The Hungarian Economy and Property Investment.

Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

They didn't use the 5 billion from the ECB, nor do they have plans to do so. They got approved for this loan primarily as a political tool to strengthen perception overseas, which has caused the HUF to weaken.
http://www.realdeal.hu/20081022/nat...ion-with-iceland-says-ecb-line-will-go-unused

Here is the results of a survey by the Bank of Canada, suggesting that most of the countries in the CEE region are at higher risk than Hungary. The percentages are in relation to the worst performing country as opposed to real values:
[broken link removed]
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

Asset prices have been more or less stagnant for years, mainly because of the lack of credit available. I don't foresee credit growth either for Hungary in the near future. Few people have been borrowing in recent years and this is unlikely to change. The banks are safe though and no local or overseas expert would specifically suggest otherwise.

The fundamental point of my post was that almost every country in the region has worse economic statistics than Hungary, yet because it is an easy (media-friendly) target and has an unfavourable economic reputation caused by years of terrible policies leading up to 2006, it has being singled out in the international press. The obvious example of a country in riskier financial shape is Latvia, which has an external debt in the region of 140% of GDP with a spiralling budget deficit, 16% inflation, an over-stretched and indebted population and collapsing property values.

In your first paragraph you seem to be saying that Hungary has not experienced much credit growth. This report seems to indicate that the average rate in the 5 years to 2007 is over 20%.

http://www.epa.oszk.hu/00900/00958/00003/pdf/00003.pdf
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

In the context of CEE, Hungary has had low credit growth over the past few years. In all of the countries referred to in the above study, excluding Poland, i.e. Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Bulgaria and Romania, domestic lending has increased by an average of 40% per year over the period you mention. In HU, very few locally-based purchase mortgages have been taken out since 2005 as few people have been buying since then!

From page 51 of the article you posted:
"In Hungary the risk of unmanageable credit growth in regional comparison is moderate at this time, and – compared to other new EU Member States – neither the equilibrium loan portfolio, real estate prices, nor the savings position of households shows no sign of any remarkable risk. The results of regional comparison are consistent with the conclusions seen in international circles. It is the opinion of many that the Baltic region and Bulgaria are the most prominent candidates for higher risks. In these countries there is a good chance that the fast growth of credit seen in recent years cannot be sustained for any extended period of time, and that today’s boom will be followed by major adjustments."

Interesting article also from a year and a half ago:
[broken link removed]
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

In the context of CEE, Hungary has had low credit growth over the past few years. In all of the countries referred to in the above study, excluding Poland, i.e. Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Bulgaria and Romania, domestic lending has increased by on average of 40% per year over the period you mention.

Very true. May I add that I have no desire to see any country endure financial hardship, but Hungary is in a tight spot.

If your CB is determined to protect the currency then the only tool it has is the interest rate because it's foreign currency reserves are too low. So, who is going to take the pain? Will it be people who borrowed in forint and now face interest rates of 11.5% (and more to come perhaps), or will it let the currency fall and thus shaft those Hungarians that have borrowed in CHF, EUR and YEN. Not an easy decision to make.

Whilst all this is playing out I think that it would be wise for an investor to monitor the situation rather than commit capital during a very uncertain time.
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

Hungary has been in a tight spot on many occasions and has always survived. This time, unlike before, its economy is actually doing okay, so hopefully it'll be able to weather this storm also.

MNB has said that if it came to a choice between increasing HUF interest rates or letting the currency weaken, then it would absolutely choose the former option. Today, the prime minister said: "There is still an exceptionally large speculative pressure on the forint," and added that the government supports the central bank “to take every measure it finds necessary to defend the forint".

Yes, Hungary is certainly not for amateur investors at the moment. There is too much uncertainty. Things change so rapidly in this region though, so it will be interesting to see how things pan out after the long weekend over here.
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

And it is moving further in your favour. The HUF is now trading -2.1% against the Euro @ 284.5.

Credit default spreads on Russian soverign debt are now at the same level as Iceland's before it went bust. Anyone who can is pulling their cash from emerging markets. There is nothing special about Hungary that will protect it from capital flight.

For anyone considering buying a property in Hungary (or any other location in Eastern Europe) I urge you to wait a few weeks to see how this crisis (for that is what it is) pans out.
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

http://hungaryeconomywatch.blogspot.com/

Article suggests that the FX mortgage market is dead and the Hungarian government will help locals switch.
Not good news for the foreign investor considering buying or trying to sell.
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

Not good news for the foreign investor considering buying or trying to sell.

IF that foreign owner has a mortgage from a hungarian bank that is, and not from AIB or cash under the matress.
The problem with converting the FX mortgages to HUF is the interest rates.
The HUF rate is double-treble the EUR and CHF rates.

Interesting piece on hungarian property on the six-one news last night. It let everyone know that all speculators in that market for the past 4 or 5 years got burned, and the best (and only) bet is the people that bought for the medium-long haul.
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

The HU markets have been closed from Wednesday evening until next Monday morning, so it will be interesting to see how things develop in the coming week or two. Gyurcsany is adamant to do whatever it takes to scare off the speculation/further weakening of the HUF (currently 3% stronger at 275/276 today).
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

Gyurcsany is adamant to do whatever it takes to scare off the speculation/further weakening of the HUF (currently 3% stronger at 275/276 today).

they've been in this position before, Nov '03 (I think?), and again, upped interest rates by 3%.
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

Yes, November 2003, but the global economy was a much better place back then. The HUF did return to normal levels and interest rates dropped very quickly, but no guarantee that the same thing will happen now.

Interesting video interview given by the government of the Hungarian central bank during the week:


In relation to CHF mortgages in Hungary, the media has overstated the case so far. Most locals took their FX loans at a level of around 1 CHF - 165/170 HUF at an average of 44% LTV. The current exchange rate is 10% above this average, despite recent fluctuation. The major risk is if the HUF continues to depreciate at a faster pace.
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

Eastern European economies face bankruptcy


Niall Green
Global Research
October 24, 2008
The economies of central and eastern Europe are being rocked by the crisis of world capitalism, compounded by the corrupt and pro-big business policies of their local elites.
Defying many economists and commentators, who had forecast that the region would be well placed to deal with the credit crisis due to the lower relative weight of finance capital within their national economies, much of Eastern Europe stands on the verge of insolvency and deep and protracted recession.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Stalinist states, central and eastern Europe provided global capitalism with vast new sources of cheap labour and raw materials. In the early 1990s the recession affecting the Western economies, accelerated the flow of capital into the former-Soviet countries, with transnational corporations seeking to cut costs by outsourcing to this newly opened-up low tax, cheap labour areas.
Major global manufacturers such as General Motors, Volkswagen and Nokia invested hundreds of millions of dollars into new factories, taking advantage of the large pools of highly-skilled and educated workers, many of whom had lost jobs in the old state-owned industries that were closed following the restoration of capitalism. Western financial institutions profited from financing the development of new industrial plants, as well as property speculation among the new bourgeois elite and foreign investors in major urban areas like Prague, Warsaw and Bratislava.
Business consultancy, Capital Economics, reports that 17 years after the restoration of capitalism and four years after most joined the European Union (EU), wages in the eastern EU states are still only one fifth of the average of those in Western Europe.
An estimated five million workers have left the eastern European countries for Western Europe between 2004 and 2007. The mass migration from the ex-Soviet states has left key sectors of the economy and public services such as healthcare critically short of skilled workers. Poland and Ukraine almost had to abandon their status as co-hosts of the 2012 European Football Championship due to the chronic shortages of labour needed to renew facilities for the competition.
Only a few months ago, a recession in Western Europe was viewed as a potential boon to overheated Eastern Europe economies. Inflation, running at 15 percent in Russia and Latvia, seemed to be the greatest threat. However, as the full impact of the global crisis unfolds, the alleged ability of Eastern Europe to weather the storm relatively better than its Western counterparts has been thrown into question.
All the economies of the eastern European region are highly dependent on credit from the international markets. The Institute of International Finance has estimated that total private capital and credit flows into eastern Europe, the former USSR and Turkey, are likely to fall from nearly $400 billion in 2007 to an estimated $262 billion next year, a figure which may fall even further as it is based on optimistic forecasts of the effectiveness of the international governmental bailouts of the banks.
Erik Berglof, chief economist of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, stated that the eastern European countries, “could deal with rising borrowing costs and an economic slowdown coming from the US and Western Europe, but a complete shutdown of international borrowing—nobody can withstand that.”
The International Monetary Fund forecasts a fall in the growth rate for gross domestic product (GDP) for central and southeast Europe from 5 percent this year to 3.5 percent in 2009. For Russia and the former Soviet Union, it predicts growth of around 7 percent for this year and 5.5 percent for 2009.
Even these figures fail to show the full impact of the economic crisis on countries whose economies are heavily dependent on exports to the wealthier western EU.
The impact of a recession in France, Germany and Britain will be acutely painful to the eastern economies of Europe. The Czech Republic, for example, relies on exports to the wealthier euro currency zone for 40 percent of its GDP. As the British magazine, the Economist, stated, “If Germany gets a headache, eastern Europe gets a migraine.”

Emergency bailout for Hungary

On October 16, the same day countries across the EU pledged to shore up the banking system with a package whose total could exceed €2 trillion, the European Central Bank (ECB) granted Hungary a bailout worth €5 billion, saving its economy from a financial meltdown.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is poised to offer the country a further, and probably much larger, bailout loan.
Last week, Hungary put tight controls on foreign exchange lending in an effort to stabilise the country’s troubled financial sector. This prompted a massive drop in the value of the Hungarian currency and stock market, quickly followed by sharp rises on the news of the ECB bailout.
Hungary has a very high level of foreign public debt—60 percent of GDP—meaning that the country is less attractive to foreign investors and less creditworthy to private and international lenders. Global credit ratings agencies Fitch and Standard and Poor’s have lowered Hungary’s rating to BBB+ , the third lowest investment grade offered to any country.
In addition, many ordinary citizens and local firms have loans with Hungarian banks that have been packaged in complex schemes based on the speculation that the Hungarian forint would stay on the same exchange rate as the euro. That situation is likely to change as Hungary’s high budget and current account deficits pressure the devaluation of its currency, which is now trading at a two-year low, further destabilising its banking system.
The government of Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsany has reduced its official GDP growth forecast for 2009 from three percent to just 1.2 percent, and has acknowledged it is planning a budget based on a zero percent growth rate next year. The Hungarian government has pledged to cut its budget deficit, meaning that public services spending and wages will be driven down.


Nick Chamie, of RBC Capital Markets, has warned that much of eastern Europe is ill-equipped to bail out the financial system and may suffer the same fate as Iceland, whose financial system has seized-up with the collapse of its three major banks.
“The three Baltic states along with Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Bulgaria and Romania—and of course Iceland—are top of the list,” of those vulnerable to an investment exodus, Chamie warned.
Baltic states in crisis
Latvia and Estonia are officially the first economies in the eastern EU to fall into recession. Lithuania, whose growth has been slower than its Baltic neighbours, is likely to officially enter a recession in early 2009 and has been forced to guarantee the deposits of savers up to the value of €100,000, double the average EU guaranteed amount.
The Lithuanian prime minister was forced to appeal for calm in early October, stating that “There is no danger for any Lithuanian bank to go bankrupt. We monitor the situation constantly.” The country’s banking sector is dominated by the Swedish bank SEB.
The heads of government of all three Baltic states issued statements October 10 insisting that their countries were not headed for insolvency. “It is impossible to compare Lithuania with Iceland,” Prime Minister Gediminas Kirkilas told a joint news conference with his Latvian counterpart.
Reinhard Cluse, “emerging Europe” economist for Switzerland’s UBS bank, was more cautious, stating in response to the financial situation in the Baltic states:
“Iceland was a special case, but the same rising waters that flooded Iceland first are a problem for others, too.”
The three countries have seen an explosion of credit fuelled by property speculation over the past decade, while current account deficits have soared to among the highest in Europe. In Estonia, domestic and foreign debt stands at twice the country’s GDP, leaving it heavily exposed to the problems of bad debt that have beset the global financial system. Property prices in the capital Tallinn, have fallen by one quarter since 2007 and home foreclosures are on the increase.
“There are going to be some pretty big casualties in property-related sectors and retail,” warned Joakim Helenius, head of Tallinn based investment group Tigon Capital.
In Latvia, the central bank had to intervene this month to prop up its currency with public funds. The cost of bailouts, combined with falling domestic tax and customs revenues, mean that all three states are likely to suffer large budget deficits next year. The Latvian Central Bank estimates its government’s overspending to be 5.5 percent of GDP in 2009.
This will force government borrowing, bringing with it demands from international lenders that state budgets be slashed. The EU budgetary commissioner has already condemned Lithuania’s draft budget for 2009 as far too high and has demanded that President Valdas Adamkus refuse to sign it into law.
Meanwhile, the increase in government indebtedness of these tiny countries, with limited resources to draw upon, will likely restrict investor confidence, further deepening recessionary pressures.
The banking sector in the Baltic states is dominated by Scandinavian capital. Swedish company Swedbank has seen a 50 percent fall in its share value, largely due to its heavy exposure in the Baltic countries, while its credit rating has been slashed. Swedbank expects profits from its Baltic subsidiaries to be cut in half in 2009. Swedbank maintains it and other banks will continue to pump credit into the Baltic markets in order to prevent an economic crisis there from spreading into Scandinavia.
Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic
Bulgaria and Romania, who joined the EU in 2007, are also in a highly precarious position. Citibank’s evaluation cited their high vulnerability to financial instability. Bulgaria already has a national deficit of 21.5 percent of GDP. This figure is likely to rise as Hungary borrows from international lenders such as the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund to save its banks, and the government itself, from insolvency.
Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic are widely portrayed as being in a better position than most other states in the region, with less dependence on loans from foreign finance capital. They are, however, highly dependent on direct investment from transnational corporations and sales of manufactured goods and services to Western Europe.
The three countries have become major centres of manufacturing for the EU market, with the Polish and Czech economies booming from the development of plants making cars, electrical equipment, household goods and industrial plant largely for sale to Western Europe. Slovakia has become a virtual single auto-industry state, with the major automobile manufacturers closing factories in Western Europe and relocating tens of thousands of jobs there in an effort to slash wages.
While the foreign direct investment (FDI) that Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic are heavily reliant upon, is due to rise modestly to $90 billion across Eastern Europe in 2009, this figure represents a small fraction of total investment capital which has sharply contracted. FDI could freeze up next year if cash strapped companies hoard their resources in the event that global finance credit remains in limited supply.
With exports of commercial and domestic manufactured goods to Western Europe likely to fall over the coming period, combined with greatly restricted credit, even the relatively stable economies of the ex-Soviet region are likely to be plunged into recession.
Shares on the Polish stock exchange are trading at less than half their peak. Poland has mirrored the steps taken across the EU, pouring public money into a bailout of its banks.
Ex-Soviet regime
To the east of the EU member states, the situation could prove to be even worse. Russian authorities have set aside nearly $200 billion (€149 billion) for a financial market rescue. Despite the relatively small size of its financial sector, which has assets valued at just 65 percent of its GDP (compared to 250 percent of GDP for banks in the euro zone), the country is highly dependent on foreign finance capital to fuel growth.
Over the past decade hundreds of small banks have emerged, fuelled by debt borrowed from major Western financial institutions and used to pay for developments in certain industries and construction in the booming property sector in Moscow and other large cities.
The Medvedev-Putin regime in Russia has injected $700 billion into its financial system, a greater amount than the United States or most western EU states as a portion of GDP. This massive increase in state spending has been made even more dangerous to the Russian public finances by the sharp fall in the price of oil, which has halved from its peak earlier this year.
A similar story is taking place in Ukraine, where foreign finance has been heavily relied upon to boost growth in industry and commercial property construction. Like Russia, the Ukrainian economy is now faced with the double blow of greatly restricted access to Western finance combined with plummeting prices for its main industrial exports, especially steel.
The Ukrainian stock market has lost over three-quarters of its value in a year.
Ukraine’s central bank has been forced to prop up most of the country’s financial institutions with state funds, while a run on the country’s sixth largest bank, Prominvest, was caused by warning that it was likely to collapse.
The possibility of providing a stimulus to the Ukrainian economy by cutting interest rates, as has been put into effect across Europe and in the US, is limited by the fact that inflation is currently running at 25 percent. The Ukrainian Prime Minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, has requested a large loan from the IMF of up to $14 billion to shore up the economy.
US credit ratings agency Fitch downgraded Ukraine last week, stating:
“The downgrade reflects Fitch’s concern that the risk of a financial crisis in Ukraine involving large depreciation of the currency, further stress in the banking system and significant damage to Ukraine’s real economy is significant and rising.”
Tymoshenko is in a bitter political struggle with President Viktor Yushchenko, who has called early parliamentary elections for December in an effort to unseat his rival. Both former leaders of the “Orange revolution” are blaming each other for Ukraine’s economic woes. Tymoshenko has condemned the calling of fresh parliamentary elections, the third in three years, as a destabilising factor in the current economic crisis. She warned that all politicians must put aside “political ambitions” in an effort to bail out the economy at the expense of other areas of budgetary spending.
“We have to revise the state budget for the year 2008, and completely alter the draft state budget for 2009, because the whole world, and Ukraine as well, will see a certain stagnation of production, a certain fall of GDP growth, and, I think, the country will suffer the biggest blow in 2009. It means we have to transfer to a saving budget in 2008 and 2009,” Tymoshenko told the Ukrainian parliament on October 13.
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

Hungary has been in touch with the IMF as a pre-emptive measure, to provide a safety net and to reassure speculators and investors that even if the absolute worst happened, there would still be funding available. It's not a 'lifeline' or an effect to save the country from 'financial meltdown'. Similarly, the ECB loan of 5 billion euro is a pre-emptive step which the country will not use. I don't foresee either funds being availed of.

While it does have certain problems like every other country at the moment, there is absolutely no reason for HU to be singled out as the 'next Iceland' as the international media seems to be suggesting. Economic 'journalists' seem to like to leave out factual information, which gets in the way of their headline and it's important to see the full picture. The majority of reports I've read have been mostly sensationalistic and not fully accurate. Due to the fiasco in 2006, HU is the most media-friendly country in the region in terms of being portrayed as an economic mess, but based on factual information rather than speculation, the countries with most risk in the region are very clearly Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Bulgaria and Romania; countries with current account budget deficits of 15-23%, compared to Hungary's 3.4% for 2008. HU hasn't had a speculative price bubble in the housing market and has had comparatively low credit growth over recent years, so the bank deposit-to-loan ratio is around 140%, a somewhat worrying but manageable figure (compared to e.g. 250% in Latvia). 80% of the banks are foreign-owned and have stated that they will have enough liquidity to weather this storm. These are substantial players such as Intesa SanPaolo, Unicredit, etc. Their HU divisions are some of the most profitable in Europe, without having restored to poor lending principles. Economically, Hungary is doing better than it has been doing in years and will even meet some Maastrict criteria for entering ERM-2 by the end of this year, which it plans to join in 2010.

The main risk factors in Hungary at the moment as I see them are:
1. Relatively high percentage of FX mortgages, mainly CHF, which will cause problems if the HUF weakens well above 1 EUR - 300 HUF or 1 CHF - 200 CHF. At the moment, the very weakened HUF is still only 10% less than the rate at which the average CHF mortgage was taken out and the average LTV mortgage is 44%. This is (at least not yet!) the crisis that it's claimed to be. In addition, alongside banks, Gyurcsany has come up with a package to allow borrowers to switch to HUF mortgages free of charge if they wish to.
2. Leading on from point 1, there is a chance that the HUF will continue to weaken/weaken substantially if speculators continue to put pressure on the currency. This is anybody's guess, but it has strengthened by 3% since Thursday's all-time low.
3. Potential problems financing both the FX and HUF parts of the high overall budget deficit, built up from years of excessive borrowing, but this appears to be under control.
4. Temporarily constrained growth due to the austerity measures, making it more difficult for the country to increase GDP.
5. If the only Hungarian-owned bank, OTP, has lied and turns out not to have enough liquidity to get through this difficult period. They have assured everyone that they have. Similarly, if the foreign-own banks go bust (highly unlikely) or stop providing finance for their HU divisions, then it will have an obvious effect.
6. If another country in the CEE region becomes 'the new Iceland' and this creates a domino effect on neighbouring countries. With strong backing from the ECB and IMF, the risk is much much lower in the EU than in Iceland, which had no safety net and had totally over-extended itself with toxic assets in an insane fashion.
 
Re: Forint now seen as better bet to Zloty (according to Goldman Sachs)

Budapest ...... nice find that TV interview, helped me explain the situation there to several people who had sucked up all the bad press in the UK.
 
The original post asked AAMers to compare the Polish and Hungarian Economies, Currencies and impact on property investment.

The thread has evolved however and Ive renamed the thread so that the discussion now only relates to Hungary.

Threads which ask for comparisons between two or more overseas locations are very hard to moderate. Can I ask posters to remain focused and if they want to discuss other locations that they do so in another thread.

Also can I ask that if posters have an interest (property, goods or services) in particular developments, areas, or countries that they explicitly declare that interest.

Thanks
aj (moderator)
 
It might appear to be an honest account but it's actually not an accurate assessment of the current situation. The IMF won't 'bail out' Hungary. It's a last resort measure, which HU probably won't use, unless things get a lot worse. Perception and speculation rather than fundamental problems have caused the current crisis. It's difficult to see the facts through the mainly exaggerated and inaccurate sensationalist articles and overly-simplific explanations. The IMF and ECB funds were accessed, not necessarily to be used, but instead to provide absolute proof that if the worst were to happen, that the economy will not collapse.

The HUF has now firmed quite strongly to 1 EUR - 271 HUF from Thursday's low of 1 EUR - 284 HUF, now that speculators have been kept at bay somewhat with recent governmental tactics such as the 3% interest rate increase.

this should force the Hungarian government to get it's This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language in gear
This also totally misses the point. The Hungarian government had terrible economic policies from 2001-2006 and since then, has barely put a foot wrong. The budget deficit was brought down from 10% in 2006 to 3.4% this year, a huge achievement by any stretch. There are no major fundamental economic problems in Hungary and the government is actually doing a good job, probably for the first time in over a decade. Few analysts would argue that long-term potential for Budapest is anything but favourable.

In relation to overseas property investment in general, most Irish got it totally wrong when they invested in the wrong areas and paid too much in Budapest around 2003/2004. Most got it wrong again with Bulgaria in 2006 and many are likely to have made the same mistakes in Poland in 2007. Amateur property investors tend to run like sheep and chase unrealistic goals like '20-30% capital appreciation' in an overheated marketplace, instead of doing proper research and buying a desirable property at a reasonable price in a stable market, where rental returns are good and long-term growth is likely. These investors then tend to blame the country for their bad judgments.
 
Its just a shame that this whole IMF situation looks so bad to the rest of the world.

They hear Iceland needing a bale out and then Ukraine and they then lump Hungary in with that negative thinking due to the IMF involvement.
 
Back
Top