AP Maximizes Negativity in Covering Realtors' Housing Report

Photo of Tom Blumer.

Granted, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) is a trade organization which will, as trade organizations do, try to put the best face on a bad situation. And granted, part of the press's job is to filter through hype and false sunniness to report the truth of what's really going on.

But that is most emphatically not what the Associated Press did with yesterday's NAR report on the state of the national housing market. Instead, AP failed to report overall statistics in favor of reporting individual metro areas; ignored most of the legitimately good news; ignored an important piece of historical context; and, most importantly, and as has been the case for well over a year in the national business press, emphasized reductions in unit sales while de-emphasizing much smaller reductions in sale prices.

Here are five of the key paragraphs AP's unbylined report ("New data reveal breadth of housing slump"):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Sales of existing homes fell in 45 states during the October-December quarter, with metropolitan areas showing growing weakness, a real estate trade group said Thursday.

The fourth-quarter data from the National Association of Realtors underscore the breadth of the housing market’s slump.

South Dakota was the lone state to show a sales increase. Existing home sales there rose 8.9 percent from the same quarter a year ago. Sales were unchanged in North Dakota. No sales figures were available for Idaho, Indiana and New Hampshire. Sales also fell in Washington, D.C.

Median home prices fell in more than half of the 150 metropolitan areas surveyed. Out of the 77 that experienced declines, 16 showed double-digit percentage drops, the trade group said. The largest price declines were found in Lansing, Mich., Sacramento, Calif., Jackson, Miss. and Riverside, Calif., which posted price declines of 17 to 19 percent.

..... The states suffering the biggest drop in sales in the fourth quarter were Nevada, down 44 percent and Wyoming, down 42 percent. Other states with big declines were New Mexico, down 39 percent, Oregon, down 38 percent and Arizona, down 37.6 percent.

It seems that if it wasn't a double-digit negative number, AP tried mightily not to report it.

Here is some of what AP chose to ignore, straight from the NAR release:

  • Regional median sales price drops vs. a year ago -- Midwest, -3.2%; Northeast, -4.8%; South, -5.4%; West, -8.7%; US overall, -5.8%. These numbers are by no means pretty, but they're not nearly as bad as the "scary" unit sales declines.
  • The overemphasis on unit sales declines at the expense of information on prices is a significant oversight. It's as if someone tried to tell you that the stock market had a bad day if the indices stayed unchanged but volume dropped by half. Your response would be, "So?" The fact of the matter is that a lot of people are holding onto their homes or, if they are trying to sell but are in no hurry, sticking to their guns on selling price and riding the storm out. Though I don't want to overlook the difficulties of not being able to move when you'd like to (which I don't deny can be a significant hardship in some cases), how is all of this cause for comprehensive alarm?
  • Eleven of the 150 metro areas tracked had double-digit home-price gains (yeah, you read that right), including Metro San Jose, CA (+11.2%). 12 more metro areas had price gains of 6% or more. Other unreported increases in reasonably large metro areas include Buffalo-Niagara Falls (+9.1%), Des Moines (+5.6%), NYC-White Plains (+3.6%), Oklahoma City (+8.2%), San Antonio (+7.9%), and (imagine that) San Francisco-Oakland (+5.5%).
  • AP totally ignored an important larger-context point made by the NAR, namely that "the typical seller who purchased their home six years ago still saw a very healthy gain. The median increase in value for sellers who purchased that home in the fourth quarter of 2001 is 31.2 percent, and the median home equity accumulation is $49,000." Six years happens to be how long a typical homeowner stays in their home before selling.

At some point, you have to consider the possibility that the reporting on the housing situation is as it is because the business press is determined to convey the impression that the mortgage lending and housing "crises" are nationwide phenomena that require comprehensive, national solutions, when the data show that this clearly isn't the case.

I'm at that point.

Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.

—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

fake money

A house worth more money only means that the dollar is worth less and at that rate of 1/3rd drop in buying power a few percentage points in house equity means people still lost money.

I did read that housing sales were up in Detroit, but America has got to get off this inflation system as it is destroying our people in making them worry about the costs of living from doctor bills to now paying for gas.

I so much would like people now to understand the economy of the 1960's. A person could earn 400 dollars a month and live well. A starter house cost 5000 and was a nice home. An LTD cost around 1100 dollars. A dentist could drill and fill your teeth for more visits than you cared for 35 bucks. 20 dollars bought more groceries than you could eat in week.

That was before hyper inflation where the banking cartel crooks deflated the dollar. What good is 100,000 house with 2500 dollar yearly taxes, 10,000 dollar roofing, 15,000 painting, it costs over a thousand bucks to heat and cool it.......top it off with insurance and the value of that 5000 dollar home in 1965 is not worth as much today in buying power. A car cost 1/5th of that home and now it costs 1/3rd.

That is Americans loosing what is important in buying power. Ronald Reagan regained that for a time for Americans, but there is a literal real estate, banking etc.. etc... screwing Americans over in their money and the government steals half a person's wages.

Americans deserve an economy like the 60's when things were cheap and life was without all these burdens. It can be done, but until we get off this roller coaster of "houses went up" and thinking inflation is a hedge against anything this will not end.

There are economists who do know how to fix this. I have posted enough of the basics here to try and educate citizens as this is ridiculous in what Americans are hitched to.

We can with correct policy produce ourselves out of this. American can keep Mexico and Canada sovereign and build them to be trading partners. America can buy up northern Mexico and Americanize it as our economic buffer zone and do the same to Latin America as a bulwark in destroying the Chavez communism being implemented by the same Soros raiders ruining those people's lives.

Americans produce better than anyone. We need to have our system produce and generate wealth. Doing so will make America a 1950's LENDER STATE TO THE WORLD and not a debtor state.

Doing so will end the welfare system as people will be able to afford the care they require themselves.

This system will bust and the last thing America needs is it to bust and have George Washington's prophecy coming true in the entire world lining up against us in an invasion of our shores bringing war here.

We need to fix the system make America so economically strong and necessary to world economic SUPPLY that no one will be attacking us.
That is how one solves being sucked into Eurasian wars.

End the fake money and reinstitute BUYING POWER.

 

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

and....

it could usually be managed on one income.

OTOH, houses are twice as big, every kid has his/her own room, cable, wireless, and the Net didn't exist, blah-blah.

I just digussed this topic

I just digussed this topic with some friends over cocktails. My point to them was the money supply was distorted once Nixon got us off the gold standard. We can't print gold, we can greenbacks. The inflationary spirals of the 70's as well as the "stagflation" were caused by the fed's new found ability to print money without the need to back it. This freedom enabled the government to institute a pleathora of new spending programs (from Great Society nonsense to out of control foreign aid) in an attempt to spend our way to prosperity.

I went to college for economics and against all odds (it was the 60's-70's) was a die hard Milton Friedman, Chicago School free trader. As such I tried to explain the real cost of money to my friends. They couldn't get it. They never will. One friend told me he bought his home for 400k in 2000 and now it's worth over 600k. I told him unless he added 200k in improvements all that means is it now takes 600k to purchase what 400k would 8 years ago. The blank stare was priceless.

at the time it all seemed quite natural

The lenders got themselves into this housing mess with their mortgage fraud. Let all these lenders, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae go down and out of business and let's start fresh. This story Why The American Business System Is Collapsing is just one of several that was published in Broowaha Reno by a writer calling herself Morgana out of Reno, NV.

"It occurred to her that she ought to have wondered at this, but at the time it all seemed quite natural." Alice in Wonderland The fraud in the origination of American home loans guaranteed their debt was secured by a house of cards, nothing more than smoke and mirrors.  How safe debt is, is dependent upon two issues.  The first is what the debt is for.  In other words, what secures it.  The second is the ability to pay the debt back.  In accounting, Assets = Liabilities + Equity.  Assets are everything that can be used to pay debt.  Houses secure home loans.  I have said and written since 2003 about the lack of the value in the American houses to pay back the frenzy of American home loans made.  Fraud in the origination of American home loans guaranteed their debt had zero quality in their ability to be paid back.  Many states have anti-deficiency laws so the borrower has no personal liability beyond the house. Up to 2003, corporate debt overall, was very safe.  It was a rare company that their bonds lost some or all value.  Why?  Because business debt is supposed to involve two expenditures, and historically and traditionally it did.  One is relating costs to current income.  The other is allocating spending to capital goods.  In government, an excess of spending is called a deficit.  In business, it is called an investment.  Rarely does a business do an investment out of accumulated earnings.  Same for government.  Rather, both issue bonds.  The assets of the company secure that bond.  The full faith and credit of the American government secures Treasury bonds.  The companies borrowed household sector savings to finance their capital outlays.  In other words, families invested their money in corporate bonds to finance machinery, plant, research and development, employee education, and other growth promoting expenditures.  Normally, when a bond becomes due, companies issue new bonds that pay off the old bonds.  The debt as a whole is never paid off.  Instead, debt grows.  Look at the history of companies such as Exxon and AT&T.  Why did their debts grow?  The reason is that their physical capital remains productive.  Why?  Because business regularly replaces and upgrades fixed assets.  There was always an investment into infrastructure.  Hence, corporate debt was a profitable and sound place to invest household, bank and financial company savings.  That all changed with two strategies.  In the 1980’s, corporate debt doubled from $1 trillion to $2 trillion.  Why?  Because companies were taken over with borrowed funds, corporate junk bonds were issued to pay off the acquisition debt, and the companies then stripped of their producing assets.  The result was debt with no income-producing asset to back debt up.  By the 1990’s, making the interest payments on those junk bonds was taking 90 percent of American business’ after-tax income.  Then American business moved from tried and true “nuts and bolts” investment into speculation.  What happens when that speculation turns out badly?  The result is two backbreaking burdens.  The first is on the investors that invested in what turned out to be nothing.  They lost their money.  The second is on the companies that now have to pay the interest on the debt that is not producing an income to service the debt. What was the speculation bought into?  Starting in 2003, American home loans.  The fraud in the origination of American home loans is in more than just the sub-prime loans.  It is in the prime loans as well.  The value never was there in the beginning to secure the home loans.  Five years later, it is even less. Business can not legally print money.  The US Constitution allows the American government to do exactly that.  It issues Treasury bonds.  They are United States government debt.  Treasury bonds purchased by many not friendly or supportive to America.  The American government crowds out states, counties, cities, businesses and individuals when the demand for money is greater then the supply of money.  The American federal government has gotten what it wants at the expense of nonfederal borrowers that do not get what they need to conduct daily government, business and living activities.  Currently, and growing, $12 billion dollars a month is no longer available for nonfederal American needs.  Instead, that cash services this administration’s war debt rapidly soon to exceed a total of 3 trillion dollars ($3,000,000,000,000).  The result of the current American administration’s War on Terror is their war has become the economy of American. 

There was and is nothing wrong with the American rules and regulations that were and are in place to deter, detect and punish mortgage fraud.  America does not need more or a different set of rules and regulations.  The President’s proposal to put the Federal Reserve in charge and expand its functions is illogical.  Although the Federal Reserve Board is in Washington, D.C., the Federal Reserve is no more federal than Federal Express.  It is not part of American government.  The Federal Reserve is an independent monetary authority.  It is a private central banking system for our nation.  It was established in 1913.  It was created to strengthen the nation’s banking activities.  America has twelve Federal Reserve Districts.  Each district has a Federal Reserve Bank.  Its member banks own each Federal Reserve Bank.  The Federal Reserve Board coordinates the twelve Federal Reserve Banks.  It has seven members.  The US Senate advises and consents to the President’s appointments to the Board.  Each serves a fourteen-year term.  What America has needed, and still is in need of, is the enforcement of the existing laws and regulations.  It was lender managers, real estate brokers, real estate appraisers, the National Association of Realtors and all their local versions, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, HUD, VA, FBI, state Attorney Generals, country District Attorneys, local police and sheriffs, state real estate departments, state mortgage departments, state insurance departments, Justice Court judges, District Court judges, and Supreme Court judges that failed to do their jobs when mortgage fraud was brought, as legally required, to their attention.  The result of that failure and the War on Terror is a perfect storm of an American cash and credit shortage and the largest American deficit in its history even when adjusted for inflation.  Today, America owes it deficit to foreigners rather than historically and traditionally to Americans.  The result of that is lowering standard of living in America and the American recession.  Why?  Because that vast transfer of American wealth and cash to foreigners to service the now foreign-owned American debt, and the increasingly deteriorating lack of value in the American home have brought the American economy to the brink of collapse.  That is certain to take other economies with it. Copyright © 2008 Morgana

Ed