1 / 37

Santa Barbara Housing Prices:

Santa Barbara Housing Prices:. Another Dot-Com Bubble? Stephen F. LeRoy, UCSB Department of Economics. SANTA BARBARA COUNTY MEDIAN HOME PRICE. $690,883. Existing Single Family. $634,154. $476,100. $417,700. $302,029. $243,249. $210,768. 92. 94. 96. 98. 00. 02. 04. 06. 08.

finian
Download Presentation

Santa Barbara Housing Prices:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Santa Barbara Housing Prices: Another Dot-Com Bubble? Stephen F. LeRoy, UCSB Department of Economics Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  2. SANTA BARBARA COUNTY MEDIAN HOME PRICE $690,883 Existing Single Family $634,154 $476,100 $417,700 $302,029 $243,249 $210,768 Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08

  3. 50% 45% CALIFORNIA 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% SANTA BARBARA COUNTY 10% 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 Housing Affordability Index Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  4. S o u t h C o a s t S i n g l e F a m i l y H o m e M e d i a n P r i c e $1,000,000 $975,000 Aug 2003 headlines = $950,000 950,000 2003 = $825,000 900,000 2002 = $749,000 850,000 800,000 750,000 700,000 650,000 600,000 Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004 2002 2003 2004

  5. The March 2004 Montecito Median Home Price was $2.3 million. Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  6. 2003 Median Home Prices for Cities in Santa Barbara County All Inclusive $650,722 $557,646 $481,246 454,792$ $291,729 $282,563 $210,453 Buellton Carpinteria Guadalupe Lompoc Santa Barbara Santa Solvang Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004 City Maria

  7. Recently, some signs of leveling off: • Home sales in August dropped 47% relative to a year ago. • Same with condos • Median price Jan-Aug: $1,049,000 • Median price August: $989,000 • - SBNP, September 25 Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  8. What Is A Bubble? • Prices rise, then drop? • Markets are irrational? • What does irrational mean? • With 20-20 hindsight, of course I shouldn’t have bought all those dot-com stocks • Was it obvious at the time? • Anyone could have shorted the NASDAQ … Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  9. Rationality • Economists like to think of people as being rational. • People are doing the best they can, given limited information. • They aren’t making mistakes that are big and obvious Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  10. Of course, a few people are irrational by any definition • But if they dominated markets, there would exist obvious trading strategies by means of which rational people could exploit them • Who are these rational people? What are the trading strategies? Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  11. Rational Bubbles • Here’s a definition of bubbles that doesn’t appeal to irrationality • Suppose rental income (or the service yield of a home) is I dollars per year • The price of an apartment complex in year t is Pt • The return that the market demands (in view of risk, illiquidity) is r • If the expected value next year is Pt+1, what is Pt? Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  12. Return consists of rental income (per dollar of value) plus rate of capital gain: • Solve: Replace t by t+1: Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  13. Now substitute the last equation in the one before: • Keep doing this. Eventually you get: Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  14. Present-Value • Let n go to infinity. • You get that the price of the apartment complex equals the discounted value of its rents Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  15. But only • IF the present value of its price n periods in the future (the right-most term) goes to zero! • But suppose it doesn’t! If this term approaches a positive number, that’s the bubble • So price = fundamental value + bubble • Existence of a bubble is consistent with equilibrium because the rate of return equals r by construction. Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  16. The Bottom Line • Under a rational bubble, rental income per dollar is low, but price is expected to rise so as to generate the appropriate return • This justifies the current price • Therefore I/P is decreasing, as well as low • Investors don’t lose by holding an asset with a bubble • That’s why it’s a rational bubble • What about uncertainty? Doesn’t change the story much: even if the bubble may burst, the bubble may still be consistent with equilibrium, if it grows really fast when it doesn’t burst. Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  17. The task • We have to figure out whether housing prices can be explained by the present value model without bubbles • Or can we explain the price runup only by assuming that there’s a bubble? Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  18. Special cases • Suppose there’s no bubble and that I is constant. Then price is: • So if r is 10%, P=10*I • This is the constant perpetuity formula Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  19. If I grows at rate g, this becomes • This is the growing perpetuity formula • If r=10%, g=5%, P/I = 22. So a growing revenue stream gets a higher price multiple Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  20. Bad News • Price-income multiplier is very sensitive to both r and g: • r=10%, g=5%, P/I = 22 • r=8%, g=5%, P/I =37 • Conclusion: given the margin of error in estimating r and g, it’s hard to get an exact estimate of what P/I should be in the absence of bubbles… Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  21. This checks out. • In Philadelphia, P/I is around 8. In Santa Barbara, it’s maybe 20. Why? Nobody expects rents to grow much in Philadelphia (because they haven’t in the past). • People do expect rents to grow in Santa Barbara (because …). • Equivalently, rental income in Philadelphia is higher than in SB per $ invested, but capital gains are expected to be lower. Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  22. Good News • The constant perpetuity formula can give some guidance in interpreting changes in P/I. • Changes are traceable to variations in r or g Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  23. Suppose there’s a bubble • (Take g=0 for simplicity) • Set Pt equal to some number greater than that implied by the constant perpetuity formula • You can use the relation between Pt, Pt+1, Pt+2,… to calculate future prices. • If there’s no bubble, P = constant. Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  24. Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  25. If there’s a bubble, price rises at an accelerating rate. • It must. Income per dollar invested is dropping, so capital gain rate must be increasing. Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  26. Therefore in a Rational Bubble • P/I rises over time. • That has happened in SB, nationally. Prices now average 20 x rents in parts of CA, Florida. • Was around 10 x rents in 1995. • WSJ, 8/31/04, p. A2 Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  27. The big question • Are people bidding up the price of real estate because • Their estimates of growth rate of rental income have been revised up, • or because the discount factor has dropped (no bubble) • Or • Just because they expect prices to rise (there is a bubble)? Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  28. Rents • SB is a nice place to live • But: it was a nice place (even nicer?) in 1975, when housing prices were much lower • So you really need to argue that people have been finding SB more attractive in the last few years Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  29. That’s possible: with telecommuting, you can trade options without living in Chicago. • Supply of new housing is limited • Boomers are starting to retire ($) • Lots of $ in LA, and many want second homes in SB • But: SB economy looks a lot like the rest of California (remember those affordability indexes). Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  30. Rents have been flat in SB since 2000 or so • It’s possible that investors revised upward their expectations of the growth rate of rental income over the distant future, even though rents are flat now. • But is it plausible? Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  31. Interest rates have dropped. • Were expected to rise in the past 6 months, but they haven’t Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  32. Mortgage rate, 1971-2004 Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  33. Mortgage rate minus CPI growth, 1971-2004 Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  34. Conclusion • I don’t see fundamentals – as reflected in the growing perpetuity formula -- as justifying anything like the price runup that we have seen. • Modest mortgage rate decreases, flat rents don’t justify price doubling in the last several years. • Fundamentals justify high prices in SB • But not this high Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  35. Past Bubbles • Have almost always occurred when there were genuine reasons to be optimistic • 1720 – South Sea bubble (East India Company had a monopoly on English trade with South America) • 1929 – electricity, automobiles • Japanese stock prices, 1980s • 2000 – internet • Same with SB housing Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  36. A good sign: housing prices weathered a recession • However, interest rates will increase sooner or later. • Signs of speculation: purchases of second homes. If there’s a price break, will owners of such properties hang on? Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

  37. Thanks for coming! Economics Forum -- October 26, 2004

More Related