In what is possibly the most historic event in most young peoples lives (under 40) the first African-America ever has been elected to the highest office in the land.
I congratulate Barack Obama and Joe Biden on their election victory. John McCain was gracious in defeat and gained my utmost respect with his concession speech. Cheers to John McCain.
Now President-elect Obama can look forward to undoing all the wrong that has been done to this country and the world. Best of luck!
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
The End of the World as We Know It?
Maybe not that bad, but troubles in the financial markets are starting to cause some grave concerns with government officials. As if Fannie and Freddie weren't enough, over the weekend Merrill Lynch was bought (read: saved) by Bank of America, Lehman Brothers (all 158 years of it's history) chose to declare bankruptcy, and AIG (just the largest insurance company in the country) started pursuing large amounts of capital or it was threatening to go the way of Lehman (AIG's story is still developing).
Talking heads are using terms like "changing landscape of Wall Street" and the "end of Wall Street as we knew it". And they're probably correct. Now that Bear, Merrill and Lehman are effectively nothing more than memories now, and only two large investment banking firms are left standing (Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley), the face of Wall Street has indeed changed. There are plenty of things to argue about regarding the current crisis and these failed institutions. It's just a question of where to begin?
Should these firms have been bailed out?
Could this whole mess have been avoided? And who's to blame?
Where do we go from here? How do we avoid the same mistakes?
Talking heads are using terms like "changing landscape of Wall Street" and the "end of Wall Street as we knew it". And they're probably correct. Now that Bear, Merrill and Lehman are effectively nothing more than memories now, and only two large investment banking firms are left standing (Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley), the face of Wall Street has indeed changed. There are plenty of things to argue about regarding the current crisis and these failed institutions. It's just a question of where to begin?
Should these firms have been bailed out?
Could this whole mess have been avoided? And who's to blame?
Where do we go from here? How do we avoid the same mistakes?
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
US Govt Bails Out Fannie and Freddie
Over the weekend, the U.S. Government stepped in and took over the two beleaguered GSEs (government sponsored enterprises) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The move was not unexpected and was almost anticipated, but the rapidity with which the move was made caught some folks off guard. On Friday, September 5th, Fannie Mae stock was actually trading up before the close, and had been climbing over the last couple of weeks. To think that the folks buying the stock (or even short-covering) would make this decision in the face of a takeover makes little or no sense. Therefore, it seems this move caught atleast some folks unawares.
The Street had been clamoring for this move for the past six months, and maybe twelve, and they've finally been satisfied. Fannie's stock was down to $0.70 on the monday after the announcement and Freddie was similarly down, in anticipation of common shareholders being almost if not entirely wiped out. Now that the Street has it's desire, does this make sense and will it help the housing and mortgage markets improve? The idea is that with the government's explicit guarantee, debt issued by the GSEs and their mortgage-backed securities, should carry less perceived risk and therefore have lower yields. Sure enough, on the mortgage rate side, rates have come down, in some cases substantially. However, is this a trend or a momentary blip on the radar? Several analysts are indicating that the housing market still has more downside and until inventory subsides and prices stabilize, the bailout of the two GSEs will not have significant material impact. I say that this is the beginning of the capitulation and the market had to go through this period before any kind of recovery could occur.
Maybe of more significance is the status of the banking system and the health of those institutions that the economy will ultimately look to as credit facilities. The toxin that exists in the market place must be removed for the economy to make any kind of recovery. As long as concern and uncertainty about the health of the debt and assets of the two GSEs continued, the credit market was not going to recover but was going to continue to flounder, as too many credit market participants were holding their securities. Now that the government has stepped in, these securities should strengthen and with them the health of most of these credit providing entities.
The Street had been clamoring for this move for the past six months, and maybe twelve, and they've finally been satisfied. Fannie's stock was down to $0.70 on the monday after the announcement and Freddie was similarly down, in anticipation of common shareholders being almost if not entirely wiped out. Now that the Street has it's desire, does this make sense and will it help the housing and mortgage markets improve? The idea is that with the government's explicit guarantee, debt issued by the GSEs and their mortgage-backed securities, should carry less perceived risk and therefore have lower yields. Sure enough, on the mortgage rate side, rates have come down, in some cases substantially. However, is this a trend or a momentary blip on the radar? Several analysts are indicating that the housing market still has more downside and until inventory subsides and prices stabilize, the bailout of the two GSEs will not have significant material impact. I say that this is the beginning of the capitulation and the market had to go through this period before any kind of recovery could occur.
Maybe of more significance is the status of the banking system and the health of those institutions that the economy will ultimately look to as credit facilities. The toxin that exists in the market place must be removed for the economy to make any kind of recovery. As long as concern and uncertainty about the health of the debt and assets of the two GSEs continued, the credit market was not going to recover but was going to continue to flounder, as too many credit market participants were holding their securities. Now that the government has stepped in, these securities should strengthen and with them the health of most of these credit providing entities.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Fed Leaves Benchmark Rate Unchanged
The Fed left it's target fed funds rate at 2.0%, as widely expected. The stock market cheered the non-change and the Dow rallied over 200 points. The url below links to the Board of Governor's website and the FOMC statement:
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20080805a.htm
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20080805a.htm
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Bush Signs Housing Bill
President Bush signed the Housing bill at 7 AM ET Wednesday morning to little if no fanfare.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and a couple of others were on hand to oversee the signing.
One can only surmise distaste of the bill on the part of the Republicans by the perfunctory manner in which such seminal legislation was passed by the White House. Not to mention the importance the legislation will play in helping the U.S. housing market, as well as the economy as a whole, in its attempt at recovery.
Leading up to the signing of the bill Republicans were objecting to the possibility of using taxpayer money to bail out the two GSEs (government sponsored enterprises) FNMA and Freddie Mac. $25 billion was the estimated amount of taxpayer money that may be required to bail out the two mortgage finance companies. The objection is heard and noted, however, why would the use of taxpayer funds be so objectionable if it is taxpayers as a whole that will most certainly benefit by a healthy mortgage secondary market as provided by the two GSEs? It is also understood that not all taxpayers are homeowners and therefore should not have to contribute their hard earned tax dollars to the bail out. True enough. However, most renters do aspire to be homeowners one day, and if they hope to achieve that goal, it will be reliant upon the existence of the two mortgage giants to make that happen. In essence, all taxpayers have a vested interest in the existence of the GSEs and if the tab were to be $25 billion or some other such amount, it doesn't sound like a price too high to pay.
* * *
Think of NMZ Financial & Markenomics for residential mortgage and home loan needs for Lamorinda, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Contra Costa County and all Bay Area and Califorina real estate.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Lawmakers Agree on Bill To Bail Out FNMA & Freddie Mac
On Wednesday, July 23, the House of Representatives is set to approve a bill aimed at alleviating the current housing crisis as well as rescuing FNMA & Freddie Mac, the two government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). Part of the bill will authorize Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to bail out the two GSEs and place few restrictions on the two large mortgage finance providers.
Please click on the links below to go to the homepages of both FNMA and Freddie Mac.
http://www.freddiemac.com/
A previous obstacle to the success of the bill was the veto threat by the Bush administration due to the bills provision to provide $3.9 billion to communities for the purchase of foreclosed properties.
The bill appears to leave the two GSEs basically intact as autonomous organizations with few additional limitations which would have possibly harmed common shareholders. The bill does not impose any restrictions on the GSEs abilities to continue to pay dividends to shareholders. Also important is the point that the Treasury will not receive preferential treatment over other shareholders if it decides to inject capital into the GSEs through the purchase of preferred shares of the GSEs.
The bill does add provisions for a stronger regulator of the two GSEs as well as additional oversight. The Fed has already begun reviewing the books of the GSEs to verify their capital position and liquidity. One goal of the bill is to enhance the market's confidence in the GSEs. FNMA and Freddie Mac common stock is down 66% and 72% this year, respectively. The importance of the companies to the American financial system and economy as a whole cannot be overstated. With the collapse of the secondary market for morgages and Wall Street's inability and unwillingness to participate in its recovery, FNMA and Freddie Mac remain two of the few options for creating a market for mortgages, along with lesser known GNMA and FHA.
One pleasing aspect of the bill to both borrowers and lenders in high cost housing markets, such as the Bay Area, is the higher cap on loan amounts that will result. The new conforming loan limit would become $625,000, or the median home price plus 15%, for both FNMA and Freddie Mac.
A previous obstacle to the success of the bill was the veto threat by the Bush administration due to the bills provision to provide $3.9 billion to communities for the purchase of foreclosed properties.
The bill appears to leave the two GSEs basically intact as autonomous organizations with few additional limitations which would have possibly harmed common shareholders. The bill does not impose any restrictions on the GSEs abilities to continue to pay dividends to shareholders. Also important is the point that the Treasury will not receive preferential treatment over other shareholders if it decides to inject capital into the GSEs through the purchase of preferred shares of the GSEs.
The bill does add provisions for a stronger regulator of the two GSEs as well as additional oversight. The Fed has already begun reviewing the books of the GSEs to verify their capital position and liquidity. One goal of the bill is to enhance the market's confidence in the GSEs. FNMA and Freddie Mac common stock is down 66% and 72% this year, respectively. The importance of the companies to the American financial system and economy as a whole cannot be overstated. With the collapse of the secondary market for morgages and Wall Street's inability and unwillingness to participate in its recovery, FNMA and Freddie Mac remain two of the few options for creating a market for mortgages, along with lesser known GNMA and FHA.
One pleasing aspect of the bill to both borrowers and lenders in high cost housing markets, such as the Bay Area, is the higher cap on loan amounts that will result. The new conforming loan limit would become $625,000, or the median home price plus 15%, for both FNMA and Freddie Mac.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
SEC's Unusual & Interesting Move On Short-Selling
On Tuesday, July 15th, the SEC made the unprecedented move of limiting short selling in certain stocks in the financial sector. Viewing the financial sector as already weakened, the SEC made the radical move to prevent further weakness to many beleaguered companies in the sector, most notably, FNMA and FHMLC, amongst others. The past week has seen massive selling in the stocks of the two GSEs (government sponsored enterprises) and brokerage firm Lehman Brothers. In an ironic twist, it should be noted that the two GSEs stock declines picked up intensity on a Lehman Brothers analyst's research report, that received much media attention over the July 4th weekend, regarding the two companies weak capital positions exacerbated by a FASB accounting rule change (which, again ironically, the analyst conceded would not even apply to the two GSEs).
Short selling is the act of selling a stock that is not owned but borrowed and then sold. The action the SEC is limiting is the act of "naked" short selling, that is, selling stock that is not owned while no attempt is made to borrower the stock. In short selling, money is made by selling at a higher price and buying the stock back at a lower price, the difference being the profit. The SEC is limiting naked short selling for the next 30 days, starting Monday, July 21st.
Because FNMA and FHMLC play such a significant role in the housing industry and are critical in the sector's recovery, the Federal government has been active in trying to shore up confidence in the two GSEs. Their declining stock values and eroding investor confidence make it harder for each to raise capital, and this week Moody's Ratings Agency downgraded the preferred stock and bank rating of each. One trader referred to the stock declines as "thermonuclear". The following url links to a Fortune magazine article on Moody's downgrade.
http://dailybriefing.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/07/15/moodys-casts-jaundiced-eye-on-fannie-freddie/?source=yahoo_quote
Although the SEC's move seems dramatic and radical, it is believed that such a move will have little impact on curbing the short selling in the market place and will do little more than make it mildly more expensive for short sellers to operate. Many argue that short sellers are a necessary part of a healthy market as the action alerts the market to overpriced securities and naturally deflates inflating bubbles.
I think the US Government has stood by long enough and cannot afford to let the market dictate the fate of the two GSEs. I have never believed in a purely capitalistic model, and the Governments role, however limited, must exist as a safeguard in unusual circumstances, and these circumstances continue to become more and more unusual.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
FNMA & Freddie Mac - Could They Really Fail?
On July 7th, FNMA (Federal National Mortgage Association) and Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation) stock declined over 15% each to 14 year lows, primarily based on capitalization concerns. A Lehman Brother analyst surmised that an accounting rule change (FASB) would require the two GSEs (Government Sponsored Enterprises) raise as much as $75 billion in additional capital to meet the new capital requirements.
As it turned out, that same analyst conceded that the possible rule change would not apply to either GSE and that they would be exempt from having to raise the additional capital to meet the requirement. Unfortunately for investors of both GSEs and for the GSEs themselves, the damage had been done. On Wednesday, July 9th, FNMA issued $3 billion in two-year notes and paid the highest spread to date on those notes. The yield spread to comparable U.S. treasury securities was 74 basis points (0.74%). By way of comparison, last month FNMA issued $4 billion in two-year notes and the spread to comparable U.S. treasury securities was 65 basis points.
What does this mean? Basically, it is costing FNMA more to raise capital today compared to yesterday. This raises their cost of capital and to maintain their profit margin, it means higher rates for investors and therefore higher rates for borrowers who want to purchase a new home or refinance their current home.
If both GSEs have implied government backing, that presumably means the U.S. Government would not let them fail, why is there so much fear on the "Street" about their well-being? It could be that the "Street" does not believe the Government would come through and bail either out in the unlikely event that they fail. Or, it could be that the investing community views a worst-case scenario equating to a Government bail-out with no remaining equity for investors. I am not sure what, if anything, will come to pass, however, the credit markets are giving their own interpretation of FNMA's well-being and it's not very positive.
As it turned out, that same analyst conceded that the possible rule change would not apply to either GSE and that they would be exempt from having to raise the additional capital to meet the requirement. Unfortunately for investors of both GSEs and for the GSEs themselves, the damage had been done. On Wednesday, July 9th, FNMA issued $3 billion in two-year notes and paid the highest spread to date on those notes. The yield spread to comparable U.S. treasury securities was 74 basis points (0.74%). By way of comparison, last month FNMA issued $4 billion in two-year notes and the spread to comparable U.S. treasury securities was 65 basis points.
What does this mean? Basically, it is costing FNMA more to raise capital today compared to yesterday. This raises their cost of capital and to maintain their profit margin, it means higher rates for investors and therefore higher rates for borrowers who want to purchase a new home or refinance their current home.
If both GSEs have implied government backing, that presumably means the U.S. Government would not let them fail, why is there so much fear on the "Street" about their well-being? It could be that the "Street" does not believe the Government would come through and bail either out in the unlikely event that they fail. Or, it could be that the investing community views a worst-case scenario equating to a Government bail-out with no remaining equity for investors. I am not sure what, if anything, will come to pass, however, the credit markets are giving their own interpretation of FNMA's well-being and it's not very positive.
Friday, June 27, 2008
The Week that Was: The Markets
Many investors and traders are glad this week is safely in the rear view mirror.
After resisting poor economic news and even poorer earnings forecasts, the equity markets finally succumbed to a painful sell off. Following are what the numbers look like (for the week ending June 27): the Dow: down 4.1% to close at 11,346; the S&P 500: down 2.9% to close at 1,278; the Nasdaq: down 3.8% to close at 2,315.
On Friday, money fleeing equities found solace in the treasuries with the 10-year treasury price rising 18/32, or $5.96 per $1,000 face amount, sending its yield down 7 basis points to 3.96%. For the week, the yield was down 20 basis points, the biggest one week decline since February.
Oil and energy prices continue to confound. Oil hit a intraday high of $142.99 before settling at $140.25. Oil is up 45% year-to-date. Cash continues to seek the safety and inflation hedge that gold offers. Gold rose $16.20 to close at $931.30.
Pundits continue to exclaim that we still have not seen the bottom and more pain is coming in the form of increasing oil and energy costs and lower equity values. Particularly vulnerable has been the financial sector. Most of the big name banks and brokerages are testing 52-week lows with "experts" claiming they are still overvalued and further declines are forthcoming. It's hard to argue with them until the market shows some resilience and buyers come in looking for oversold value plays. Most investors and traders will tell you that they will sit on the sidelines until the market shows signs of stabilizing and only then will they wade back into equities. Usually, by the time that happens most have missed very good opportunities.
After resisting poor economic news and even poorer earnings forecasts, the equity markets finally succumbed to a painful sell off. Following are what the numbers look like (for the week ending June 27): the Dow: down 4.1% to close at 11,346; the S&P 500: down 2.9% to close at 1,278; the Nasdaq: down 3.8% to close at 2,315.
On Friday, money fleeing equities found solace in the treasuries with the 10-year treasury price rising 18/32, or $5.96 per $1,000 face amount, sending its yield down 7 basis points to 3.96%. For the week, the yield was down 20 basis points, the biggest one week decline since February.
Oil and energy prices continue to confound. Oil hit a intraday high of $142.99 before settling at $140.25. Oil is up 45% year-to-date. Cash continues to seek the safety and inflation hedge that gold offers. Gold rose $16.20 to close at $931.30.
Pundits continue to exclaim that we still have not seen the bottom and more pain is coming in the form of increasing oil and energy costs and lower equity values. Particularly vulnerable has been the financial sector. Most of the big name banks and brokerages are testing 52-week lows with "experts" claiming they are still overvalued and further declines are forthcoming. It's hard to argue with them until the market shows some resilience and buyers come in looking for oversold value plays. Most investors and traders will tell you that they will sit on the sidelines until the market shows signs of stabilizing and only then will they wade back into equities. Usually, by the time that happens most have missed very good opportunities.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Fed Leaves Rates Unchanged
At the Feds regularly scheduled FOMC (Federal Open Market Committee) meeting on June 25, 2008, the Fed left it's fed funds target rate at 2%, as widely expected. The Fed's statement indicated more concern over rising inflation and less concern over economic growth. The following url will lead to the actual statement on the Board of Governors website:
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20080625a.htm
The Markets reaction to the statement was subdued as most participants anticipated that the Fed would stand pat on rates. An hour after the release of the statement, equities were off their highs and the treasuries have strengthened, sending their yields lower.
Only one Fed governor, Richard W. Fisher, voted in favor of raising the target rate. I think Mr. Fishers vote in favor of raising rates is indicative of the direction the Fed will likely go in the near future. It was probably too soon to raise rates at this meeting, but as we go forward, the need to raise rates will only increase, and the Markets will likely expect it.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20080625a.htm
The Markets reaction to the statement was subdued as most participants anticipated that the Fed would stand pat on rates. An hour after the release of the statement, equities were off their highs and the treasuries have strengthened, sending their yields lower.
Only one Fed governor, Richard W. Fisher, voted in favor of raising the target rate. I think Mr. Fishers vote in favor of raising rates is indicative of the direction the Fed will likely go in the near future. It was probably too soon to raise rates at this meeting, but as we go forward, the need to raise rates will only increase, and the Markets will likely expect it.
Greenspan's Comments are laughable
The headlines blare out into the ether "Economy on brink of recession, Greenspan says".
http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSJAT00371420080624?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&rpc=23&sp=true
You might ask yourself why I say they are laughable. Well, well my friends of gloom and doom it was only a few short years ago that Alan Greenspan was the wizard of the goldilocks economy and he could do no wrong. I find it funny that the man at least on the surface of the situation most responsible for the structural problems he laments about says that he was responsible for nothing. (Please read excerpt from article in case you do not have time to read the link for the article above.)
Greenspan said he did not believe arguments that the housing problems in the U.S. were due to interest rates being too low during his tenure. "As far as I'm concerned, the data do not support it (that argument). The housing bubble is clearly an international phenomenon."
Hmmmm! Mr. Greenspan seems to forget that the USD had become the reserve currency of the world. It would allow lesser minds, such as mine, to assume that low interest rates on borrowing of the USD would help to fuel the speculation not only in housing in USA but in markets all over the world. Not to mention the practice of Wall Street buying up all sorts of paper and debt instruments. Then slicing, dicing, and repackaging them to sell in the open markets to friends and supposed foes alike. Ever ask yourself why there were buyers? Answer, because the good ol' USA was still seen as a Nation that looked like it knew what it was doing. The world had a begrudging respect for our business and financial institutions and people who ran them. To be simple about it. They trusted our leaders in business and finance knew what they were doing! Well Kiss that trust good bye, it went up in smoke with the housing and mortgage industries. We are now in uncharted territory. And unfortunately for Al he's the poster boy. He let the guests drink from the punch bowl long after the party should have ended.
I am not even going to try and delve into detail about the housing market in the United States and what caused this train wreck. Mr. Greenspan is just one culprit of many whom should have known better all the way down to the borrower who should have known they were living way beyond their means. We will save the vitriol for the remaining players in and around that industry for later posts. Suffice to say Greenspan only wants to be remembered for the good times. Unfortunately sometimes the good times are at the expense of others at a later date.
My only advice for Greenspan and his crowd of cheer leaders, albeit much smaller since he left office, are these words which at the moment I do not know who to give credit (possibly Mark Twain).
"When you take responsibility for the sunshine, you better be prepared to take the blame for the rain!"
Well Mr. Greenspan, it's raining.
Asland
http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSJAT00371420080624?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&rpc=23&sp=true
You might ask yourself why I say they are laughable. Well, well my friends of gloom and doom it was only a few short years ago that Alan Greenspan was the wizard of the goldilocks economy and he could do no wrong. I find it funny that the man at least on the surface of the situation most responsible for the structural problems he laments about says that he was responsible for nothing. (Please read excerpt from article in case you do not have time to read the link for the article above.)
Greenspan said he did not believe arguments that the housing problems in the U.S. were due to interest rates being too low during his tenure. "As far as I'm concerned, the data do not support it (that argument). The housing bubble is clearly an international phenomenon."
Hmmmm! Mr. Greenspan seems to forget that the USD had become the reserve currency of the world. It would allow lesser minds, such as mine, to assume that low interest rates on borrowing of the USD would help to fuel the speculation not only in housing in USA but in markets all over the world. Not to mention the practice of Wall Street buying up all sorts of paper and debt instruments. Then slicing, dicing, and repackaging them to sell in the open markets to friends and supposed foes alike. Ever ask yourself why there were buyers? Answer, because the good ol' USA was still seen as a Nation that looked like it knew what it was doing. The world had a begrudging respect for our business and financial institutions and people who ran them. To be simple about it. They trusted our leaders in business and finance knew what they were doing! Well Kiss that trust good bye, it went up in smoke with the housing and mortgage industries. We are now in uncharted territory. And unfortunately for Al he's the poster boy. He let the guests drink from the punch bowl long after the party should have ended.
I am not even going to try and delve into detail about the housing market in the United States and what caused this train wreck. Mr. Greenspan is just one culprit of many whom should have known better all the way down to the borrower who should have known they were living way beyond their means. We will save the vitriol for the remaining players in and around that industry for later posts. Suffice to say Greenspan only wants to be remembered for the good times. Unfortunately sometimes the good times are at the expense of others at a later date.
My only advice for Greenspan and his crowd of cheer leaders, albeit much smaller since he left office, are these words which at the moment I do not know who to give credit (possibly Mark Twain).
"When you take responsibility for the sunshine, you better be prepared to take the blame for the rain!"
Well Mr. Greenspan, it's raining.
Asland
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Fire in the Economy
What is going on in today's economy. Is it the WAR or is it Inflation or is it just stupidity in Washington. You will see over the next coming weeks and months discussions about the weaknesses in our leaders. Markenomics is going to discuss these topics and more. Markenomics with authors Raider Mike (Mike Hurtado also Michael Hurtado) and Road Rage will contribute to making Markenomics a insightful blog to read and follow. Economic and political commentary will be the most discussed topics. Look for Mark Zinman of NMZ Financial, a home loan residential mortgage company and mortgage broker of Lafayette, California and the Walnut Creek area, and the broader Bay Area to contribute to discussions on home loans and mortgages. Discussions on mortgages, home loans, equity lines of credit, FNMA, Freddie Mac, the two GSEs, and other big mortgage related finance companies. Raider Mike will analyze the market place and the influence these companies will have on the financial system and the economy as a whole. See Through the Forest is the name of the url and it's name is exactly what it sounds like: to see through the forest and glean what we can from what is happening in the U.S. economy and it's impact on you and your mortgage and home finance needs. This is also a mortgage and real estate blog for the Bay Area of California, Contra Costa County real estate and mortage and home loan information and beyond. Lafayette, California real estate and mortgage home loans will be discussed as well as mortgage rate quotes, not just in Lafayette, but Dublin, Pleasanton, Pleasant Hill and Orinda. Orinda real estate and home loans will be discussed. All of the communities that make up Contra Costa County real estate and mortgage home loans. Lamorinda home loans and real estate. Lamorinda is a combination of communities of Lafayette, Moraga, and Orinda.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
