's harmony sheet, creating the solutions to literally pay for alone in lots of conditions.

This tends to become an exceptionally powerful marketing point for corporations at the same time as people, to know that they're cleansing and defending their reputations and cyber photographs, even though simultaneously running a very useful marketing initiative. Frequently corporations absolutely disregard their former advertising efforts over the internet and opt for the advantages of On the internet Status Management.

Possessing a SERM firm in your side is free of a doubt the way in which to go within this cyber age. For far more details on online reputation management and corporate reputation management, Please visit us at http://removeripoffreports.net/

Business Making Money

We’ve been promised for a while now that our phones will become our personal assistants. Executives from Cambridge, Mass.-based Vlingo sat down with me this week to talk about how they’ve delivered on that promise — and started turning it into real revenue.

It seems like all the big guys are trying to get into this business. The incentive, as a Googler put it when the company launched a similar service last year, is that voice is much more natural than typing as a way to interact with your phone. Apple, meanwhile, showed its interest by acquiring a startup called Siri. And Microsoft included voice commands on Windows Phone 7.

The difference, according to Vlingo’s vice president of business Hadley Harris, is that the startup has built all its basic technology, including speech recognition (something that Siri outsourced) and the “intent engine” that allows the app to translate your words into actions that it understands. Vlingo is working with other companies to integrate a wide range of apps into the system, so that you can use your voice to buy a plane ticket off travel site Kayak or check your updates on Facebook.

Vlingo has been downloaded 7 million times, Harris said. BlackBerry users represent most of those downloads, since that’s the phone that Vlingo focused on first, but iPhone and especially Android are catching up. The company’s strategy is to release new features on Android first, then port them to other phones as resources and technology allow.

The app is free, so Vlingo makes money through advertising and revenue sharing with its partners. Specifically, Harris told me it currently earns $7.74 for every 1,000 Web searches, $49 for every 1,000 local searches, and $24 for every 1,000 “other” monetizable actions, such as a ticket purchase on Kayak. With users performing an average of 30 actions every month, Harris said Vlingo is making about 14 cents per user per month.

That might seem a little low, Harris acknowledged, but the plan is to dramatically increase both the number of users and the number of actions over the next year. Most promisingly, he said Vlingo has made deals with a number of Android handset manufacturers who don’t want to direct all of their usage to Google services. (He said it’s too early to reveal who the manufacturers are.) Not only will that put Vlingo on more phones, it will also make the application more prominent on those phones by turning it into the default app whenever you want to use voice commands.

Next Story: Why display ads are cool again Previous Story: Gamification is the new black, reaching beyond loyalty programs to engagement

Whenever you hear a business executive or politician use the term "American competitiveness," watch your wallet. Few terms in public discourse have gone so directly from obscurity to meaninglessness without any intervening period of coherence.

President Obama just appointed Jeffry Immelt, GE's CEO, to head his outside panel of economic advisors, replacing Paul Volcker. According to White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, Immelt has "agreed to work through what makes our country more competitive."

In an opinion piece for the Washington Post announcing his acceptance, Immelt wrote "there is nothing inevitable about America's declining manufacturing competitiveness if we work together to reverse it."

But what's American "competitiveness" and how do you measure it? Here are some different definitions:

It's American exports. Okay, but the easiest way for American companies to increase their exports from the US is for their American-made products to become cheaper internationally. And for them to reduce the price of their American-made stuff they have to cut their costs of production in here. Their biggest cost is their payrolls. So it follows that the simplest way for them to become more "competitive" is to cut their payrolls -- either by substituting software and automated machinery for their US workers, or getting (or forcing) their US workers to accept wage and benefit cuts.

It's net exports. Another way to think about American "competitiveness" is the balance of trade -- how much we import from abroad versus how much they import from us. The easiest and most direct way to improve the trade balance is to coax the value of the dollar down relative to foreign currencies (the Fed's current strategy for flooding the economy with money could have this effect). The result is everything we make becomes cheaper to the rest of the world. But even if other nations were willing to let this happen (doubtful; we'd probably have a currency war instead as they tried to coax down the value of their currencies in response), we'd pay a high price. Everything the rest of the world makes would become more expensive for us.

It's the profits of American-based companies. In case you haven't noticed, the profits of American corporations are soaring. That's largely because sales from their foreign-based operations are booming (especially in China, Brazil, and India). It's also because they've cut their costs of production in the US (see the first item above). American-based companies have become global -- making and selling all over the world -- so their profitability has little or nothing to do with the number and quality of jobs here in the US. In fact, it may be inversely related.

It's the number and quality of American jobs. This is my preferred definition, but on this measure we're doing terribly badly. Most Americans are imprisoned in a terrible trade-off -- they can get a job, but only one that pays considerably less than the one they used to have, or they can face unemployment or insecure contract work. The only sure way to improve the quality of jobs over the long term is to build the productivity of American workers and the US overall, which means major investments in education, infrastructure, and basic R&D. But it's far from clear American corporations and their executives will pay the taxes needed to make these investments. And the only sure way to improve the number of jobs is to give the vast middle and working classes of America sufficient purchasing power to get the economy going again. But here again, it's far from clear American corporations and their executives will be willing to push for a more progressive tax code, along with wage subsidies, that would put more money into average workers' pockets.

It's politically important for President Obama, as for any president, to be available to American business, and to avoid the moniker of being "anti-business." But the president must not be seduced into believing -- and must not allow the public to be similarly seduced into thinking -- that the well-being of American business is synonymous with the well-being of Americans.

Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future, now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org.

bench craft company reviews bench craft company reviews

The Week in Android News | Android Central

Another week has passed us by, and the Android news continued to flow. With Google changing leaders, the Xoom shows us a price tag, and much more, it is easy to have missed something along the way. If you took your eyes off the site for ...

Why Fox News Should Hire Keith Olbermann When His Non-Compete ...

The traditional broadcast news divisions? NBC's out, and of the other two, one's owned by Disney, and at the other one Dan Rather attacking George Bush was too controversial. Olbermann is an incendiary Rather hopped up on ego and ...