Dow+166.42up+1.61%
10,484.58
Nasdaq+41.26up+1.92%
2,187.30
S&P+20.03up+1.84%
1,111.41

MSN Money video

Video on MSN Money
This video player requires the installation of the free Adobe Flash Player
More video on MSN Money
Arrow © Photodisc/Superstock // Arrow © Photodisc/Superstock

Extra6/24/2009 11:50 AM ET

4 of America's nastiest housing busts

A look at other big downturns of the past 3 decades suggests that recovery from the current housing crash could take years.

[Related content: homes, home prices, mortgage, housing, recession]
By MSN Money staff

How long until housing recovers its losses?

A long time, if history is any guide. The Federal Housing Finance Agency last week released a study of real-estate downturns since 1975, tracking home prices from the quarter in which the declines began to the quarter in which inflation-adjusted prices returned to their previous highs.

Prices typically fell for three years and nine months, the agency said, but the average recovery took nearly twice that long: six years and eight months.

If that sounds depressing, consider the length of recovery times in the four regional housing busts the paper studied. On average, home prices in Texas are still 15% below their inflation-adjusted peak -- reached in 1982.

The study, using regional and metro housing data going back four decades, went on to examine four busts in greater detail. The authors, however, cautioned that comparisons between historical regional busts and the current national one are limited; each of those studied was provoked by a sharp drop in employment, while the current bust was triggered by careless lending and borrowing practices.

Below the charts are summaries of each bust from the agency's report.

The New England bust:

Metro areaPeakBottomDepreciationFull recovery

Hartford, Conn.

1988 Q2

1997 Q2

40.7%

New Haven-Milford, Conn.

1988 Q2

1997 Q2

40.6%

2005 Q2

Manchester-Nashua, N.H.

1988 Q2

1995 Q1

39.2%

2002 Q4

Kingston, N.Y.

1988 Q2

1996 Q4

39.1%

2003 Q3

Rockingham County-Strafford County, N.H.

1987 Q4

1994 Q4

38.0%

2002 Q2

Binghamton, N.Y.

1988 Q1

1997 Q1

37.7%

Barnstable Town, Mass.

1988 Q1

1994 Q4

36.5%

2001 Q2

Norwich-New London, Conn.

1988 Q4

1996 Q3

36.2%

2004 Q2

Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, Conn.

1987 Q3

1996 Q4

34.4%

2003 Q3

Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, N.Y.

1988 Q1

1997 Q3

33.9%

2003 Q1

Worcester, Mass.

1988 Q2

1995 Q1

32.9%

2002 Q1

Springfield, Mass.

1988 Q4

1996 Q3

32.5%

2004 Q2

The New England economy began to weaken in 1988. In prior years, unemployment in the region had fallen to 3%, and per capita income had climbed to 123% of the national average. However, a more competitive computer industry, the end of the Cold War (and a resulting decline in defense contracts) and elevated business costs eventually resulted in high unemployment and high commercial and residential vacancy rates.

Real-estate prices reached a sharp peak in the second quarter of 1988 and fell dramatically after that, ultimately dropping more than 32%. Prices bottomed out in the first quarter of 1997, at which point a relatively speedy recovery ensued. Ultimately, the New England housing cycle included a nearly nine-year period of decline followed by a brief recovery of just under five years to its previous peak.

The California bust:

Metro areaPeakBottomDepreciationFull recovery

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, Calif.

1989 Q4

1997 Q2

36.7%

2003 Q2

Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, Calif.

1989 Q3

1997 Q1

35.3%

2002 Q3

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif.

1990 Q1

1997 Q2

33.9%

2002 Q4

Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, Calif.

1989 Q4

1997 Q1

33.6%

2002 Q1

The California economy expanded rapidly in the 1980s. Gross state product grew at an annual rate of 5.1% from 1983 to 1989, well above the national growth rate of 3.6%. The state's economic growth was accompanied by substantial population growth, which led to a construction boom and large increases in real-estate prices.

By 1989, a substantial decline in national defense spending seriously hurt California's booming defense industry. In addition, the national recession of 1990-91 reduced the demand for goods and services produced in California. Unemployment increased, and the California real-estate market subsequently collapsed.

As in New England, California's downturn in the early 1990s had a relatively speedy recovery of less than five years to its previous peak.

In the early 2000s, California experienced a particularly large home price boom fueled by a marked increase in the availability of mortgage credit. Home prices in California peaked in the first quarter of 2006. The ensuing subprime-mortgage crisis has hit California particularly hard. As of the first quarter of 2009, home prices have fallen almost 44%, adjusted for inflation, far more than the 32% drop from 1989 to 1997.

The energy bust:

Metro areaPeakBottomDepreciationFull recovery

Midland, Texas

1982 Q2

2000 Q4

56.2%

Lafayette, La.

1982 Q3

1988 Q4

52.5%

Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, Wash.

1979 Q3

1988 Q4

44.5%

Oklahoma City

1980 Q1

1990 Q4

42.6%

San Antonio

1981 Q4

1990 Q4

41.4%

Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, Texas

1979 Q2

1997 Q1

40.8%

Austin-Round Rock, Texas

1986 Q2

1990 Q4

39.9%

2006 Q3

New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, La.

1979 Q2

1991 Q1

39.3%

2005 Q4

Baton Rouge, La.

1979 Q2

1990 Q4

39.0%

Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas

1979 Q1

1990 Q4

37.6%

Salem, Ore.

1979 Q1

1987 Q4

37.3%

1997 Q2

Tulsa, Okla.

1980 Q3

1990 Q4

37.1%

Corpus Christi, Texas

1982 Q1

1990 Q4

36.2%

Shreveport-Bossier City, La.

1984 Q2

1991 Q3

34.0%

Ogden-Clearfield, Utah

1979 Q1

1990 Q4

33.9%

1997 Q2

Dallas-Plano-Irving, Texas

1986 Q2

1995 Q1

33.8%

Although the oil crises of the 1970s put a drag on the national economy, they boosted the economy and home prices in Texas. During the period, nonresidential construction in Texas more than quadrupled, and office vacancy rates fell from 15% to 7.6% in Dallas and from 7.8% to 5.7% in Houston.

By 1982, however, oil prices had begun to fall, and, with each $1 drop in the price of crude resulting in an estimated loss of 25,000 jobs in Texas, declining oil prices had significantly hurt that state's economy. Coupled with a weakening national economy, the oil price declines led to significant drops in employment. The layoffs began in the oil fields but were followed by job losses in related fields (geologists and engineers) and next in service businesses (motels, restaurants and retail stores). By September 1986, 743,000 Texans were unemployed.

Video on MSN Money

Selling a house © Comstock
Death of the mortgage broker
Many banks are cutting out mortgage brokers. And there are fewer brokers now. So how can consumers shop for the best deal?
Home prices peaked in the first quarter of 1982 and then declined steadily. Prices bottomed out in the first quarter of 1997 after a drop of 33%. Statewide, Texas real-estate prices have yet to fully recover; they now are roughly 15% below their prior peak.

The Midwest bust:

Metro areaPeakBottomDepreciationFull recovery

Peoria, Ill.

1979 Q4

1985 Q4

48.9%

Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, Iowa-Ill.

1978 Q4

1989 Q2

47.2%

Topeka, Kan.

1978 Q4

1993 Q1

36.4%

Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, Mich.

1979 Q3

1984 Q4

34.6%

1996 Q4

Evansville, Ind.-Ky.

1980 Q3

1991 Q3

34.4%

Toledo, Ohio

1979 Q1

1985 Q4

33.6%

Ann Arbor, Mich.

1978 Q4

1985 Q1

33.2%

1997 Q3

Wichita, Kan.

1979 Q2

1992 Q4

33.1%

Michigan and Detroit mirror Texas with respect to home price downturns. What drove Texas' expansion in the 1970s and early 1980s caused the collapse of Detroit's economy, and what caused the collapse of the Texas economy caused Detroit's rebirth. As a result of the challenges facing the American auto industry after the oil crises of the 1970s and the subsequent emergence of fuel-efficient, foreign-made automobiles, Detroit experienced significant unemployment, and the local housing market collapsed.

Real-estate prices peaked in the third quarter of 1979 and fell precipitously until the fourth quarter of 1984, when the oil bust spurred demand for gas-gulping, U.S.-made automobiles. Detroit's home prices returned to their 1979 peak in 1996, more than 17 years later. They have since plummeted in the current downturn.

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 10 of 162
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 8:10:01 PM
I have a home in Michigan too, but I didn't buy it to see it appreciate in price.  It did go up in value to almost double what I paid in the first place.  I'm not sure what it will fetch today, though it is in a fairly good location. 
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 8:16:19 PM

The problem is that only a small portion of the foreclosed houss are on the market and over the next few years literally several muillion more will be forclosed on.  Additionally the govt giving people $8,000 for down payments or closing costs does exactly the same thing that caused the subprime mess...people buying houses with no equity...so what will stop them from walking away if it gets tough...finally the **** is complaining to congress that appraisers are low balling appraisals and causing their sales to go south...hmmm dosen't the **** understand that the appraiser only reports the market and guess what idiots...the market is down and going to go down a whole lot more.....take off your rose colored glasses and view reality....

Wednesday, June 24, 2009 8:18:08 PM
the deleted part of my post was not a cuss but the national association of realtors............
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 8:45:56 PM
jdl12 I applaud your decision not to let the house go back to the bank. If everyone could do the same thing, we would be out of this mortgage mess in no time. However, just like in the stock market, oil market, housing sector, and now gold market, people tend to rush and buy and the height, and sell at the low. That's what is happening now, people are leaving their 30 year, long term obligation, because of a short term, move in the market. Shame on them. However, we will be awarded for our responsibility, we always are.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 9:00:21 PM
Let em crash! if the material in the house only cost 65000 to build it, the house is only worth 65000 dollars plus the cost of inflation. This BS that you can build it for 65000 and sell it for a million is nothing more than speculation on property values. Let the Realtors eat it. Screwing us for 15 years with over inflated prices and the helping people get into houses the realtors knew damn well they couldnt afford. Let them choke right along with the banks, the US auto industry and Wall Street.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 9:08:37 PM
In southern California, I think it will be 10 years before my home is worth the selling price I paid in 2006. It's about half that now.


Obama's original plan for the mortgage crisis included addressing current home values, but the Republicans voted that down in the Senate....now, for all the Dem haters - this idea of a principal reduction was originally part of Bush's mortgage crisis plan.

Here's the info on the original Hope For Homeowners program:
http://www.hud.gov/news/release.cfm?content=pr08-150.cfm

...and here's a quote:
"In many cases, to avoid what would be an even costlier foreclosure, banks will have to write down the existing mortgage to 90 percent of the new appraised value of the home."


Why is this not available now? I think because of banking lobbyists....blah... what do I know, I'm just a fool paying a ridiculous mortgage.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009 9:36:12 PM

Since we are going to a "service economy" and all of our factory jobs have gone to Mexico and China the income level has dropped drastically on jobs that might be available. Our "middle class" who could buy a $200,000 + home do not exist. People do not even have the down payments coming out of former homes to put on a home in the medium price range to bring down the price to a do able payment.  The only way home values can go is down at least until we figure out how to bring a "middle class" back to America.  The biggest mistake made was to bailout and not let things right themselves all the Congress and President have done is delay the inevitable unless they figure out how to bring back 3 million plus middle income jobs.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009 9:40:18 PM

I sold my home in 14 days March of 2006 and made a $40,000 profit. Best thing I ever did. Now I RENT a million dollar high rise condo for peanuts. I am doing Great!Smile

 

LISTEN! During 2005 the Wall Street Journal had a bunch of information about the coming housing crash. Almost everything they said about the future of the housing market came to pass. Was I the only one that paid attention? The information was there.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009 10:02:17 PM

Floating. That rediculous mortgage is what you signed up for. Seemed like a good idea and a deal at the time didn't it? Look in the mirror pal to see who's to blame.

 

Most problems have occured because people lied about their income then bought way more house than they could afford.

 

Guess what? Adjustable rates when you but anything, always adjust up in the favor of who sold it to you.

 

This mess stems from the government trying to make everyone equal. People are low income for a reason. They have no money. They should've never been allowed to buy homes. Thank Jimmy Carter and the liberals for that.

 

Well they got their wish, but in reverse. They've made everyone else poor.

 

I learned my lesson in the eighties when I bought my first house on an adjustable. Back then there were no limits to what they could or would raise it to in a given month or year. Bought with a 6.9% and in three years 14.9%. I was adjusted right out of it. Meanwhile the Aero space industry was dying, and everyone out of work then too.

 

Also back then there were capital gains taxes on real estate. When you sold, you had to buy a house of equal or more in value. Hard to do when you income has dissappeared and you're working two jobs.

 

Buy a house for $129,000. Loose your job and sell your house for $153,000 thinking you got out from under it.

 

Wrong. You now owe taxes of 45% on $29,000. And you have to pay the realitors commision too which was 6%.

 

No bailouts back then.

 

This time around I bought with 10% down and because of poor credit, opened with 7.5% fixed rate when everyone else was taking 3.9% ADJ. Everybody thought I was a fool. Well, after being in the house for three years(4 yrs. ago) I refied with a 5.125% fixed and never touched the equity in my home. Thus my home is still worth more than I bought it for.

 

It's BS that people are saying they got taken advantage of. You signed the papers. You actually thought you could buy a $600,000 house when you only make $50,000 or less a year?

Wednesday, June 24, 2009 11:03:29 PM

Just closed on a refi last month. I didn't ever want to get stuck in an adjustable again and my 5 year arm was up. So, I refi'd into a 30 year fixed conforming mortgage at 4.25 (without having to buy down points). I run my own business in the service industry and have many years of repeat customers coming calling me and I'm booked solid while others are losing their jobs and homes and are miserable. All I can say is I'm happy I ditched my 20K a year corporate job in an accounting department 15 years ago working with a bunch of unhappy, overweight women that seemed to resent me, and implied that I was an incompetent petulant menace who didn't know anything. Too bad for them. I make over 100k a year and all my customers are happy while they are breaking office swivel chairs, staring at computers, making 30K, and complaining about new-hires.

1 - 10 of 162
To add a comment, pleasesign in