from patriotz’s link, here is the full PDF report from Demographia.

As I have stated many times before, Demographia botches Vancouver numbers. The price is way too low. I checked San Francisco numbers, and the it was dead on. Vancouver is likely at the VERY TOP of the list, and has been for some time.

from the "we are different here" category

http://tinyurl.com/6jvufv

the joys of commuting from a bedroom community with

expensive gas…. hello Port Moody et al

"Imagine a new condo. Now imagine a condo of the same size and general amenities but it’s 50 years old. Which one is worth more?"

Yup, basic maintenance alone increases over time. Rent also decreases over time relative to new stock, even with decent upgrades. Maintenance up + rent down = depreciated asset.

"Does anybody know how many months of inventory it should take before the bubble should statically burst?"

The rough crossing point is around 5-6 months of inventory for at least 3 months before you can observe definite negative price movements. Vancouver is diverse enough of a market with no major supply/demand shocks that it should follow this general rule.

Does anybody know how many months of inventory it should take before the bubble should statically burst? Like in Miami or San Diego or Phoenix or etc, how many months of inventory does it take before you get significant price reductions? Somes sites quote, "there are 11.2 months of supply of existing homes on the market", however if we are only at 18,000 listings locally and we are selling about 3000 a month, shouldn't that mean we have six months of inventory? Does that mean our bubble won't burst yet?

"if you could explain the rent to cost ratio you mentioned. Please provide an example of this 100 to 150 rent to cost ratio." The ratio compares monthly rent to price. The analogy used is to a bond that produces a return (yield) every month just like a rental property. Example: condo is $200K and rent is $1300 to produce ratio of 150. This means you get 7.8% gross annual return. After expenses this is reduced further to say 6.5% at best. This yield is reasonable as it is a few % above the risk free yield you would get from a treasury bond. In some cases the risks are higher so the ratio could go lower to 100. You need a higher yield to compensate for the risk just as you would demand a higher yield from a junk… Read more »

from patriotz's link, here is the full PDF report from Demographia.

Vancouver saw 9% increase in median price-income ratio from the report a year ago. Victoria's saw 10.6% increase. Data was from Q3 (September 2007). In the past 6 months the US markets have eroded significantly. It is likely Vancouver is now closer to the top of the list and could soon be in the top 4 if US prices continue to fall fast. Unless Vancouver median price starts falling too.

So, what’s your method for determining proper real estate pricing that tells you otherwise? Or are you just another one of those people who claims that their “feelings” are more valuable than scientific measurements.

Touchy, touchy, boy. I don't have anything to tell me otherwise. I was surprised by the magnitude of the drop you anticipated. My question "are you serious" reflected my sincere surprise and was not meant to be sarcastic.

You on the other hand, well I think you need to chill a bit and give people the benefit of the doubt before you automate your "I don't tolerate fools gladly" phraseology. So step back, take a deep breath, or instead of giving "thumbs up" to most of your posts, I'll just ignore you.

In Stockton California houses that sold for $500k two years ago sell today for $200k. Of course Stockton is the foreclosure capital of the US right now, with 3 out of 4 house either in or on the path to foreclosure:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24883012/

This shows the danger of using up your market boosting tricks during a boom and absorbing future demand leaving little or nothing left to help cushion the bust. Nothing yet has helped stop the carnage in many US markets, not lower interest rates and not government bailouts. In Vancouver we've seen the advent of zero down 40 year mortgages and interest only loans, what will be left to keep our market from crashing hard?

"Was that a joke? They have the olympics in 2012, FYI."

Prices are up in LONDON=OLYMPICS12

believe it or not, the fundamentals here are stronger than the u.k. currently.

Wrongo. Vancouver and Kelowna have a higher price/income multiple than almost every market in the UK, including London.

http://www.fcpp.org/images/publications/50LeastAf…

the credit crunch has hit the u.k. quite hard, more similar to u.s. than here. re-assessment of mortgage risk has had a significant impact on r.e. demand. r.e. has tripled in u.k. as opposed to doubling here. believe it or not, the fundamentals here are stronger than the u.k. currently.

olympics-never have a positive or negative effect on a real estate market. non factor.

1/3 by 2011: would need to see the macroeconomic carnage trigger first before that would be a legitimate prediction. infusing personal pyschological issues into a prediction wastes the time of anyone reading this blog.

It's funny you guys just hope all day long for the price of real estate price in Vancouver to drop or bubble. Com on, face it. It's stupid, not going to happen. It's almost waste of time hoping… I know people are going to argue. But that's not going to help.

Why I find this interesting is that UK has … yet the bubble is bursting.

They don’t have the Olympics in 2010.

Nope. 2012 isn't 2010.

former Vancouverite has no clue

My prediction: Real house prices will be 1/3 of what they are today by the end of 2011.

Are you serious?