Welcome!
VancouverPeak.com- jesse and Makaya are now friends
- jesse replied to the forum topic Sandbox. in the group Housing Data
- jesse posted an update: CMHC starts, completions and under construction in Vancouver […]
- The Ant started the forum topic BC Population Growth in the group Housing Data
- jesse and The Ant are now friends
- jesse and wreckonomics are now friends
- wreckonomics posted an update: New Year, New HPI. ”Selection Broadens and Demand Eases to […]
- Best place on meth and admin are now friends
- jesse and Best place on meth are now friends
- jesse replied to the forum topic February 2012 Daily Numbers in the group Housing Data
Wordpress theme by Abhishek Tripathi of Mediawick Digital Solutions
May 30th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
…which is why we are all here.
Eventually, the majority of our children will be cognizant of the fact that any newspaper that exists solely for paid advertising will have an objective different than one that is stated.
We’ll celebrate ‘global’ blogs like Calculated Risk, The Big Picture and naked capitalism and we’ll have our local blogs like the Popes.
The times are a changin’, although not fast enough in my opinion.
May 30th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Let me explain how this works. The assignment editor assigns the news story, the reporter can pitch a story idea to the assignment editor, but the assignment editor has the final say what news story the reporter reports, what they want covered in the story, etc.
May 30th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Media’s motto: “Don’t tick off your advertisers.”
Bottomline …. #1 revenue stream is from advertising. Revenue from other sources is minimal in comparison.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
hah – yeah, my post was more of an unreasoned rant than anything.
Going completely off topic – the current model we have for newspapers/tv news doesnt seem to be working very well – as you say Lager (sorta i think) – the financial connection between the reader and reporter is too long. It’s like playing telephone.
The money seems to flow like this:
reader-advertiser-news company-reporter
Each extra layer messes with things.
Are there any fee for news and analysis companies? I think that’s what the bloomberg terminals are/were like?
More ranting: whytf is the weather so prominent on tv news stations?? I guess it’s for people without internet connections.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Why can’t journalists just report numbers? Do they have to add poorly researched/biased opinions too?
No one would read a paper that just printed the numbers, people want to know what they mean without doing their own analysis.
Look at it from the reporters perspective: you can spend a bunch of time doing research and writing up an article, or you can take the press release, move a few words around and then have the afternoon to go outside and enjoy the fine spring weather or do ‘research’ for a story on internet porn.
You will get paid the same either way, but if you did the analysis yourself you may be held accountable for it. If an expert provides you with the analysis, well hey, they ought to know right?
May 30th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
hey, regarding that foreclosure stuff.
I just let a guy in a suit&tie in our building because he was posting a foreclosure note on a person’s apt door.
i know we aren’t suppose to let people in the building, but hey I’m bear and I’m happy to see the foreclosure man in Vancouver!
He was mentioning in the elevator that I should be happy to see him, because this person probably hasn’t been paying their strata fees either, and now they’ll get her out. He was saying that strata has first title before the 1st mortgage. I didn’t know that.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
“Kinch says the biggest change in the mortgage market which may be fueling foreclosures is ‘stated income.’”
Peter, you’re not suggesting we have “liar loans” are you? I don’t believe you.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
From that news1130 story-
While the number may have some people panicking, Kinch says our markets are still strong and people are still gainfully employed in Vancouver and the Lower Mainland.
Uh. Maybe not panicking, but isn’t the point that we SHOULD be concerned about this doubling of foreclosures when the economy is strong? We have a notoriously up and down economy here and there are signs of a global slow down. What happens when the markets aren’t strong?
May 30th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Sorry Paul, I’ll stop doing that…I just was in the rare position of having some time to kill at work this morning, and being in the middle of house-hunting-hell right now, I’m obsessively looking at your numbers and charts every day.
May 30th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
The person who tells the reporters what news to cover is called an assignment editor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assignment_editor
And…if you don’t want to do what they ask, there will be consequences to pay.
May 30th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
arbitrage, because then the masses would need to think for themselves. If it’s on paper it must be true! 8% price increases in 2009, they’re coming – the banks and real estate agents said so!
The boom will NOT bust until the bust happens. Canada will NOT go into recession until it’s in recession.
May 30th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
That article reads like a press release. It cites only one source, a mortgage “expert”. I’m guessing that means someone whose livelihood relies on selling mortgages.
I love how it’s different here because this jump in the foreclosure rate is a result of stated income, otherwise known as liar loans. Because they didn’t have those in the US.
May 30th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I should add:
I’m wondering if the editor/publisher said – “hey, go write a fluff piece supporting Kinch” to the reporter (sorta like a conspiracy to keep the property market / advertising up) or if the reporter got the numbers and thought… hm, i should boost the word count… i think i’ll call Kinch.
May 30th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Why can’t journalists just report numbers? Do they have to add poorly researched/biased opinions too?
May 30th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Here’s some more journalistic gold attempting to dispell cause for concern over the recent doubling of the foreclosure rate in the Lower Mainland.
Kinch is a frequent advertiser on 1130.
May 30th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Hey guys I will be updating my own graph this evening. No need to edit my charts and beat me to the punch.
Thanks
May 30th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
?”If they didn’t think apartments were a good investment they wouldn’t be buying. Rather self-evident really.”
That’s not what the article implied. They said that vacancy rates were low therefore rental apartment was a good investment. I don’t see how that is self-evident.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
RE West End:
I walk past the Barclay almost every day to and from work. The hideous brown colour makes it look like a giant dog turd. The “50% sold!” sign has been sitting there for as long as I can remember. You couldn’t pay me to live in that building.
Also,
Here’s an interesting vid about Alt-A loans in the States. There are 50% more of them than subprime, 100% greater in value, and are even more screwed up. Lots of good info on just how much money is going to be lost on these. Subprime is the tip of the iceberg.
Mr. Mortgage on Alt-A Crisis
May 30th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Nice update on Paul’s graph. Lets see that make the front page of the Sun.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Mold City,
I have not been contacted, but strata laws require me to file a “form K” with my property management company. Surely stats could be collected from property management companies and correlated with rents in the newspaper. But hey, who am I to judge, I just want realistic stats.
Even getting some information from Prompton or other companies who handle individual rentals would help.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:39 am
umdesch4, nice update. That chart looked crazy last month, this month it’s insane.
Paul said he’ll have a new post tonight covering sales and listings on his blog.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:27 am
Anonymous
Actually I think it’s a terrible graph because it doesn’t seem to be adjusted for inflation.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Patiently
“But if its a Buyers market, you can probably buy a new home with the contingency that you sell your old home. Right?”
Maybe, but there’s been a major shift in the psychology of these things in the past 5 years or so. I think most Vancouverites have forgotten that this kind of stipulation used to be a standard part of home buying. There’s still people who buy without even getting an inspection done (just remember the people with the bats from last year!). I think a lot of the newer RE agents don’t even know how to add that sort of thing into a contract, they’re used to a take it or leave it market.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:44 am
A nice graph posted at:
http://www.economist.com/daily.....p;fsrc=nwl
or
http://tiny.cc/clickhere976
America’s house prices are falling even faster than during the Great Depression
May 30th, 2008 at 10:38 am
CIBC Deathwatch: $6.7 Billion in losses.
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=550881
My former employer. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bank.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:20 am
“As far as the emotional angle goes, isn’t that the only thing left to sell at these price levels? If you didn’t ‘love’ the place why would you pay these stupid prices?”
Yep, a realtor would never suggest it, but the most sensible thing to do in an early buyers market is sell, rent for a while, and then maybe buy when blood has flown through the streets and gone down the drains.
umdesch4,
That graph is on viagra. Lots of happy bears out there.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:19 am
“and was impressed to see a thin vineer of concrete on top of plywood for flooring. I’m not a engineer, but I don’t think that would make it any quieter for the tennant below!”
When I worked in construction, a long time ago, I think this was pretty much standard practice to pour a thin layer of concrete on the floors above ground. My guess is this is more of a structural issue. For noise, they would put up 2 3/4 inch sheets of gyproc on the rooves and combining walls with a dampener between the sheets. The dampener was a thin piece of aluminum folded over to create space between the sheets.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Blue Skies – you must be mistaken about a GDP contraction in Canada. Canada is different, how could Canada have a contraction when the US still hasn’t even had one yet. Imagine if it does (actually I think it has but they’re fudging the numbers in the US)
Anyway, even if all of Canada and even the Rest of BC slows down, that won’t touch Vancouver, which is the most different of the differents.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:09 am
If they didn’t think apartments were a good investment they wouldn’t be buying.
At more than a 50% drop in transactions, number of units AND dollar value since last year it looks like many of them aren’t buying.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:05 am
As before, here’s Paul Boenisch’s graph of listings according to REBGV, with an extrapolation of where I expect the data point to be tomorrow. You can see some grid pixels there, ‘cuz I was counting pixels for accuracy. Since each vertical pixel represents 71 listings, I’m pretty sure that unless something radical happens today and tomorrow, this graph should be within about 1 pixel of the actual result. (I took a SWAG of about 100 net new listings for the 30th, and then rounded up)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/umdesch4/2536173681/
May 30th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Sauder’s vacancy rates are based of CANSIM data. CANSIM, in turn, calculates vacancy rates from CMHC which in this particular release is based on “apartment structures of six units and over, privately initiated in metropolitan areas”.
estat.statcan.ca/MIS/Directory/Estat_Table_Directory.pdf
In other words, the vacancy figures cannot be taken at face value.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:02 am
How the f&%$ do I infer from this that investors view apartments as a good investment?\
If they didn’t think apartments were a good investment they wouldn’t be buying.
Rather self-evident really.
May 30th, 2008 at 9:55 am
PW – I think the meaning is that you can put a subject on your offer based on the sale of your place, but if you can’t sell the home you live in, or find that its worth a lot less than you originally thought (due to a falling market) then you would ‘lose’ the purchase of the new house because you wouldn’t be able to complete the deal.
Remember many markets are currently seeing multi-thousand dollar drops in value each month. Think of how many places have been for sale for more than three months, even in the supposedly hot market of Vancouver. If last months condo price decline continues its going to get sticky for sellers with all that competition.
If you sell your house first then you know exactly how much you’ve got to put into the next place.
As far as the emotional angle goes, isn’t that the only thing left to sell at these price levels? If you didn’t ‘love’ the place why would you pay these stupid prices?
May 30th, 2008 at 9:48 am
From the Sun article linked by Ted:
“Much like real estate generally, the market for apartment blocks cooled in the first quarter of this year. But with Metro vacancy rates hovering below one per cent, investors still view apartments as a good investment.
2008 Transactions: 24
Total units: 902
Dollar value: $99.9 million
2007 Transactions: 54
Total units: 1,950
Dollar value: $220.3 million”
How the f&%$ do I infer from this that investors view apartments as a good investment? Just because a place is 99.3% rented doesn’t mean it’s a good investment. Well done again, Vancouver Sun!
May 30th, 2008 at 9:43 am
Then again I guess the seller of the new home can just back out. I guess she is referring to the emotional side. Not the rational side which would be that there are lots of other homes out there to buy instead. I would never fall in love with real estate.
May 30th, 2008 at 9:30 am
Drachen, I see what you mean. The poor wording and basic writing errors on that mail-out were confusing. But if its a Buyers market, you can probably buy a new home with the contingency that you sell your old home. Right?
May 30th, 2008 at 8:41 am
Warren, I’m not sure about Sauder, but the article refered to CMHC stats. This is from their methodology page:
The survey is conducted on a sample basis in all urban areas with populations of 10,000 and more. The survey targets only privately initiated structures with at least three rental units, which have been on the market for at least three months. The survey collects market rent, available and vacant unit data for all sampled structures. Most RMS data contained in this publication refer to privately initiated apartment structures.
However, I think they have recently started to track individual units. Don’t you have a condo you rent out downtown? Have you or your tenant ever been contacted for a rental survey by CMHC?
May 30th, 2008 at 8:36 am
Th majority of 888 Hamilton is rental suites. A lot of furnished corporate apartments too.
May 30th, 2008 at 8:01 am
Patiently
“And why is “purchased” in quotes? Who does she think purchased the home? The lender, or the lenders investors?”
I think this is in reference to the second home. If you make a deal on a place without selling yours first you may have to renege so the house wasn’t really purchased, thus the quotes. I actually find it quite refreshing that an RE agent would be so forthcoming with this kind of information.
May 30th, 2008 at 7:47 am
Mold City,
Are you sure about the way rental stats are calculated? I thought that had been discussed before and it was determined that sauder’s methodology included a cross section of the market.
If it is only those larger rental buildings, the stats are useless.
May 30th, 2008 at 7:39 am
the “R” word…..
http://tinyurl.com/49ynp6
Canada’s economy contracted in the first quarter of the year…..raising the spectre of a recession in Canada even before one in the US sets in.
May 30th, 2008 at 7:07 am
Re-west end.
Last week I saw an ad in the West Ender where a unit had dropped the price $120,000 at least a 20% reduction, the neighbors must be pleased.
As far as the rental market goes the Coast Hotel may be turned into rental units.
Most of the new retail space at the bottom of Davie still is for lease after months and months sitting empty well except a Tim Hortons is going in one spot.
As far as “The Barclay” looks like it should be a North Van housing co-op in the 70s, they just put a little bit of blush on a pig and are trying to sell it as a princess.
May 30th, 2008 at 6:55 am
Mold city if you’re right then I think this could get really interesting. How many basement suites have been made in this town? Add in all the condos and you’ve got some serious unaccounted for supply out there.
May 30th, 2008 at 6:53 am
the future of vancouver’s homeless if re prices skyrocket forever
May 30th, 2008 at 6:44 am
On Vancouver’s east side, for instance, Goodman estimated an average per-unit price of $149,776 so far in 2008 compared with $127,281 during all of last year.
There you have it. That’s what apartments are really worth. The difference between these prices and condo prices is the fool premium.
May 30th, 2008 at 6:40 am
Interesting stat from Teds link:
Adamache said that the cost of home ownership has risen two-to-three-times higher than the cost of renting, which pushes up demand for rental housing, although in recent years builders have only put up about 500 units per year of purpose-built rental housing. She added that investor-owned condominiums have provided the bulk of new rental stock.
Across Metro Vancouver, 22 per cent of new condos are turned over as rentals, Adamache said. In downtown Vancouver, that number is closer to 45 per cent.
Interesting because official vacancy stats are based only on large scale rental operation – I believe the cut off is something like 3 units to be included in that count. Any owner renting out 1 or 2 condos as ‘investments’ is not include in the vacancy stats.
It seems like a bunch of the new condo stock is being turned into rentals, but not necessarily included in the official vacancy stats. Doesn’t this mean vacancy rates could rise dramatically, but not be reflected in the stats? I personally work with 3 people who own an extra ‘investment’ condo they rent out at a loss that would not be included in vacancy stats if they were vacant.
May 30th, 2008 at 6:25 am
I’ve been following the West End housing market in detail for a month, and in that time I’ve seen some exciting price decreases.
There’s one development (The Barclay) where the developer booted out renters and redeveloped the low-rise wood frame apartment building. I was in there checking out the work in the non-show suites, and was impressed to see a thin vineer of concrete on top of plywood for flooring. I’m not a engineer, but I don’t think that would make it any quieter for the tennant below!
Anyhow, they had two bedroom walk-ups for $559K for the longest time ($680/sqft). I guess they needed more money to finish the project because yesterday I noticed they went UP in price when all the other properties that haven’t sold in that dollar/sqft range have been LOWERING their prices! Now these places (MLS# V680049, V680061, V680074) are going for $595K ($723/sqft). A few of the smaller ones (MLS# V680045, V680067) they were selling for $552K and are now selling for $595K ($731/sqft).
They must be students of the Rennie School of Marketing, if it doesn’t sell, jack up the price!!
The average price per square foot in the west end (for two bedroom places) has been drifting upwards. At the start of May, it was 595/sqft, and now it’s 599/sqft. However, many places are dropping their prices, some are silly reductions (MLS# V701466) that dropped from $497,000 to $492,000. Others are whoppers (but still over priced!): MLS #V694094 dropped from $499,900, to $429,000! Still hasn’t moved, despite being below the average price per sqft in the west end.
I’ll be interesting to see how some of these places play out over the summer months!
May 30th, 2008 at 5:57 am
What real investors pay for rental income streams in a tight market:
On Vancouver’s east side, for instance, Goodman estimated an average per-unit price of $149,776 so far in 2008 compared with $127,281 during all of last year. In Burnaby, Metro Vancouver’s hottest market in 2007, Goodman added, the average per-unit price is $135,368 so far this year compared with $125,496 during all of 2007.
Sander added that the Lower Mainland extremely low apartment vacancy rates and the rising gap between the cost of home ownership and the cost to rent help support current prices.
http://tinyurl.com/4eolne
May 30th, 2008 at 4:13 am
What I’m seeing out there? It’s getting ridiculous and I don’t see anything propping up purchase as well as rental prices other than psychology and anticipation. Amateurs first time home renters on roids is what i’m witnessing. Ads such as “$1900 for a studio in yaletown” is making it tough to locate a reasonable home..
http://vancouver.en.craigslist.....96834.html
in addition, check out msn.ca:
guess who came in 1st?
http://finance.sympatico.msn.c.....-home.aspx
May 30th, 2008 at 3:27 am
From a Surrey realtor’s mail-out to “valued clients” :
BUYERS MARKET: Means there are too many homes for sale and not enough buyers.
SELL FIRST: Why?
*It is nice to know what kind of money you can spend on your next home.
*Eliminate the possibility of losing the home you have “purchased”.
*Eliminate some of the stress in dealing with the competition.
——–
What’s with that second bullet point? It seems like the realtor is hinting that many potential sellers are at risk of foreclosure. WOW!!!! True, but WOW!!!
And why is “purchased” in quotes? Who does she think purchased the home? The lender, or the lenders investors?
The realtor also goes on about how you want to buy first in a sellers market (in the same format:
SELLERS MARKET: When there is and a shortage of homes and an abundance of buyers.
BUY FIRST: Why?
*Gives you time to shop and find what you want
*Selling your home, in this kind of market, will be “easy” compared to finding your new property.
———
First of all, she needs a proof reader. Also, both points are confusing.
Very odd mixed messages. No, I’m not a valued client of that realtor, thank goodness.