Welcome!
VancouverPeak.com- admin replied to the forum topic Sandbox. in the group Housing Data
- admin posted an update:
- 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
Wordpress theme by Abhishek Tripathi of Mediawick Digital Solutions
September 16th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
(percent owners + percent renters = 100%)
This is so incredibly basic, yet we have these moronic stories run in our daily paper.. As if ‘landlords’ count purely on price appreciation. ‘landlords’ count on rent, ‘speculators’ count on rapid property appreciation. Morons.
It would make me embarrased to live in a city where the newspaper prints this garbage, but I know the media in other cities is just as bad.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
For those who remember crazy tile house from the last thread, the asking price was an insane $669K.
http://tinyurl.com/5zjyas
Well check this much cheaper house in another nice part of New West:
http://tinyurl.com/6qn9sl
It was recently reduced by 16% from over $555K to $469K. That’s $200K or 30% cheaper than crazy tile house. This cheaper house is on a larger lot and hasn’t had a bizarre renovation. Those statues would have to go though.
But no, I wouldn’t buy either house for much more than $300K (well, I wouldn’t buy crazy tile house at all).
September 16th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
46 patriotz,
“or to help unload their properties to a buyer. Oops, Harper already promised the latter.”
Can you send me a link on this? I would like to read more.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
The situation is only going to get worse if the real estate market continues to slow down and rental properties become even less appealing to own as property appreciation declines, Gordon said.
Holgs already ripped this one apart, but allow me to pile on:
If there are fewer landlords, there is BY DEFINITION more owners (percent owners + percent renters = 100%). If more people own, there is less rental demand.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
“Landlords are at the point where they can’t afford to be landlords anymore,” she said.
Murray Richardson owns three properties in Vancouver and says he’s losing money because rents aren’t going up as fast as his costs, adding “nobody wants to hang on to rentals.”
Really now? So what are landlords going to do? Blow the properties up?
The rental market does not care whether any landlord can “afford” the property or not. If a landlord decides to sell, who’s going to buy the property? Another landlord of course, or a new owner-occupier, who vacates his old rental.
Next the specuvestors will be asking for government handouts to “keep them providing rental accommodation”, or to help unload their properties to a buyer. Oops, Harper already promised the latter.
Things are getting ridiculouser and ridiculouser.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
I recently got in a really heated discussion at work about prices in Moscow. My point of view is that since it is THE most expensive place in the world now
Except for housing, which is bad value but still way cheaper than London or New York, Moscow is actually cheaper than Vancouver. A bus or Metro ride is 70 cents, you can see a hockey game for $8, a beer at a cafe is $2.50, etc.
September 16th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
richard, I’ve noticed the same thing – since the quotes from the past are always bullish and wrong I’m assuming someone saved them and are reposting them. It would be helpful if they picked a handle instead of using the original posters name if that is whats going on.. I dunno, pope? is there something weird going on with the comment system?
September 16th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
vancouverguy has provided us with some approximate, but reasonable, numbers for downtown condos.
Jesse do you have a link for that?
September 16th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Dosh, What is your point, that you were horribly wrong? Northwest markets are all falling now, not just Vancouver. Check out seattle:
http://seattlebubble.com/blog/.....inking-in/
September 16th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
re #39 – i can’t understand that comment. is that person quoting himself? and where does the quote start/end? is there a problem with the comment handling of the site? that’s not the first one i couldn’t make heads or tails of, notwithstanding the usual gobbledygook from the usual suspect.
September 16th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
i don’t agree with Somerville. I think Toronto Re is very expensive, too. Why are those people obsessed with the idea that “falling real estate prices are bad”. In fact It is very good. Rising re prices are very bad. How come are majority so stupid? I am asking this question last three years. Economic life of a house is around 30 years. You need to spend as much as your purchase price in 30 years. Half million dollars home costs you 1 million dollars plus inflation plus interest for your mortgage in 30 years. My roughly estimate, you can pay in 80 years iy you have an average income. 2-3 years ago it was $25K. It was mentioned on Rob Tv. It wwas interesting to hear that it was 25K 15 years ago. Let’s say $40K. ohh man this is crazy.
the people who made a big purchase deserve a big F and everything.
September 16th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
dosh Says:
April 27th, 2007 at 11:40 am
Well it looks to me like the west coast is the place to buy – even in the US where prices are down they’re still up in the northwest. How do all the naysayers account for that?
September 16th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
The Fed is getting set to bailout AIG with an 85 billion dollar loan, taking 80 percent of the company. What a bunch of commies. I guess the lesson here is that if you’re going to fuck up, fuck up big!
September 16th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Textbooks of the future will discuss the past decade as an absolute classic in world economic history. Tens of thousands of History and Economics graduate students will choose various aspects of the 10-year orgy as thesis topics. We are watching the unfolding of history on a grand scale.
September 16th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Dear Tsur;
It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think your an idiot. Than to speak and confirm the fact.
September 16th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Yaltown Boomerang.
Are you looking for suites downtown?
did you try downtownsuites*com
Bruceward*com
promptom*com
husehunting*ca (the best place to find actual market value rentals)
September is probably tricky but you should be able to negotiate rents down starting October 1st.
From my experience working in a real estate office that did property management old people are not good because they complain a lot , especially if you raise the rent or if a tap drips more than once an hour and they ignore the no smoking and no pets rules and what if they go into the hospital long term or die?
They also stay so a retiree that moved into a place in yaletown in 1994 is still there and paying $1080 for a 2 bedroom and starts shouting if the rent goes up $40.
September 16th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
This is kind of funny after the report from BCHydro of the insane number of vacant properties.
http://communities.canada.com/.....ility.aspx
That would imply that a large number of properties are vacant to just hold for appreciation wihtout having to deal with the problems of being a landloard. In Edmonton this was a problem and now we our Vacancy rate has doubled.
September 16th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Hmmm, I should offer $25/month more rent if I really like the place, it’s not much but greed is powerfull… $300 annual investment vs. the opportunity cost of my time raking through craigslist and viewing shoebox apartments. I suppose the risk to this is they could go back to the first choice and ask for more.
How does it work with rentals? If you sign an agreement to rent you can be held to the deposit, generally up to a month, but what if the landlord agrees verbally then comes back saying somebody has offered more, can you hold them to the agreement?
September 16th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
YLTNBoomerang, all you can do is put on a grey wig and talk about The War a lot. Put yourself in the landlord’s shoes and decide why s/he would pick you as opposed to someone else like the pensioner. More money is an acceptable answer.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
YLTNBoomerang, eeeenteresting and well observed. It lines up with my experience with basement suites. The asking rent doesn’t move around that much and if you price at market you get tons of applicants. $100 above and it’s crickets. Probably indicative of what is effectively a commodity.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Ooops, forgot purpose of original rant..
We actually found a place we wanted to rent, good size, fair price and we put in an application. Turns out it was us vs. a retiree and they went with the retiree! I know credit isn’t the issue as I could have bought the place outright but I told the truth that market prices were too high and we wanted to rent… they saw us as not wanting to rent long term where the pensioner with fixed income would be there until death, DOH!
This was very annoying and I have decided to no longer tell the truth to landlords; what I need is a good story to tell them to make them think we are there for a long time, any ideas? Bear in mind my gf has rental references, I don’t as I have always either owned or rented from family.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
I hear you YLTNBoomerang! Hubby and I aren’t interested in a suite less than 800 sq feet and $1500 – $1600 is what we are comfortable paying. We will go $1800 – $2000 for a larger place but that is our limit. I too see the same places listed $2200+ month after month… I emailed Prompton a while back to let them know their listings are all about $300 p/mo over priced IMHO. Actually, I’ve come to think all the rental agencies do this on purpose, they’re trying to push the ceiling on the rental market to “maximize” profit for their clients who are still likely cash-flow negative even at that rate!
September 16th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
So… Been looking for a month to rent a bigger place now, really annoying! That Sun story irked me even more! Here’s my interpretation of hitting the pavement:
There is a shortage of affordable rental housing in Vancouver but there is not a shortage of available rental housing in Vancouver.
I am looking for a bigger 1 bdr + den around 1000sqft and am willing to pay $2/sqft; basically, my budget is $2K/month. What I have found at this price is that there are not too many people that are willing to pay upwards of $2K/month. If you hold the rent at $2K and shrink the sqft to say 700, there are very few people willing to fork out the dough. Lower the rent to $1500 and you get lineups.
I have found that the price point that the market is ready and willing to pay is $1500-1600 for a 2 bdr or big 1bdr den downtown, at this price you get hoards of renters. If you price over $2K, you get nobody. What this tells me is that a lot of “investors” suffer from the human condition of greed and are illogically holding units vacant for higher rent. This holdout can only go on for so long before they either drop rent and bite the bullet of long term negative cash flow or they sell. If they sell, who will buy unless:
1. It is cheaper to own then rent (assuming a downpayment is available)
2. The price is low enough such that those without the downpayment will rent off you and that rent will cover your costs
So anyway, the gf and I each have our own places and our combined rent right now is less than $2K so we will keep looking until we find the right place.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Publishing this kind of crap should be illegal, BTW. Isn’t this in essence a fraud???
September 16th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
I think this article has a very simple message, actually.
I think it’s trying to convince all the prospective studio/1br renters to go out and buy something NOW.
Before the prices go down.
So all the scammers can try and make some money.
That’s it.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
The situation is only going to get worse if the real estate market continues to slow down and rental properties become even less appealing to own as property appreciation declines, Gordon said.
“Landlords are at the point where they can’t afford to be landlords anymore,” she said.
Murray Richardson owns three properties in Vancouver and says he’s losing money because rents aren’t going up as fast as his costs, adding “nobody wants to hang on to rentals.”
I’ve come to the conclusion that a majority of people, even those with really high IQ’s, have a disability when it comes to seeing the consequences of things that happen now leading to bad/good later. Either that or us bears are just gifted with something that a majority of people don’t have…
A lot of us on these blogs saw the implosion of Lehman, Merill, Fan & Fred, etc, a loooong time ago (2004.) It’s been a long time coming. It didn’t really take a high IQ, just the capability to be open to a lot of different opinions and the patience to read millions of blog posts / comments.
This guy can’t put two and two together. He states that “Landlords can’t afford to be landlords anymore” but from that point he reaches the conclusion that: rents will go up because there will be fewer landlords. What?
Let’s think this through:
- More “landlords” losing money on rent every month
- means more landlords trying to get out
- means more people selling because they don’t want to hold a money-losing property
- which means even more inventory
- which means even lower prices
- which means even more people selling & fewer people buying
- which (positive feedback loop, you get the drift)
…
- final conclusion: reduced construction, higher unemployment, bankruptcies, foreclosures, waay lower prices, banks reselling at even lower prices, fewer high-income renters and more properties, and hence, much lower rents.
I recently got in a really heated discussion at work about prices in Moscow. My point of view is that since it is THE most expensive place in the world now, and with a recession looming which will impair the demand for oil, it HAS to drop. The other point of view was of course “OIL”, “OLIGARCHS”, “it’s high so it’s going higher”, “god is always making more billionaires”. (Looks like I was right – Russian stockmarket down 17% today)
Thank god for these blogs and the freaking common sense of those that post on them.
BTW I’m posting this from Sweden. Still a renter, but the number of people pestering me to buy a place here has gone down dramatically in the last few months.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Harper is hilarious. Tax credits for FTBs! Doesn’t he know we can’t afford to buy at these ridiculous prices and $750 in my pocket isn’t going to make a bit of difference? Duh.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Source: REBGV Dynamic stats
Sept 1-15 WEST VAN SFH
Gross Sales 13,331,500
Units Listed 88
Units Sold 9
Sale Success Ratio 20%
% Sales to Listings 10%
Avg Price/Unit 1,481,277 (-18%)
Active Listings 560 (+63%)
Sept 2007 WEST VAN SFH
Gross Sales 97,940,700
Units Listed 137
Units Sold 54
Sale Success Ratio 56%
% Sales to Listings 39%
Avg Price/Unit 1,813,716
Active Listings 343
Sept 1-15 COQUITLAM SFH
Gross Sales 11,734,700
Units Listed 112
Units Sold 18
Sale Success Ratio 23%
% Sales to Listings 16%
Avg Price/Unit 651,927 (-2%)
Active Listings 780 (+52%)
Sept 2007 COQUITLAM SFH
Gross Sales 58,740,650
Units Listed 185
Units Sold 88
Sale Success Ratio 57%
% Sales to Listings 47%
Avg Price/Unit 667,507
Active Listings 510
Sept 1-15 NEW WESTMINSTER SFH
Gross Sales 1,373,000
Units Listed 34
Units Sold 3
Sale Success Ratio 21%
% Sales to Listings 8%
Avg Price/Unit 457,666 (-19%)
Active Listings 157 (+52%)
Sept 2007 NEW WESTMINSTER SFH
Gross Sales 16,403,303
Units Listed 44
Units Sold 29
Sale Success Ratio 70%
% Sales to Listings 65%
Avg Price/Unit 565,631
Active Listings 103
Sept 1-15 NORTH VAN SFH
Gross Sales 15,068,000
Units Listed 109
Units Sold 16
Sale Success Ratio 25%
% Sales to Listings 14%
Avg Price/Unit 941,750 (+8%)
Active Listings 412 (+72%)
Sept 2007 NORTH VAN SFH
Gross Sales 70,467,290
Units Listed 166
Units Sold 81
Sale Success Ratio 72%
% Sales to Listings 48%
Avg Price/Unit 869,966
Active Listings 239
Sept 1-15 RICHMOND SFH
Gross Sales 22,950,900
Units Listed 118
Units Sold 29
Sale Success Ratio 39%
% Sales to Listings 24%
Avg Price/Unit 791,410 (0%)
Active Listings 996 (+68%)
Sept 2007 RICHMOND SFH
Gross Sales 115,209,600
Units Listed 205
Units Sold 147
Sale Success Ratio 62%
% Sales to Listings 71%
Avg Price/Unit 783,738
Active Listings 592
Sept 1-15 VANCOUVER EAST SFH
Gross Sales 21,095,398
Units Listed 149
Units Sold 31
Sale Success Ratio 31%
% Sales to Listings 20%
Avg Price/Unit 680,496 (0%)
Active Listings 1,025 (60%)
Sept 2007 VANCOUVER EAST SFH
Gross Sales 116,199,540
Units Listed 250
Units Sold 172
Sale Success Ratio 61%
% Sales to Listings 68%
Avg Price/Unit 675,578
Active Listings 637
Sept 1-15 VANCOUVER WEST SFH
Gross Sales 40,993,388
Units Listed 166
Units Sold 27
Sale Success Ratio 33%
% Sales to Listings 16%
Avg Price/Unit 1,518,273 (-4%)
Active Listings 1,000 (+98%)
Sept 2007 VANCOUVER WEST SFH
Gross Sales 178,496,540
Units Listed 247
Units Sold 112
Sale Success Ratio 67%
% Sales to Listings 45%
Avg Price/Unit 1,593,719
Active Listings 504
Sept 1-15 LADNER SFH
Gross Sales 840,100
Units Listed 14
Units Sold 2
Sale Success Ratio 40%
% Sales to Listings 14%
Avg Price/Unit 420,050 (-36%)
Active Listings 137 (+117%)
Sept 2007 LADNER SFH
Gross Sales 12,655,600
Units Listed 33
Units Sold 19
Sale Success Ratio 82%
% Sales to Listings 57%
Avg Price/Unit 666,084
Active Listings 63
Sept 1-15 PORT MOODY SFH
Gross Sales 2,753,500
Units Listed 31
Units Sold 4
Sale Success Ratio 21%
% Sales to Listings 12%
Avg Price/Unit 688,375(-9%)
Active Listings 187 (+74%)
Sept 2007 PORT MOODY SFH
Gross Sales 14,388,100
Units Listed 39
Units Sold 19
Sale Success Ratio 65%
% Sales to Listings 48%
Avg Price/Unit 757,268
Active Listings 107
September 16th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
minotaur3: He was probably talking about checking at the end of the month for vacancies one month in advance. Many people wait until the last day of the month to give notice, so the property manager wouldn’t know what units will be vacant until then.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
minotaur3, it sounds like if there are lineups, they’re not charging enough rent or maybe they’re trying for a bidding war. “Caveat Rentor”.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
jwepo, thanks for the nitpick, I’ve corrected the spelling.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Actually, is this it?
Vacant suites draw lineups of up to 50 people
http://www.canada.com/vancouve.....4a&p=1
The situation is only going to get worse if the real estate market continues to slow down and rental properties become even less appealing to own as property appreciation declines, Gordon said.
“Landlords are at the point where they can’t afford to be landlords anymore,” she said.
Murray Richardson owns three properties in Vancouver and says he’s losing money because rents aren’t going up as fast as his costs, adding “nobody wants to hang on to rentals.”
If there are 50 people viewing per suite, then I could see them having an open house at the end of the month.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
These guys are paid to feed us crap.
Just like the Sun when they are printing the story about line-ups for rental apartments. “with the RE market going down and home values not increasing as they did anymore owners cannot afford to keep rental properties, hence the shortage of rentals is looming… I haven’t seen a bigger pile of sh*t in ages…
But I guess people will believe it. They are THAT stupid.
-
Do you have a link to that article?
I called up a Coal Harbor apartment complex this weekend to check for availability and was told to call back on the last day of the month for availabilities, and be ready to view it and sign a lease on the spot if I liked the place. Sounds like major BS to me – that’s not how apartments are rented out. Vacancies are known for at least a month ahead of time, no reason for a “feeding frenzy” on the very last day. There’s either massive amounts of demand letting them get away with this (unlikely) or this is typical salesman pressure tactics to drive up rents. I can’t see how or why they would even want a mad scramble on the last day of every month. Anyone? Either way, the article sounds worth a laugh so please link it if possible, thanks.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Yup best to vote NDP because Jack Layton knows economics and rich asians.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
What’s next from Harper? $600 economic stimulus cheques?
Is he trying to make Bush like he know’s what he’s doing?
Well he couldn’t resist copying the US strategy of picking the taypayer’s pocket to try to prop up RE prices, could he?
One more reason not to vote for that gang. Every economic move they’ve made since they took office has been wrongheaded.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Huh, and just last May Tsur said house prices dropping isn’t necessarily the way it will work out:
http://www.canada.com/theprovi.....83ff0a9d32
“With housing markets, it doesn’t have to be that a correction happens by prices dropping and magically being affordable,” says Somerville. “They can work by things growing flat or very slowly for an extended period until population and incomes catch up.”
My favorite quote from that article is from Helmut ‘whiplash’ Pastrick who said:
“If you’re holding off because ‘Why should I buy now if it’s going to drop 20 per cent next year?’ I think that’s a bit of a gamble. A person’s well within their right to do that, obviously, but just bear in mind the general view is there will still be a price increase this year and another next year,”
Well yes, but as most of you know Pastrick has changed his tune from prediction of a 10% rise in prices to a 10% drop in prices, maybe more.. Thats a 20% shift in his forecast in about 3 months!
September 16th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
That’s “definitely”, not “definately” (in the title). Not to nitpick.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:59 am
One can spellcheck posts and comments using google toolbar. It works for post titles as well…
September 16th, 2008 at 11:57 am
“Somerville’s study was cooked”
I don’t think the “cooking” was intentional but merely a product of making certain assumptions, realized or not, that may or may not be realistic. At first glance I agree it looks to be the latter.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Sorry about the double-trigger
September 16th, 2008 at 11:48 am
These guys are paid to feed us crap.
Just like the Sun when they are printing the story about line-ups for rental apartments. “with the RE market going down and home values not increasing as they did anymore owners cannot afford to keep rental properties, hence the shortage of rentals is looming… I haven’t seen a bigger pile of sh*t in ages…
But I guess people will believe it. They are THAT stupid.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:48 am
These guys are paid to feed us crap.
Just like the Sun when they are printing the story about line-ups for rental apartments. “with the home values going down and home values not increasing as they did anymore owners cannot afford to keep rental properties, hence the shortage of rentals is looming… I haven’t seen a bigger pile of sh*t in ages…
But I guess people will believe it. They are THAT stupid.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:43 am
http://www.thestar.com/Federal.....cle/499952
What’s next from Harper? $600 economic stimulus cheques?
Is he trying to make Bush like he know’s what he’s doing?
September 16th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Toronto housing prices are not out of line because they have not had the explosive growth of other cities, Sommerville said. “Some cities look way out of line when you run the numbers, but Toronto is bang on.”
Real prices in Toronto are higher then they were in 1989 before a major bust. But of course this time Ontario won’t see a recession like it did in the early 90′s, right?
http://cuer.sauder.ubc.ca/cma/.....oronto.pdf
Somerville’s study was cooked to make Vancouver look mildly overpriced, and this resulted in all sorts of absurdities, like Toronto having “normal” prices, and Ottawa being twice as overpriced as Vancouver, which is absolutely ludicrous.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:28 am
According to insider developer friends in Vancouver:
“no new developments planned until after 2010 – and the ones that are going ahead are generally smaller developments, higher end or resort…”
just an msn conversation but interesting to hear.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:23 am
“I wonder what conclusions the study would come to if it is assumed the todays prices are way out the norm.”
Ahh Alan, you found one of the fatal flaws. Congratulations.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:21 am
“I wonder what that study would show if you included data from the price/rent ratio of condo stocks.”
I wonder indeed. vancouverguy has provided us with some approximate, but reasonable, numbers for downtown condos. Housing busts happen slowly — not over a weekend
— so we have the luxury of time to properly do the math.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Now they’re going to start playing this like they saw it coming all along.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Err, rent is a moving target, just like in Florida. Once the constructio boom is over and realtors, mortgage brokers, and construction trades stop making the easy cash, we can expect rent to fall A LOT further. Plus the huge amount of speculator owned condos coming online.
The fact that downtown rent has not gone up a lot proves that rent will go on a free fall once all the condos complete. If the presale prices give rediculous price/rent ratio at today’s rent, imagine what it would give when rental market crashes.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:58 am
I wonder what conclusions the study would come to if it is assumed the todays prices are way out the norm.