Did you go to school? Do you know how to think? Why would someone want to sell in a rising market? It’s because the have to!! That’s the same reason why someone will sell in a falling market!!

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

very true!

from weak hands to the strong

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

People were expecting a good return from their Nortel shares too.

People can expect anything they want. RE will only sell for what buyers are willing to pay. And I don’t go along with this “people don’t have to sell” stuff. People do have to sell, except for those making lateral moves within the market, which are irrelevant to supply and demand, and investors in sustainable cash flow positions, who will be incented to get out by falling prices. Maybe not right away, but soon enough. Don’t forget the builders too.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

It’s still a seller’s game in that case. When prices are skyrocketing and demand exceeds supply, buyers tend to jump at any opportunity and compete with each other. In the case you cite, the sellers merely have to wait Sooner or later the seller MUST sell, particularly with home prices falling due to oversupply.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Actually, a down market is neither a buyer’s nor a seller’s market. Sellers don’t want to sell because they think their property is worth more than buyers are actually willing to pay. Buyers don’t want to buy because they think (correctly) that prices will only go down further. This explains why the number of transactions in places like LA is at an all-time low recently.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Actually,

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

In that case I have a proposition: I’ll put up all the capital and offer you 50% of the “guaranteed” returns as long as he covers all losses. Since losses are by definition impossible it’s monay in da bank.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

..but I’m guessing his guarantee is meaningless and not backed up with cash right?

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

I have a friend who is a RE agent. On Jan 1st he guaranteed me RE would go up 10% this year and said it’s still a seller’s market. I saw him the other day and he now says 10% gain only for downtown and it’s turning into a buyer’s market. Funny how RE agents can change their tune so fast.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Ok, so if it drops a mid 30s % per year it’s still got at least two years of falling to do and I doubt we’ll do much more than just get over the hump this year, proper price drops won’t be around ’till late this Fall at the earliest.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

All excitement and pumped joking aside, I strongly disagree.

Vancouver is kind of unique when it comes to crashing, and Robert Shiller did’nt call it the “bubbliest city in the world” without a reason.

It has a history of holding in there longer than other areas and drawing attention to it’s insanity with awe, only to blow up in dramatic fashion. The 81 crash and the 90 correction saw price drops of 38% and 22% in less than a year, and languish for several years thereafter. 95 also saw a sudden price drop, but rather than languish, it continued to drift lower for another 7 years.

The big difference is that the current bubble is unprecedented, and the bottom of the crash will not be such a mistery as in areas in the US that were the first to be tested.

The recession that’s heading our way will be the straw to break the camels back.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Public transit sure can’t compete on the convenience level

Actually, public transit certainly CAN compete on convenience, but we generally need more density throughout the metro for this to work, which is exactly why it makes sense for Translink to enter real estate. Translink will use their muscle to ensure we don’t get any more 1-storey Sleep Country buildings built beside rapid transit stations – if your municipality doesn’t want density, you won’t get rapid transit, fair and square!

Anyway, let me explain the convenience advantage Translink can offer. More concentrated density in town centres means more people who live, work, and play mostly within their own town centre or at least within other town centres, rather than, say living in a sparse Surrey SFH neighbourhood, working at a Burnaby office park by the highway, and playing downtown.

Also, increased density in town centres actually (in the short-medium term) increases road congestion surrounding them, which makes car travel LESS convenient! At the same time, the full-right-of-way rail lines built to link town centres are extremely convenient (no parking required, and faster than the car in travelling between transit nodes). Translink could even further increase the convenience advantage by offering services such as Wi-Fi on board. I know that for some trips (i.e. if you only like to buy groceries once a week), a car is needed, but for most trips, such as commuting, it can be much more convenient to use transit.

my question is how can you time a speculation driven market? To keep this on topic it appears that Translink is jumping into local real estate when its being driven by nothing but speculation.

The picture I get is that they’re in this for the long run, rather than trying to time the market. Provided they enter the market gradually, they should be okay.

Also, bear in mind that Translink actually has less at risk than private developers. It can propose more developments which are deeply integrated with stations for higher profit potential. Also, by building high density by stations, they get the benefit of increased ridership, which a private developer wouldn’t.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

I’m so pumped about the likelyhood of our RE market starting to tank that I can barely contain myself, and we’re screwing around with some intricacies of this translink stuff.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

But like all things the devil is in the details.

Do you they intend to actually develop land? I hope not because from having worked with some Translink people, you wouldn’t believe the overpaid, under-worked attitude of that place. There is a lot of public-sector padding in Translink and to me it’s not all akin to the lean, mean attitudes of the developers I’ve met. I imagine they’ll partner with developers, and just cream a % off the top.

But where it gets tricky is the conflicts of interest now inherent in the planning process. Do the planners put a stop at a location because Translink already owns the land, or do they try and keep it secret that they like a location so Translink can setup a private, numbered company to go out and buy it.

Should be interesting, but again I don’t see why we as taxpayers shouldn’t be allowed some of the spoils of the increased value that public transit brings to an area.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Timing a speculative market is easier with stocks and commodities because there are many indicators and technical tools to help you do that.

How do you time the speculative RE market? You could use some of the same tools – although in RE they are more limited.

In my view, we have just in the last month received the first technical indicator of a top in the RE market: affordability is at an 18 year low. Therefore, affordability is just now what it was when the last bubble burst. Until this month, prices still had a way to go before comming up against a historical cealing.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

No, that is what taxpayers are for!

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

You don’t understand what you’re saying, you just type words and think it looks good. You ran away yesterday saying you need a few months to figure stuff out, what’re you doing back again?

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)