找回密码
 注册
搜索
查看: 850|回复: 14

[转贴] Wall Street Finds Profits by Reducing Mortgages

[复制链接]
发表于 2009-11-22 10:08 PM | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式


本帖最后由 yaobooyao 于 2009-11-22 22:46 编辑

看看这个CNBC 最新的Report, WS 找到了新方法在烂掉的MBS中重新找到利润增长点。

FannieMae, FreddiMac 已经死了一次了,这次有可能再搭上FHA, Ginnie Mae, 还有不长记性的buy-side 机构投资者。反正最后都是政府兜着,比中国还社会主义!

未来美国经济的生死基本上完全拴在了失业率数字的变化上了,就业率的改善才能保证refinanced mortgage loans 不会再次default。  失业率和时间的赛跑!

今天学习了一天的MBS、CMBS、ABS、SBALoan-backed Securities,  突然看到这则消息, 很吃惊!美国的经济主体是私有经济,资本逐利的血腥在这次次贷危机中暴露无疑。 Obama 政府现在真的是面临着次贷危机的二次方了!

FED 加息的时间窗口将变得越来越窄, 越拖时间长就越被动, 越拖就越不可能动手, 拖到滞胀的时候,加不加都无所谓了,历来各国央行对通缩和滞胀都是回天乏术的。 大笨真的是在适当的时候出现在适当的位子上, 恭喜这位老兄!





Wall Street Finds Profits by Reducing Mortgages
HEDGE FUNDS PRIVATE EQUITY
The New York Times
| 22 Nov 2009 | 07:44 PM ET

As millions of Americans struggle to hold on to their homes, Wall Street has found a way to make money from the mortgage mess.

Investment funds are buying billions of dollars’ worth of home loans, discounted from the loans’ original value. Then, in what might seem an act of charity, the funds are helping homeowners by reducing the size of the loans.

But as part of these deals, the mortgages are being refinanced through lenders that work with government agencies like the Federal Housing Administration. This enables the funds to pocket sizable profits by reselling new, government-insured loans to other federal agencies, which then bundle the mortgages into securities for sale to investors.

While homeowners save money, the arrangement shifts nearly all the risk for the loans to the federal government — and, ultimately, taxpayers — at a time when Americans are falling behind on their mortgage payments in record numbers.

For instance, a fund might offer to pay $40 million for a $100 million block of mortgages from a bank in distress. Then the fund could arrange to have some of those loans refinanced into mortgages backed by an agency like the F.H.A. and then sold to an agency like Ginnie Mae. The trick is to persuade the homeowners to refinance those mortgages, by offering to reduce the amounts the homeowners owe.

The profit comes when the refinancings reach more than the $40 million that the fund paid for the block of loans.

The strategy has created an unusual alliance between Wall Street funds that specialize in troubled investments — the industry calls them “vulture” funds — and American homeowners.

But the transactions also add to the potential burden on government agencies, particularly the F.H.A., which has lately taken on an outsize role in the housing market and, some fear, may eventually need to be bailed out at taxpayer expense.

These new mortgage investors thrive in the shadows. Typically, the funds employ intermediaries to contact homeowners and arrange for mortgages to be refinanced.

Homeowners often have no idea who their Wall Street benefactors are. Federal housing officials, too, are in the dark.

Policymakers have encouraged investors and banks to put more consumers into government-backed loans. The total value of these transactions from hedge funds is small compared with the overall housing market.

Housing experts warn that the financial players involved — the investment funds, their intermediaries and certain F.H.A. approved lenders — have a financial incentive to put as many loans as possible into the government’s hands.

“From the borrower’s point of view, landing in a hedge fund or private equity fund that’s willing to write down principal is a gift,” said Howard Glaser, a financial industry consultant and former official at the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

He went on: “From the systemic point of view, there is something disturbing about investors that had substantial short-term profit in backing toxic loans now swooping down to make another profit on cleaning up that mess.”

Steven and Marisela Alva say they do not know who helped them with their mortgage. All they know is that they feel blessed.

Last December, the couple got a letter saying that a firm had purchased the mortgage on their home in Pico Rivera, Calif., from Chase Home Finance for less than its original value. “We want to share this discount with you,” the letter said.

“I couldn’t believe it,” said Mr. Alva, a 62-year-old janitor and father of three. “I kept thinking to myself, ‘Something is wrong, something is wrong. This sounds too good.’ ”

But it was true. The balance on the Alvas’ mortgage was ultimately reduced to $314,000 from $440,000.

The firm behind the reduction remains a mystery. The Alvas’ new loan, backed by the F.H.A., was made by Primary Residential Mortgage, a lender based in Utah. But the letter came from a company called MCM Capital Partners.

In the letter, MCM said the couple’s loan was owned by something called MCMCap Homeowners’ Advantage Trust III. But MCM’s co-founders said in an interview that MCM does not own any mortgages. They would not reveal the investor that owned the Alvas’ loan because they had agreed to keep that client’s identity confidential.

Michael Niccolini, an MCM founder, said, “We are changing people’s lives.”

In Washington, mortgage funds are lobbying for policies that favor their investments, particularly mortgages held in securitized bundles. They want more mortgage balances to be lowered, which might help mortgage bonds perform better. Big banks generally oppose such reductions, which lock in banks’ losses on the loans.

In April, about a dozen investment firms formed a group called the Mortgage Investors Coalition to press their case. One investor who is speaking out is Wilbur L. Ross, who runs a fund that buys mortgages and owns a large mortgage servicing company.

Mr. Ross said modifications that simply lower interest rates or lengthen the duration of a loan, as is typical in the government modification program, do not work well.

“They make a payment or two, but then one night the husband and wife will sit down at the table and say, ‘Do we really want to make 140 monthly payments into a rat hole?’ ” Mr. Ross said.

The Fortress Investment Group, a hedge fund in New York, is one of the firms at the forefront of picking through mortgages. Fortress created a $3 billion credit fund in 2008 partly to buy loans from banks like Citigroup, which were under pressure to purge loans to raise cash.

“They’re going ahead and they are refinancing them and getting their money out right away,” said Roger Smith, an analyst at Fox-Pitt Kelton. “What Fortress is doing is actually good for the borrower.” Congress, however, may not be happy that hedge funds are making money this way, Mr. Smith said.

Fortress, which declined to comment, typically buys batches of loans and works with other companies to evaluate which ones might qualify for F.H.A., Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac refinancing.

Sometimes Fortress works with Nationstar, a mortgage servicer and originator that it owns. Other times, Fortress uses an outside partner like Meridias Capital, a lender in Henderson, Nev., that once originated Alt-A loans, which are just above subprime.

After the mortgage market imploded, Meridias began dissecting portfolios of troubled loans for investment funds.

Because firms like Fortress purchase blocks of mortgages at distressed prices, they are able to reduce the principal amount of the loans. Nick Florez, president of Meridias, calls such transactions an “incentive refinance.” He said he would not agree to take a loan unless he could help the homeowner. He said he was able to reduce the loan amount by 11 percent on average.

“I’m giving money away,” said Mr. Florez, who is a 35-year-old Las Vegas native. “It’s really a feel-good business.”

It is too early to know how the new loans will work.

David H. Stevens, the new commissioner of the F.H.A., said he was monitoring F.H.A. lenders but did not have thorough information about which ones work with distressed investors. So far he has not seen a problem from loans coming from hedge funds.

“They’re helping to protect people in their homes and they’re refinancing people from a distressed situation,” he said.

But he acknowledged that funds have an incentive to aggressively push homeowners into federally guaranteed loans, since the investors get their money back as soon as they complete the refinancing.

Seth Wheeler, a senior adviser in the Treasury Department who specializes in housing policy, declined to say whether the investment firms that are lowering principal for homeowners are altruistic or not.

“Investors are doing it where it both benefits the investor and the borrower,” he said.

Part of the risk may be determined by how the funds compensate the F.H.A. lenders and whether the lenders are beholden to the funds for business.

David Zitting, the chief executive of Primary Residential Mortgage, the company that refinanced the Alva family’s loan, said his company did not receive fees from the hedge funds.

“They have all sorts of motivations that, frankly, we don’t understand,” he said. “We don’t do anything special for them because that’s not fair lending.”

The Alvas had to dip into their savings to qualify for their new federally insured loan, since the biggest F.H.A. mortgage they could get was for $285,000, they said. They paid off $21,000 in credit-card and car loans, and put up an additional $29,000 for their new mortgage, depleting their already meager savings.

Brian Chappelle, a mortgage consultant, said loans to people like the Alvas, with modest incomes and scant savings, could turn out to be risky.

“It does raise risk concerns for F.H.A.,” he said.

The Alvas are grateful for the help. Their home is, Marisela said, a dream come true. “I’m very happy,” she said. “We never thought this was possible.”
This story originally appeared in the The New York Times

URL: http://www.cnbc.com/id/34098888/page/2/[/url]
发表于 2009-11-22 10:34 PM | 显示全部楼层
ding
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-22 10:48 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2009-11-22 11:03 PM | 显示全部楼层

Diffusion 发表于 2009-11-22 22:48


这简直象一个嗜赌成性的投机者,第一次因为Margin Call 腰斩了, 然后不死心,又全Margin 上。。。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-22 11:17 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-22 11:39 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 lite1067 于 2009-11-22 23:50 编辑

FNM and FRE claimed they were sufficiently capitalized -- two months before the federal bailout. Now they are on the life-line support for nearly $200B and growing.

FHA claimed they didn't need a bailout - two months before audit reported their capital is less than 0%. FHA is insuring mortgage loans with as little as 3.5% down-payment.  

Fed has purchased nearly all the new (conforming) MBS issuance in 2009. They virtually drove the private sector out of the mortgage business. Anyone trying to fiance or refinace a jumbo loan would understand.

Are these people in White House, Fed, Congress, and wall st out of their minds? No. Actually they are in such a great cooperation in attempting to inflate the debt away.
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-22 11:44 PM | 显示全部楼层
这简直象一个嗜赌成性的投机者,第一次因为Margin Call 腰斩了, 然后不死心,又全Margin 上。。。
yaobooyao 发表于 2009-11-22 23:03


&^$% 这些人之所以这么疯狂,是因为FRE/FMN/FHA亏了都是纳税人来扛。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-23 12:06 AM | 显示全部楼层
什么纳税人这个那个,金融系统真倒了你们就不需要交税了,直接饿死更直截了当些!
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-23 01:08 AM | 显示全部楼层
未必是纳税人来扛, 反正最后fed把它买回去就是了. 通胀或者滞胀来的时候, 还是底层的人最倒霉.
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-23 02:59 AM | 显示全部楼层
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-23 07:19 PM | 显示全部楼层
So, any impact on your trading decision?
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2009-11-23 07:27 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 yaobooyao 于 2009-11-23 19:29 编辑
So, any impact on your trading decision?
joep 发表于 2009-11-23 19:19


You might keep away from regional banks for sure,  and those monoline insurance companies like MBIA, ABK, they will die twice.

Anything you want to go long, look for those sectors benefiting from weak dollar, and with bigger overseas revenues.

If you want to buy dip on homebuilders, you may have it even cheaper if you wait a bit longer.

If you want to buy a house, wait for the 2nd round peak of the newly conforming refinanced mortgage going delinquency.
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2009-11-23 07:33 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 yaobooyao 于 2009-11-23 19:39 编辑
FNM and FRE claimed they were sufficiently capitalized -- two months before the federal bailout. Now they are on the life-line support for nearly $200B and growing.

FHA claimed they didn't need a  ...
lite1067 发表于 2009-11-22 23:39


这些PE 买入MBS 之后, 对MBS 的Pool Of Mortgages 中的default 了的减principle refinance 的过程中, 就像以前一样, 对borrower 的收入(尤其其稳定性)的考核还是大放水的状态。他们只关心refinance 的Mortgage loan 符合所谓的conforming criteria, 然后就可以重新打包制造新的MBS Passthrough bonds 或者CMO, 所以又可以打上AAA级的标志去卖了。如果过几个月,又有borrower  失业失去收入了呢, 不是又default 了?

100M$  par value 的MBS, 银行甩卖才值40M$, 这帮PE 给那些default 了的Borrower 减10~20% principle (比政府的Program 大方多了),重新出Mortgage, 然后再打包发新的MBS,只要卖高过40M$+ Service Fee + capital Expense,  绝对是赚个盆满钵满。如果理论值卖出80% 原PAR Value, 几乎等于赚一倍。

评分

1

查看全部评分

回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-23 08:07 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 svntn 于 2009-11-23 20:11 编辑

these funds make money at the expense of the banks, not the government. they do the dirty job that the banks don't want to do and make money out of it. Those mortgages are not sub-primes loans, these are eligible for government agency purchase at the first place.

Also, these funds are not considered Wall Street by Wall Street - clearly reveal the target of this article is main street average Joes and through them to achieve some sort of political agenda.
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2009-11-23 08:37 PM | 显示全部楼层
14# svntn


Something close to the public-private partnership Washington promoted to fix the mess a while ago?
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

手机版|小黑屋|www.hutong9.net

GMT-5, 2025-7-24 02:33 AM , Processed in 0.058632 second(s), 19 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.5

© 2001-2024 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表