Victoria flippers in trouble
During this weekends open-topic post ‘tacoman’ noted that someone has started up a Victoria area flippers in trouble blog modeled after the original Sacramento area flippers in trouble and Phoenix flippers in trouble. These blogs all track drops in asking prices and where available show recent sales activity.
The Victoria area blog isn’t yet showing drops anywhere near as dramatic as the US based blogs are tracking but it will be interesting to see where this goes as the market changes. On the Sacramento blog the first listing is a house bought in March 2007 for $1,308,000, currently sitting on the market with an asking price of $600k.
RSS 2.0 comments feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:39 am
If you want to track ‘flippers’, then you will need to come up with a better methodology. I would suggest that using the standard definition that real estate economists use such as somebody who buys and sells the same product within a short period of time (e.g. 3 months or 6 months).
If a ‘flipper’ were to list at a loss in a short period, then yes, they are in trouble.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:55 am
The house for Rolston Cres. in Saanich indicated a potential loss of 8.7%. Yet, the most recent asking price shown was $65,000 higher than what the owner paid only 6 months prior (i.e. $385k). Note that this house has since sold. Assuming the owner got near the final asking price, they would have made a ‘17% gain’ in only 6 months. Let’s say that owner was ½ cash on the purchase. That would be a 34% return on equity, or a 68% return on a yearly basis.
Trouble indeed.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:59 am
Then again the places listed on that site are obviously not all being sold by ‘flippers’. I’d say its an exaggeration, not unlike listing a 700sq foot condo as ‘huge’ on the MLS.
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:38 am
If the property’s last sold price is unknown or a good comparable sale is unavailable, and no analysis is provided, the information being presented is meaningless to me. I want to know see that properties are clearly falling in value.
Is the analysis left as an excersize to the readers? Dave has shown just how wrong it is to assume that a price reduction means a seller is in trouble.
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:48 am
If you believe the market will only go up sites like that could be a good way to find listings with price reductions. Of course if our market goes the US bubble route than the entries on that site will get a lot more interesting.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:10 pm
That’s pretty easy to measure as the medium and mean sales prices are widely published. The only problem with the Victoria market is it’s small size and wide spread in prices. That makes for bumpy data month over month. It takes many, many months to see the trend.
Believe me, the bears will come out strong in the next couple months should the mean or median prices fall. But, it really won’t mean much until we can look at it with 6 months of hindsight.
There is a reason bloggers like this don’t want to define their methodology. They would rather cherry pick anecdotes that support their perceptions. It takes a lot of work to gather good data and analyze it with a neutral viewpoint. It’s much easier just to post price reductions because it shows up on MLS.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:26 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:26 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:38 pm
If you check the Sacramento blog, the numbers are compared to the previous sale of that same property.
In a few months, if the Victoria blog is fixed, it will show us some interesting stuff. At least compare to recent comps, if not previous sales of the same property.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Those stats can be as misleading as anecdotal evidence. The point of this site is to provide enough anecdotal evidence to be convincing. The problem is that most of the data presented is meaningless without some background information to shed some light on the price drops.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:43 pm
For clarification I was refering to Victoria area flipper in trouble.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:45 pm
1) Price reductions can be hidden by re-listings. The way the blog is set up I believe the address is tracked and re-listings are tracked as well so the full history is now exposed.
2) This is a lot of work for the owner. If you like what s/he is doing you may want to consider a donation.
3) Previous sales data is not publicly available. I’m not going to trumpet this more, only to say your MLA has the power to change this. Also any Realtors feeling altruistic or bearish are welcome to supply the missing data
4) The site is fully disclaimed. Anyone who thinks it is misleading should start their own blog.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Post a link form a “real estate economist” in support of your “3-6 month” defintion of a “flipper”. I seriously doubt that “real estate economist” has defined the word “flipper”.
Unless you do that, everyone should take your posts as misinformation.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:01 pm
“If you want to know if real estate is crashing use the defintion of crash that most boom-bust economists use, which is a 50% yoy increase in listings and a 30% decline in sales. By the accepted definition, Vancouver RE is in a crash right now!”
No supporting links or sources required. Just take my word for it. I have 1000’s of pages of statistics and economic methodology memorized for 100% accurate recall.
Dave is just a RE booster who likes to play with words and definitions and hates to support his misinformation with any facts (because there are none).
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:03 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:25 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:40 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:41 pm
They are posted on BC Assessment (2007 sales).
4) The site is fully disclaimed.
I’m not sure a lawyer would agree with that. In order for an opinion not to be libellous, it must have some basis in fact. I see no facts backing up the assertion that those owners are ‘flippers’ and ‘in trouble’.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Really? That’s news to me. My webpage just has information on my family.
Nice guess at my identity though.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Yeap, prices sticky on the way down until they snap!
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:06 pm
“In order for an opinion not to be libellous, it must have some basis in fact.”
Wrong AGAIN as I’ve said before if you don’t know, look it up! It is only libellous (legally) if it should reasonably have been known at the time of publication that it is false and it is damaging.
If an author makes a statement based on reasonable information that turns out to be completely false and damaging he or she is not liable because they had reason to believe it was true a the time.
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:06 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:34 pm
As you mentioned, not for anything before 2007.
“I see no facts backing up the assertion that those owners are ‘flippers’ and ‘in trouble’.”
Flea markets don’t sell fleas. Yours is a pretty weak argument. Freedom of expression almost always wins, especially when the definition of the slang “flipper” is so ill-defined.
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:53 pm
‘flippers in trouble’ is hyperbole - like saying somewhere is ‘the best place on earth’.
I give kudos to the creator of that site, it must be a fair amount of work to track that stuff and concrete examples like the ‘flippers in trouble’ sites from the US are a good counterpoint to the constant RE salespeople assertion that ‘everything is fine, prices only go up’.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:10 pm
I am guessing that this is parody. I am a Vancouverite who is sadly exiled in the backwater of a city that you term a retiree’s paradise. Oak bay is beautiful, as is fairfield, cook st, cadboro, and james bay.
However, have you ever taken a walk on the breakwater between september and february? It ain’t so stunning when you are being blasted in the face with freezing winds. And cheap tea at the empress had better be good, in order to compensate you for dodging all the homeless people and suburban white trash that are omnipresent on the downtown streets.
But hey.. the best thing you could do for this city is to convince busloads of retirees to come and hang out near market square and fan tan alley. After seeing the legions of drug users hanging outside, they would very likely take their dwindling investment money elsewhere.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
“Real Estate is the only investment that never goes down”
“Occasionally, Real Estate has gone down, but not in this market”
“Well, sometimes you hit plateaus. But good times are ahead”
“Even if prices have fallen, people who bought long ago have still profited from their investments”
“All markets experience temporary corrections”
“You can’t spot a bubble except in hindsight”
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:32 pm
I am just saying that I don’t buy the line that the site if ‘fully disclaimed’. Maybe he will read these posts and re-word it to cover himself a bit better.
I know that I wouldn’t be happy if my house was shown on there and somebody said that I was a flipper and in trouble.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Legal action will also be swift for anyone who calls me a “bull” as it seriously affects my credibility on these idiot bear blogs.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Agreed. Though I would be even more pissed off if I have to sell at a loss, regardless how flippant (flippy? flippalicious?) I really am. It is going to be difficult to reconcile a seller accepting a reduced price with said seller being indirectly labeled a “flipper” on a blog. I would think most buyers could care less if I’m a flipper and/or a serial killer, as long as the price is right.
Copyright could be an issue with the site but IANAL.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:35 pm
well if you listen to Dave just wait and the price will drop….
at some point the price will be low enough that you will not have to borrow a large amount of money….
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:44 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Dave, why don’t you stick to being a bogus RE expert instead of a bogus legal expert?
An opinion is just that, someone’s subjective view of something. It’s not provable one way or another.
I can call someone a “flipper” if he’s been holding his property for 20 years if I want. It’s just a subjective term meaning someone who is looking for excessive gains on RE. Likewise I can say that anyone from the guy next door to Li Ka-shing is “in trouble” if it suits me. It’s just an opinion about the market. These terms are not allegations of any sort.
You are really getting tiresome. And that’s not libellous either.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:54 pm
“You are really getting tiresome. And that’s not libellous either.”
I agree but, as was pointed out on NVcondos, he does serve a purpose. To refute his arguments he is forcing us to repeat all the good bear arguments and learn some new ones. This educates us and people who are just visiting and actually creates a situation where people who are exposed to these forums actually become immune to Dave’s sales techniques.
Kind of an ironic justice really.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:59 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:47 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:01 pm
It doesn’t matter if it is your opinion. If the statement and accusations are knowingly false (or say negligent in this case) and cause financial damages, then it may be considered libel. The definition of libel includes a statement that, “makes a false statement publicly that, tends directly to injure him in respect to his office, profession, trade or business, either by imputing to him general disqualification in those respects that the office or other occupation peculiarly requires, or by imputing something with reference to his office, profession, trade, or business that has a natural tendency to lessen its profit“.
Calling somebody a flipper and saying they are in financial trouble could undermine their ability to command the highest price for their house (i.e. damages may be incurred).
I don’t profess to be a lawyer, but I am also not a dummy.
Anyways, who cares? If the US site didn’t get sued, it’s quite unlikely up here.
We are getting off my original point that the disclaimer is far from providing legal immunity.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:15 pm
I suppose you simply did not do your homework I prescribed to you. You do not understand what a HPI really means and how to use it. Or maybe you understood it, but chose to simply ignore it because it DOES TELL the truth about the housing market in general.
The truth of the matter is, HPI (Housing Price Index) tracks the transaction of homes. Since the inception of the HPI index in the 1980, the American housing price index has risen and fallen, but has managed a stable upward climb for 20 years to about an index of 220. After all, you said it before that buying a home is a long term commitment (5 years or longer right?!?) and so, this index seemed to reflect as such. However, starting in 2000 to 2006, most of the states indexes climbed from 220 to 600, a 3 fold increase!
So, explain to me Dave how could the index climb 2 to 3x as much in 6 years when prior years, it took 20 years to double?!? And how do you explain why the HPI index is dropping like a rock in 2 years after 2006 in some states? Remember that HPI “tracks” the transaction of homes and it only changes when it is bought or sold.
HPI can be a friend to the flipper, but can also be a foe. It looks like when it’s going up. Flippers and RE pumpers love to use HPI because it shows that dramatic increase in an easy to view format. The Landcor website was cited for this. People like us hate it because people like Dave will say, homes are clearly rising. It’s true, because it tracks upward price swings. But like any index, it also tracks downward price swings too, unless ofcourse Landcor decides to fudge their data. The HPI data can become our friend and the pumper’s nightmare. Clearly, the HPI data in the states is pointing to a worse than ever housing slump.
The reality is that, the HPI tracks by the OFHEO (Office Of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight) clearly shows that California and Arizona (the two blogs location) are clearly, yes, clearly in the red.
I don’t think our situation is any different. It’s unfortunate that Landcor didn’t track the HPI until 2001. It would be helpful if we have the 1981 data to better compare it with the states and Japan.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:21 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:37 pm
“We are getting off my original point that the disclaimer is far from providing legal immunity.”
Disclaimers never provide legal immunity, at best they can help slightly in a court case, they’re just there to dissuade people from filing in the first place. Same goes for most waivers and product safety information.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:22 pm
A real flipper is an organization of people who work full time to look for properties, sell properties, check titles and organize contractors to fix up properties, etc, etc.. They can do multiple deals. Speed is the essence. The quicker you sell it, the higher the profit margin.
In fact, real flippers and builders are alike. Builders develop the land, build homes as quickly as they can to sell it to the market. The longer it stays unbuilt, the more costs associated. Not to mention special insurance and security if need be you need to get to secure a vacant lot. They know the costs involved including man hours. They are business people, some though are smarter than others.
Wannabe flippers, however, deal with limited flips. They do not have a lot of properties to flip. Usually, they flip one, roll over the profits into another flipper or flippers in the hopes of flipping for higher profits. They are usually a staff of only 1 or maybe 2 if a girlfriend or wife is involved. They rarely pay themselves and they mostly use the equity they borrowed from their principle residence — which is a bad idea. In fact, in the Adjust Cost Base (ACB) calculation, I bet you the majority of them don’t even include the time spent for them to buy, finance, renovate and sell the place. They think that’s free time. It’s funny that their time is worth less than a young teenager working at McDonald’s flipping burgers. This is probably the only time that most of these people are willing to work for “FREE”.
But that’s ok, they see what Dave showed. A good profit.
Flipping homes, while looks great on paper no doubt, is a difficult business during a normal housing cycle. The problem is, if homes in the community are worth $300,000, then your flip property can not really be sold more than $300,000 either no matter how much renovations you’ve put in. That’s why, you don’t see normal folks flipping homes during the down years after 1983 nor do you during the 1990s and make substantial YOY profits. When the HPI index rose 2.5x in 6 years, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that you can actually make money flipping. The condition is there.
But I agree that when prices are going down, flipping is really not a wise word of choice to use. Probably dumping is.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:31 pm
OK. Prove being labeled a “flipper” means you get a lower price. If you’re a “motivated seller”, you’re supposedly going to drop the price anyways, unless dropping it means bankruptcy.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Victoria BC is part of British Columbia and as such..
British Columbia, Alberta and Quebec are the only provinces with laws recognized as substantially similar to PIPEDA. These laws regulate the collection, use and disclosure of personal information by businesses and other organizations and provide individuals with a general right of access to, and correction of, their personal information.
And as such, the Office Of The Privacy Commissioner of Canada has the right to investigate on bequest of the individual in query against the organization (The Victoria Flipper Blog) for correction of their personal information if they recognize their properties listed and was deemed incorrectly targeted as a flipper.
And, it does not cost an individual anything to file this complaint. In fact, Dave can file a complaint to the commissioner tomorrow if he wants to only if he believes a property he owns or maybe manage or represent is shown on the blog. I believe the fine is like $20,000 for non compliance.
That’s why, fashioning something like we have in the states is fine as long as our laws are the same. They are not.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:45 pm
So is calling a property an overpriced POS or pointing out that it has a ridiculous price/rent, which is what people on this board do all the time. In fact the whole point of this and other bear blogs is to educate people that current prices are ridiculous and have to come down. Are the sellers going to sue Garth Turner too? Go read his book or his blog if you want to see blunt language.
The very fact that the seller has had to reduce the listing price means that he is having “trouble”. Or is that too hard for you to understand?
Nobody has the right to sell anything for any price. What something will sell for is entirely up to the buyer. Buyers, and advocates for buyers, use all sorts of tactics to try to bring prices down, just as sellers and realtors use tactics to try to push prices up.That’s what negotiating a price is all about.
Unless someone is making factual misrepresentations about the property, like claiming it has UFFI or was a grow-up, the seller has no grounds for seeking damages. Nor does a buyer have any grounds for seeking damages from a seller for the usual babble such as “everyone wants to live here”, etc. That’s just part of the game.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Lots of properties owners and lots of rental building owners are serving eviction notice to their tenents renovating their units,buildings,and increasing the rents by $300-700 more.
bloggers source tell this is happening more frequently in the westside and mount pleasant area.
‘flip it or don’t,’buy it or don’t,’sell it or don’t,rent it or not but
“Vancouver housing prices countinue to climb 8% this year and 5% next year.Buying is being recomended by experts because interest rates are low.”
with the initial arrival of $100 cheque per adult from carbon tax-all of sudden realtors phone start ringing on high volumes.showing will be on high volume from tomorrow
fear for two quarter of negative growth suppose to end next week but time has changed without any damage now yellow people wanted to go green before it’s too late.
“Vancouver,B.C. countinue heading towards best olympics of the centuary”-MIND IT.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:15 pm
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Not correct. Information in a listing that a buyer relies in when deciding to make a purchase is actionable. Not saying it happens at lot. Nor am i suggesting it’s easy to pursue or that the payoff is worth the effort. But misrepresentation and negligence are well-established in law. Sellers (and realtors) have to be able to stand behind their claims.
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:50 pm
http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet … e#comments
June 24th, 2008 at 12:29 am
June 24th, 2008 at 3:48 am
Correct, they have to stand behind their claims, which are material representations pertaining to the property for sale. But stuff like “everyone wants to move/retire here”, “the rich immigrants are coming”, “buy now before it’s too late”, etc. are not claims about the property for sale. They are just “salesman’s puffery” in legal jargon. Just like sellers of collectibles, and unlike securities dealers, realtors are not legally proscribed from making implied claims about the future value of the goods for sale.
As for the VFIT site, there is nothing on the site except the location of the property and its listing history - just the facts, as Sgt. Friday would say. The idea that anyone would have a claim for damages against someone publicizing data that has already been intentionally publicized by the seller’s agent (on the MLS) is absurd. Nor is the information copyrightable - works, not facts, are copyrightable. If the site were copying web pages from the MLS that would be another issue.
If it were possible to successfully sue anyone for such a mild attempt at consumer advocacy, people like Phil Edmundston and his “Lemon-Aid” books would have been put out of business by the auto industry decades ago. And need I say the RE industry would have gone after Garth Turner. Turner of course would have relished a lawsuit, as it would provide yet another opportunity to show himself as a hero.