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
November 25th, 2009 at 7:53 am
Surely it’s time for someone to create a Canadian Housing Bubble for this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H....._the_2000s
November 25th, 2009 at 5:27 am
@NO-LYMPICS:
You are confusing the Canada Line with the Skytrain, which is a proprietary system which only a few cities use.
The Canada Line cars are of generic design. In fact, the cars don’t even have any manufacturer’s nameplates, contrary to usual practice – no-name transit. Were they trying to hide something? This piqued my curiosity, so after a little digging I found that the cars for the “Canada” Line were in fact made in…
Korea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line
November 25th, 2009 at 3:18 am
There is no escaping fundamentals:
http://www.calculatedriskblog......-rent.html
It is not different here.
November 25th, 2009 at 2:02 am
NO-LYMPICS, Drachen, all -
The Georgia Straight article you mention is archived/linked here:
http://vreaa.wordpress.com/200.....re-an-a/
November 24th, 2009 at 11:43 pm
Wow, Bear Mountain is having financial problems at the peak of the largest RE bubble in history? What happens when prices inevitably fall in the coming years?
“Incompetent” doesn’t begin to describe it.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
#44, thanks for the Len Barrie link…can’t get enough of that Bare Mountain debacle…
November 24th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
http://www.theglobeandmail.com.....le1376388/
November 24th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
@Drachen:
That is your self fulfilling fantasy of a blowoff top. At least it makes you happy. Too bad reality does not match your fantasy as property prices will continue to rise.
November 24th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
This is just a delay tactic to avoid shadow inventory from flooding the market at this point in time. This is also happening in the US where the second wave of foreclosures has been put on hold for the moment.
Ultimately, there will come a point when FTB’s will compare what they can get by buying versus renting and it will be clear to most people renting is the better value given all the downside risks to buying at peak prices.
Since the market liquidity depends on FTB, the market will either correct downwards (even if rates stay low) or we will have to create a subsubprime market and tap into ever so more precarious tranches of low quality borrowers with the backing of CMHC.
November 24th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
40 – dude, it’s an international airport….
Cater for your customers, many of whom are from countries where english and french aren’t spoken…
It makes sense to have such announcements and signs in multiple languages – especially those of major tourist groups.
November 24th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
38 – only in english, no other languages.
___________
As it should be. It should only be in English and French, as they are the two official languages. You head down a slippery slope when you put signage and communiques into other languages, as it diminishes the incentive to learn and/or speak the language of the country.
Besides, English is the international language if you are worried about catering to those arriving from the airport…
So, for once in this PC city, I think the planners did something right.
November 24th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
“The Canada line will see $14 to $21 million dollars in losses every year until 2025″
….
Same with Expo & Millennium lines. Cause they subcontract nearly all repairs to a private workshop @Dawson/Rosser.
It’s good to have a brother in the Union who looks out for your back.
November 24th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
off topic again: YVR Train
if you ever get off at the terminal, you will note that all exiting and entering happens on the same side.
If the planners were interested in the efficient flow of passengers, they would have had exit on one side, and enter on the other. …rather than doing that…they have a loudspeaker declaring, “PLEASE WAIT UNTIL ALL THE PASSENGERS HAVE EXITED THE CAR BEFORE ENTERING”
…only in english, no other languages.
November 24th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
27 X NO-LYMPICS Says:
November 24th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Did ya see the story in the SUN a few eeks ago of a 24 year old pharmacist that bought a $500,000 condo.
WTF? ———————————————
Not that I am in any way defending this lunacy, but a 24 yo Pharmacy grad could be earning, say, 80k. Kick in no loans (mum and dad funded, there are lots of these kids), and a 100k DP pressie from mum and day, and you are left with 400k on 80k = 5x salary. While I would never do that, many would. Lunacy, but it has a certain perverse logic to it.
November 24th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
@Warren: Underground line always have higher operating costs than above ground line. Frankly I would prefer it down Arbutus by either using existing train track or build above it. It would be much cheaper and accomplish its main purpose which is rapid transit between Richmond and Downtown for the Richmond residents at a far lower construction and maintenance costs. Let’s face it, that’s was like 75% of the transportation reason to build the line. However building it down Cambie offers a lot more quick profit for developers than building it down Arbutus corridor. I think that’s the real reason of building it down Cambie. There is no real reason why Arbutus can’t be densify aside from NIMBY from the better connected residents there.
As for the ridership stats, I have serious doubts about that. I have seen Canada Line employees doing counting at Granville and Broadway stations in afternoon peak hours around 5:30PM about twice. However I’ve never seen them doing it at other stations and at other times. So if they simply multiply the number of passengers entering the station at that time by 2 (for inbound and outbound) and then by the number of hours they operate then sure, it might be 80K. But I seriously doubt that number given how infrequently they are doing the sampling.
I did a rough calculation my way. Each train has 2 cars. Each car has seating for 40 people for a total of 80 seats. I assume the trains can hold twice that number for standing passengers. So that about 240 passengers per train. Now granted I know the max passenger number is like 350 or something, might be possible in Asia where the average person is skinnier and you can pack them in like sardines but I don’t think so here. However let’s just use 300. Now the train operates from 5AM to like 2AM for 22 hours/day. So to have 80K passengers means that we must have around 80000/300 = 267 full jam packed train every day. Is that possible, maybe but I doubt it since outside of rush hour, the train is carring only about 100 people.
oh one more thing, if this system is supposed to provide rapid transit for decades to come with our growing population (because again everyone is just dying to move to Vancouver & Richmond), how the hell do you upgrade this system!?!? The station can’t accommodate longer trains without additional construction work for longer platforms. You can construct the longer platforms without digging up the streets and shutting down at least 1/2 of the tracks for each station. Given the typical Vancouver construction method, chances are any station upgrades will be done by shutting down the entire line, digging up the street and upgrade the station one at a time. Probably right when we have another bus shortage! Ok maybe we can increase the train frequency to maybe 2 minutes during rush hour which doubles the line’s capacity. But that’s about as far as you can go.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
Ya, sorry facts and numbers get in the way of your reality. You sound like the NDP.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Re: Canada Line
Sorry….it uses a technology that most of the world chose not to use. Whoop- de -doo re the ridership….one can pick any number and make it self fulfilling.
Obviously the taxpayer is on the hook to subisidize its losses for years to come.
The MAIN thing is a taxpayer subsidy to developers so that hi-density can be built along the line and displace existing zonings(commercial and industrial)….small business will suffer and die off. After casinos, the DCC’s and high property taxes these ” stroke of a pen ” zoning changes garner local gov’ts massive revenue is like an ATM machine.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
#31 realpaul:
Just like conveniently taking care of the homeless as Olympics coincidentally shows up….all BAD NEWS stories (such as EI stats and future homeless) will be buried , hidden , ignored etc.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
#30
Drachen
Yes you are correct,….. it was the GS.
One has to assume this 24 year old pharmacist has student loans etc. to pay off…no mention of a spouse,…so again, WTF? Is this the norm ?
eeks !!!
November 24th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
#22 Forrest, BNN reporter Kim Parlle broke a story today that showed the unemployment has risen 150% in BC YTD. That also 50% of the people unemployed did not qualify for EI and as such have never been counted among the unemployed and further, an additional 50% of the unemployed in the past year are still unemployed and have run out of benefits and are not being counted as unemployed either.
It looks like there is a big hidden problem with the governments reporting of the facts.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
@NO-LYMPICS:
“a few eeks ago”
Pun intended? It was the Georgia Strait actually, scary scary article. I picked one up because it has a picture of a house with rocket engines blasting off.
(nov 12-19, 2009)
November 24th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
You are arguing in circles again. I started by comparing the Canada Line to a more expensive line in the US with far less ridership.
Your argument then was somehow based around construction.
Now you bring it back to cost. Please provide some relevant comparisons if you don’t consider the Canada Line a success.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
@Warren:
How a transit line is built (surface, elevated, underground) determines how much it costs, big time, and how much any capital asset costs (including RE of course) determines ROI for a given amount of earnings (ridership, rental value, whatever).
November 24th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Did ya see the story in the SUN a few eeks ago of a 24 year old pharmacist that bought a $500,000 condo.
WTF?
November 24th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
More evidence of CHMC’s influence in distorting the marketplace. Check out this article from today’s Financial Post about apartments being a great stable investments.
http://www.financialpost.com/r.....id=2257623
The two paragraphs below that jumped out at me is below (emphasis mine):
CMHC has made it relatively easy to finance the ownership of an apartment building for Canadians. The agency backs loans for individuals who sign a personal guarantee with as little as 15% down. That mean you can buy a small $1-million building with just $150,000.
Availability of credit is one thing, but it’s the cheap money that makes most transactions work. The interest rate on a CMHC-backed loan is as little as 3.5% for a five-year mortgage or 4.5% for a 10-year. A conventional mortgage, if you could find one, would be about 200 basis points higher for both terms. If you are borrowing at 3.5% and your return on that cash is 6% to 7% – the average in the Toronto area – that spread is making you money.
November 24th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
@Drachen “The upshot, if I am correct is that the CMHC has had the opposite effect of their mandate, they’ve made housing less affordable for Canadians AND it means that many Canadian markets have a lot farther to fall than most people believe is possible.” – Interesting hypothesis, I saw an article (I wish I could find it) that made the same argument for Fannie Mae and the US system. In trying to promote home ownership they inadvertantly fuelled a bubble.
November 24th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
OT: I love the new Canada Line, I’ve used it a lot over the last few weeks. The cars are wonderfully wide and quiet. We are long overdue for a Richmond and YVR rapid transit connection and the City Hall and Langara stations seem very busy in particular. I’m not sure why there are two stations between Bridgeport and YVR but whatever. I’m happy to pay taxes until it breaks even – $8/year per person for 15 years, cry me a river!
Anyway, back to RE. It seems to be playing out as expected – bad news is accumulating and a lot of households & businesses are holding out for (1) the holiday season and (2) the Olympics. Locals, being in denial as they are, will probably still load up on Xmas flat screens and what not on the plastic. However the Olympics will be a dud as far as revenue and RE. Next year will be interesting for sure. Once the bad news works into the mainstream consciousness it will be a very slippery slope.
November 24th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
“The Canada line will see $14 to $21 million dollars in losses every year until 2025…
interesting success”
- I never understand why public transit projects are widely expected to turn a profit? They are a public service. How much do hospitals ‘lose’ each year. Or a more close comparison, how much does highway and road maintenance ‘lose’ each year. Yet, for some reason we hold a different standard for public transit.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
EI claims jump 7.1% in September across Canada. I wonder how many of these people are on the hook for presales or mortgages?
“Buy now or miss out on BEEING UNDERWATER IN THE NEAR FUTURE.”
November 24th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
It sure will, it’s called public transit for a reason.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
@Warren: The Canada line will see $14 to $21 million dollars in losses every year until 2025:
http://communities.canada.com/.....years.aspx
interesting success.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
@BearProblems:
You have a fundamental (pun intended) confusion in the point you’re making.
You are comparing what Bulls say about real-estate market fundamentals (rise with inflation) with a real-estate market bubble. The two thing ARE both about real estate but the behaviour of the market is completely different. In the case of a bubble, like we currently have, many people are living at the very edge of affordability and an increase of even a few hundred dollars a month on their mortgages will force them to list or default, this will translate to a glut in supply which as you know (I hope) drives prices down.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
patriotz,
Now it matters how the line was built? I’m talking about ROI. Comparing it a transit project happening around the same time in Seattle for a similar cost the Canada Line is waaaay ahead. What are the ridership figures for that Toronto line? How about operating expenses, is it subsidized, or does it break even, or make money?
In fact ridership does not only meet projections for the C-line, it is higher than expected. The bottom line is that it has been a success. Stop changing your argument.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Many bears believe that interest rates will skyrocket as inflation kicks in late next year or possibly the following year.
Skyrocket no but increase yes. It is not a belief it is a fact. Interest will rise the question is when. When interest rates rise it will sink any bull that is sitting with no skin in the game. Huge mortgage with little or no means to pay for it will spell disaster for many.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Nice. The next year should really tell an interesting story.
November 24th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
I would like to see the vancouver graph updated as well. scary how close it is to text book
November 24th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
All right Moose, HERE you go.
November 24th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
I like the Vancouver graph – would like to see it updated, as we must surely be at the second, “return to normal” peak now.
November 24th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
I have a hypothesis about the CMHC. I’ve been saying for years that Vancouver left market fundamentals behind around 1986-87 but I had no indication really of WHY that happened. Then, about a month ago I learned that the CMHC only started offering MBS (mortgage backed securities=mortgage insurance) in 1986. So now I’d like to compare market volatility/rise in the pre and post 1986 time periods. I can’t find any Canadian graphs that give useful information before the ’70s so there’s not a lot of material to look at but you CAN see a distinct pattern in many Canadian cities AFTER 1986, there is a sharp rise which doesn’t appear to reflect other factors and more importantly the prices have yet to return to the pre 1986 baseline.
The upshot, if I am correct is that the CMHC has had the opposite effect of their mandate, they’ve made housing less affordable for Canadians AND it means that many Canadian markets have a lot farther to fall than most people believe is possible.
Here are 3 cities for comparison (I think Toronto is actually the strongest indication that something significant changed in the market around the mid-late ’80s).
Toronto
Victoria
Vancouver (older graph with a textbook bubble graph superimposed)
November 24th, 2009 at 11:29 am
this is off topic…but relevant…
WE’RE NUMBER 1 WE’RE NUMBER 1…wait…we’ve been #1 for 6 years.
“B.C. has highest child poverty rate in Canada for six years straight”
http://www.google.com/hostedne.....-mMhjWVFZg
and we have the olympics too!
this really makes me rage with anger.
November 24th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Harper Grey LLP could do well to advertise aggresively out here in Calgary……….
November 24th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Another flog:
@Warren:
A ridership of 80,000 a day for an underground rapid transit line is dismal.
Compare to Toronto’s Yonge Street subway in its early days – and it was only 7.4 km long.
http://transit.toronto.on.ca/subway/5102.shtml
Saying that the RAV line is a success because ridership meets projections is begging the question – does the projected ridership justify a subway in the first place?
Nonsense, it was the complete opposite – the provincial government of the day – whether it was Socred, NDP, or Liberal – built what it wanted and only cared about the locals if they were on the “right” side. I well remember how Bennett and Vander Zalm steamrolled the Skytrain though East Van and refused to consider a tunnel for just the short section along Commercial Drive. Cambie Street got its tunnel because its residents were better connected. It’s not NIMBY, it’s “money talks”.
November 24th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Huge rise in EI claims story doesn’t make it into todays Vanc Sun.
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=2260102
November 24th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Are you feeling lucky today punk, huh, do ya?
http://www.vancouversun.com/
November 24th, 2009 at 10:05 am
#1 @BearProblems: Macro analysis suggests real estate prices have nowhere to go but down. Interest rates are at the lower bound, and buyers have bid prices up to the very limit of affordability. We are no longer talking about what is sane or prudent, it is a question of “what bank will sign this”. People are just crazy. Look at this letter to Garth and ponder how someone making $53000/yr feels they can carry $615000 in debt.
http://www.greaterfool.ca/2009/11/23/extreme/
November 24th, 2009 at 10:01 am
And trees grow to the sky….
November 24th, 2009 at 9:49 am
It’s quite possible that real estate prices will continue to appreciate forever. This is the “Vancouver scenario” your friends keep telling you about.
November 24th, 2009 at 9:42 am
@BearProblems: How much did interest rates go up in the States, Ireland or Spain in the last few years?
Prices that are too high don’t need high interest rates to cause a crash.
November 24th, 2009 at 9:42 am
“To me this sounds like hedging your bets.”
——————
Actually, it sounds like macroeconomics 101.
“They also claim that real estate values keep up with inflation.”
————————————————-
On a long term average. Which we are well ahead of.
“Well I guess if interest rates stay low and inflation never becomes a problem then you’ll be wrong. ”
———————————————–
Possible, but in this case RE appreciation (inflation) ceases, and the market crashes for other reasons (no rationale for holding -ve return RE). This is the “japan” scenario or a long painful slow deflation.
November 24th, 2009 at 9:16 am
Many bears believe that interest rates will skyrocket as inflation kicks in late next year or possibly the following year. They also claim that real estate values keep up with inflation. At the same time, real estate prices “crash” when interest rates go up. To me this sounds like hedging your bets. If you’re a real estate bear and believe these things you will be right no matter what happens. Well I guess if interest rates stay low and inflation never becomes a problem then you’ll be wrong.