Replies to post #88385 on Biotech Values

[bladerunner1717]

grandpatb,

In terms of housing here in California, I can confirm what 10nisman is saying. I know the real estate market pretty well here in Southern CA and I can confirm that there is tremendous demand for housing, but the banks won't lend. Unbelievably, it's even hard to get the banks to move on an all-cash offer.

I have friends in real estate who are going bankrupt, even though there are empty houses and buyers lined up willing to purchase them. The banks are insane. The properties are deteriorating quickly, being trashed or taken over by squatters. The neightborhood associations are in an uproar as they watch their property values decline. (Some are trying to sue the banks.)

I really don't understand what the banks are thinking here; these are deteriorating assets. When deals go through, they are going through at much less than what was offered the banks just a few months previously. (I have heard that the banks are having difficulties locating the paper for the loans. I don't know if this is true or not.)


Bladerunner

[grandpatb]

Sorry I can't provide you with sarcasm; I have no training in that art. Are you suggesting that the firms can't get loans because financial institutions don't want to lend or something else?
It is my belief that the business of banking institutions is to lend if they have available reserves. No doubt many are overleveraged with toxic loans and must work these off their books. But I am damned sure that given available reserves banks would like nothing better than lending at rates that will cover their risks & allow a return.
Do you think that politicians telling banks to make loans solves their liquidity problems or do you think the Fed & Treasury are somehow remiss in their attempts at increasing liquidity thus far? What do your informants think?