Banker Bubble-talk Bundle
There has been a surprising number of comments from lenders and bank economist lately about the idea of an overpriced Canadian real estate market and the risk to irrational buyers. I thought it might be interesting to round up some of the comments Canadian Bankers and Economists have made in the media recently regarding the housing market and the possibility that some Canadian markets are in a housing bubble.
TD Bank Financial Group economist Pascal Gauthier
..the current momentum is not expected to last beyond the next six to 10 months. Were it to continue into 2011, there would be more credence to the view that a bubble has formed. But the brakes are currently being applied in the background, which should prevent a bubble from forming between now and then.
BMO Capital Markets deputy chief economist Doug Porter
“Housing has definitely been at the forefront of any kind of a recovery we’ve seen … I don’t think you can find a single segment of the economy, other than maybe bankruptcy lawyers, who’ve thrived more in the last six months or staged a more impressive turnaround.”
“The rapid-fire rebound in Canadian housing is showing no signs of letting up,” Mr. Porter said in a note to clients. “While that may be causing some sweaty palms among bubble-phobes, the quick turn is a vivid illustration that monetary policy still works in this country.”
CIBC senior economist Benjamin Tal
“I challenge the [mortgage lending] industry to come up with research to make sure we know what types of mortgages are in the pipeline. We need to know how many people taking variable rate mortgages at 2.5%, who cannot afford financing a mortgage at 4.0 or 4.5%. If it’s a marginal number, then we’re not creating a bubble — we’re basically seeing monetary policy that is working.
We have to make sure if you take a mortgage now, you have to be able to finance it 200 basis points higher after 2010. If you can’t, then you should probably buy a smaller house or don’t buy a house at all — that the prudent thing to do.”
ING Canada President and CEO Peter Aceto
“You have situations in some markets such as Toronto where people are making multiple offers for homes, they are paying thousands more and waiving conditions. It gives me concern they may not be thinking rationally, and this could lead to problems. Canadians are also paying their homes off slower and slower, and the concern for me is that they are buying more house than they can really afford.”
“Canadians have been proud internally that we’re very different than the Americans in the way we behave in terms of our spending habits and the way we deal with credit. But over time we have become a lot closer than we think.”
Scotia Capital economists Derek Holt and Karen Cordes
“Is Canada in a housing bubble? Probably, but low rates, mortgage innovation and a relative shortage of new supply are likely too keep it going for a while yet.”
“The Canadian Real Estate Association has reported October sales and prices. The results are a bright spot in the Canadian economy, but with prices up 20 per cent over year-ago levels and at all-time highs by virtually every measure, this is becoming an over-valued asset class in our opinion.”
HSBC Securities Economist Stewart Hall
“… it certainly bears watching. The real estate market is definitely showing very, very robust levels of activity, particularly at this stage of the business cycle, where we have an economy that really hasn’t launched into recovery mode yet. Beyond 2009 and getting into 2010, if we are continuing to throw off these heightened levels of activity, then I will become quite concerned that we are on the cusp of an asset bubble here…”
“And when they pop, it’s rather painful to all and sundry.”
Have I missed any? If you spot any interesting quotes from lenders or economists share them in the comments section.
RSS 2.0 comments feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:20 pm
As in C.Y.A. You look pretty dumb if you miss or dismiss massive deviations from the fundamentals, but you’d have to be *really stupid* to miss it on the replay.
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:48 pm
this will all end badly
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:51 pm
“Tough budgeting decisions ahead, Tories warn”
http://tinyurl.com/ykhrn7t
How about starting from the basics? Reduce potential future liabilities like the ones attached to the CMHC guarantees? We are talking billions there alone.
This government is a bloody joke! Drachen posted the emails of local MPs online in the previous thread. Use it to make yourself heard. Somebody must be held accountable for this disaster.
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:03 pm
@domus:
I sent my MP an email regarding the CMHC on Oct 21, and actually got a response on Nov 13th. He said he would forward a copy to Flaherty, and send me a copy of his reply. Of course, I’m not holding my breath. I was surprised enough to get a not-entirely form letter back.
Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it when an MP get a letter or email from the public, that is counted as representing a specific number of the population that feels the same way but isn’t bothering to write. They have different scales too for handwritten letter, phone call, email etc. So writing an email represents more than just your one voice (I’d love to know the actual numbers). And you don’t have to present an airtight case, they just want to know the issue and whether you support or don’t support what is going on.
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Watching HGTV
This women in the states talking about how she is struggling with her payments after her interest rate changed.
Her monthly payments went from 1400 to 2200.
Will we be watching the same show soon, but instead of the women from the US it will be from Canada.
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:52 pm
So, Flaherty decides that putting thousands of unqualified dipshits into overpriced condos was worth sacrificing programs to seniors, children, the poor and disenfranchised?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com.....le1386276/
The question has always been why? Would there not be just as much economic activity being generated building schools, hospitals, opening surgeries etc etc etc as the dumping of hundreds of billions into shaky home loans?
Wouldn’t the real economy benefit from reducing taxes to business instead of subsidizing a few short term speculations in sub regional markets?
Is it the economy or the pissant number of votes that are really important to our shit for brains politico’s?
With the Libs jumping on the HST bandwagon it ensures that the gravy train going through Ottawa first.
What a loon show.
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:53 am
Looking at how nobody is backing off anywhere else (central banks, gold, etc) it looks like this bubble is far from over. We might be still seeing ongoing price growth six months from now. Then the crash will be truly spectacular, and couple generations after that will hate real estate.
If anybody is looking for a career in a growing market for the next few years, I suggest to look at anything that has to do with bankruptcies and suicides as both are going to explode.
December 3rd, 2009 at 3:14 am
@observer:
Note that anyone buying a pre-sale is making a bet on future versus present prices, and thus is a speculator by definition, even if they don’t plan to flip the unit.
December 3rd, 2009 at 5:34 am
Ozzie raise rates again. Foriegn money is pouring in and the public purse is healthy. Canada on the other hand is still trying it’s ‘one trick pony’ of manipulating the loon below the plummettting USD and taking on more puble debt by buying all its own debt. We all pay for this loonacy with inflation and higher taxes.
http://www.globeinvestor.com/s.....6/GIStory/
Reading Garths blog today we see the Gov Can is announcing massive tax increases and cutting services while continuing to ratchet up spending with money that has to raised internally because foriegners can’t buy CDN bonds. The BOC is literally vacuuming the savings of Canadians off the bottom of the vaults to perpetuate this insane policy.
They could reduce taxes and meet spending targets by stopping the insane currency race to the bottom on behalf of a few Eastern Unions who control the swing vote in southern Ontario, but no, we all have to suffer for the politcal game that is being played out.
The USD will most likely fall another 25% to 50% according to currency pundits. The Canadian public debt has climbed over the trillion mark and we can’t know the extent of all city and municipal debt in bonds now past maturity. This isolates Canada from the world economy and makes us slaves to American economy fucking us forever.
How will these public entities pay the frieght with loons falling and rates held below international standards by a federal government driven to compound CDN public debt beyond our ability to pay (get the numbers from Garths blog)
Debt has to paid for Mr Flaherty. Canadians are already scraping the bottom while paying the highest taxes in the world. What gives? And for how long?
The plummeting income from lost revenues has the government projecting negative returns in the hundreds of billions for years to come. Can we keep rates this low forever?
Simple answer……No.
December 3rd, 2009 at 6:05 am
I’m going to cross post to this thread with a touch of editing.
I’m currently working under contract for Morgan Stanley in the States. I spent 3 years working for TD. I can say this about banks: By their nature they are very risk averse. Their investment arms are a different story but when it comes to protecting their money they have their sh*t DOWN.
You don’t make any kind of chance to any infrastructure at all without documentation and approval from multiple groups. They have multiple redundant backups of EVERYTHING and they’re EXTREMELY cautious when it comes to communications.
These are people who understand risk.
Risk and opportunity are two sides of the same coin so to speak. Ordinarily if the risk is high, the opportunity to make money is also high. However in the case of Vancouver real estate the risk is now extremely high and the corresponding opportunity to profit is VERY VERY LOW.
Many of not most bears understand this, which is why they are bears.
It’s like standing around a gambling casino. Bears are observers watching people make increasingly foolish bets. They know that while the gamblers have won the last few hands eventually they’re going to lose and that will wipe out not only their profts, it’ll take the grocery money and the kids’ college funds too.
The problem is the gamblers are so intoxicated with the success of their past wins they’ve gone beyond rationality and won’t listen to the voice of reason.
Trust me, if the banks are coming out with statements like these, they have been carefully vetted and decisions have been made at VERY high levels about communicating awareness of unsustainable levels of debt.
The old cliche is when the shoe shine boy / cab drivers give you stock tips it’s time to go, but really when the bank starts publicly saying prices are unsustainable it’s REALLY time to sell!
After all, who are you going to believe, people paid to make money or a guy who lives in a Richmond basement and drives a Supra to a low end call center job? *cough*
December 3rd, 2009 at 7:23 am
@realpaul:
GoC bonds trade openly on the bond markets and anyone can buy them.
You might be confusing them with CSB’s, which aren’t really bonds but more like a cashable GIC. But they represent only a small fraction of Crown debt.
December 3rd, 2009 at 7:32 am
Interview with Sean Millington
http://howestreet.com/index.ph.....layer/1492
Fundamentals don’t matter? Sounds like “new economy” talk…
So this guy is a senior investment advisor?
December 3rd, 2009 at 8:38 am
@scullboy:
That’s your interpretation of risk. Not all people share that interpretation, many of whom well understand the concept of risk return.
December 3rd, 2009 at 9:04 am
Actually my definition of risk is the one accredited project managers use. The actual equation is cost of event multiplied by the probability of it’s occurance.
Thus if there is a 50% chance of an event occuring and the price of that event is $5000 then the price is 50%*$5000= 2500.
Let’s be honst here. Your average Vancouver real estate “investor” is bone dumb. They don’t calculate the probability of special assesments or tax increases or the probability of a drop on value. They sit for hours in the rain at places like The Mark waiting for the chance to purchase a presale agreement that places all the risk on themselves because some realtor (who doesn’t understand risk and doesn’t care) told them “the value of this contract has gone up $50000 in the last 24 hours.
December 3rd, 2009 at 9:44 am
@scullboy:
There are lots of different ways to evaluate risks and costs, and one such way is as you describe (called Expected Value I think). That method is used when you have a good handle on probability and costs. By coincidence, I just used that method yesterday to evaluate an expenditure. In this case, it was spend a little now to definitely mitigate a potential problem or spend a lot later if there really is a problem.
I don’t think that method is very useful for real estate valuation.
December 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 am
http://www.vancouversun.com/Ho.....story.html
In related news, may we now start referring to Canada as “Dubai of the North” ?
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:02 am
So, Dave, you dodged the question the other day. I’m wondering if I can get a serious response now.
In what branch of science or similarly empirical studies does the study of one graph give you more information about the future direction of that graph than the study of many similar graphs?
Also, you said my analogy of the doctor was poor but completely failed to explain why you thought it didn’t work as an analogy.
I cannot think of a single instance where a rational person would use a subject for comparison to it’s self to determine it’s future. If you actually thought that Newton covered that you need to re-think that position because Newton’s laws were arrived at by observation of many physical objects (ie. using MY kind of logic, not yours).
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:50 am
Dave:
The methodology I described isn’t good for evaluating real estate. Instead I propose people could use the methodology to evaluate the potential impact of a risk event. That event could be a sudden jump in interest rates or a shift in market value ( up or down) and the costs assocaited with the event.
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:52 am
@Drachen:
That wasn’t your original question, but in any case… Technical analysis is the study of past data and information to predict future trends. These techniques are used all the time in finance and by day traders.
Again, you are the one who posted the bubble graph and said, ‘look, this is where we are headed’. I simply pointed out that you don’t believe in graphing or technical analysis and that you were being a little contradictory.
The experience and methods behind technical analysis have be tried and tested over decades for many thousands of different equities.
Is this scientific? No. Pretty much nothing in finance is so I don’t understand your expectation of this.
In the case of real estate, we have many thousands of observations (i.e. sales) and at least 40 years of good data to go off.
In short, your question isn’t very relevant and the analogy even more so.
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:14 am
@Dave:
“Technical analysis is the study of past data and information to predict future trends. These techniques are used all the time in finance and by day traders.”
Tarot cards are used all the time in finance and by day traders. Ronald Regan employed a psychic. Your attempt at an argument is a fallacy and doesn’t answer the question.
“Again, you are the one who posted the bubble graph and said, ‘look, this is where we are headed’. I simply pointed out that you don’t believe in graphing or technical analysis and that you were being a little contradictory.”
Ahh but I am comparing Vancouver Real Estate to other real estate markets and other bubbles from history, much like a doctor would compare a patient’s history to others or a scientist would use past data to predict future events, this is different from using one data source to predict it’s self. If you can’t see the difference you need to think about it more it should be pretty obvious.
“The experience and methods behind technical analysis have be tried and tested over decades for many thousands of different equities.”
Yes, and yet every time a peer reviewed scientific study has been done on the subject it’s showed no correlation between technical analysis and actual market trends. And again you’re relying on the same fallacy.
“Is this scientific? No. Pretty much nothing in finance is so I don’t understand your expectation of this.”
And yet Warren Buffet and most truly successful investors actually DO use scientific methods, it’s just a lot more WORK to do things scientifically so most day traders rely on the hassle free (and fact free) method of technical analysis.
“In the case of real estate, we have many thousands of observations (i.e. sales) and at least 40 years of good data to go off.”
But, if I am correct in my CMHC hypothesis, that the introduction of new mortgage insurance for the Banks in 1986 has skewed the market then most of the last 40 years of data is also skewed, which is why we need to look outside our own borders for similar trends elsewhere, as it happens our market matches perfectly the standard textbook bubble graph. Which strongly indicates, without ANY other evidence that we may be in a bubble, add in fundamental analysis and the departure of price/wage ratios in this bubble and any rational observer must admit that there’s at LEAST a very very strong chance that this is a bubble.
“In short, your question isn’t very relevant and the analogy even more so.”
And I think that accurately summarizes why you don’t and probably never will understand what is happening. You’ve closed your mind to the truly scientific methods in favour of something which you admit is not scientifically proven in spite of the fact that it’s been tested rigorously hundreds of times.
You’d take a proven inaccurate forecasting tool over a proven accurate one. You KNOW you’re making this choice which I think shows that you’re being purposefully misleading.
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:26 am
@tincup: Great job Tincup! I wish more people did the same. Let us know about any news if you receive replies from the Flaherty office.
Applying a bit of pressure locally can still make these guys aware that we are not idiots and understand their game.
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:30 am
patriotz #11,
reminds me of an article I came across recently:
“Last year, only $1.9-billion were sold and the balance outstanding in the market was down to $13.1-billion.”
Read it on Global News: Record low Canada Savings Bonds now ‘a bit of a joke’ (Oct. 2009)
http://news.globaltv.com/money.....story.html
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:40 am
scull,
Your assessment is especially true, as it is now hindsight for the banks. The next time the financial world hits a hurdle and money gets tight, the major banks will be more prepared and will not need government intervention in the form of free money. That means a greater likelihood for high interest rates. Alternatively, economic growth could return to other parts of the world (ie. the US and China) and if we are not on the same cycle, we would be still in a recession and faced with rising interest rates (and that would really hurt, just like what a lot of third world nations face, high interest rates, devaluing currency and foreign debt denominated in foreign currency).
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:06 pm
I can’t help but just laugh my guts out about what is happening in this town (Vancouver), province (British Columbia) and country (Canada). To me, this pipedream looks very much like the 2002-2005 hay days of the California housing boom. I have personally experienced this and can probably write a book about it. I think the title of it would be called “Collusion”. It is merely how all bubbles are created. Collusion, on the part of the government by a way of low interest rates, a drive to increase homeownership at all costs in order to extract political dividends including becoming a subprime lender of last resort (e.g. CMHC in Canada’s case), mortgage and real estate broker and borrower fraud, unwarranted government subsidies to certain segments of the economy, i.e. the construction, real estate and financial intermediation sectors , to name a few.
Location exclusivity being touted as miraculous reason for why prices are not where they should really be. Complete detachment from reality when it comes to economic and financial fundaments (e.g. price / rent ratios, price to earnings, population income potential, economic diversification etc). To add fuel to the fire which is destined to inevitably engulf all colluded parties involved, purported “chronic housing shortages”,” multi-decade demand outstripping supply” continuously trumpeted analyses and trends,
“land-use restrictions” or “ lack of buildable land” justifications for why housing prices are so high, “net growth in foreign and inter-state (province) migration”, “the presence of a diversified economy “, and so the list went on, were all symptoms of the bubble mania which took hold in California in the early part of the decade. This was all good until there were no more greater fools left to bid up the inflated housing prices, and so the party abruptly stopped. People realized that they were not buying homes. In fact, they were renting them for the price of the mortgage. Those aforementioned fallacies, and many more others, are some of the principal reasons why the bubble burst in the States and why it will follow suit in Canada. British Columbia is no California, heck, Canada’s GDP is less than that of post-bubble California, with the country’s economy NOT as well diversified as one would expect, BUT heavily dependent on a few industries (e.g. oil and gas, energy, forestry and other derivative commodity industries, heavy machinery, construction etc.). Noteworthy is that Vancouver MSA’s per capita income is half of what per capita incomes are in the San Francisco Bay Area, certain portions of Los Angeles and San Diego areas, where prices have plummeted more than 50% from their peak.
It’s only a matter of time until the bubble bursts. The deflation in the U.S. started when the Federal Reserve began increasing interest rates. This could, however, start sooner than that. One should pay a close attention on consumer psychology when it relates to perceived expectations in the future. Often, this is how contagions, financial panics, great depressions are started. The longer the imbalances persist in the greater economy when it comes to housing, the more painful and protracted the adjustment is going to be when it comes. The Canadian government can keep the last fool from wanting to dump his inflated housing mortgage on the market for as long it provides backstop guarantee. However, financial markets are going to severely punish the Canadian government shortly by dumping its dollar, lowering its perceived credit worthiness (thus increasing implicitly and explicitly borrowing costs in the economy). A scenario just like this is currently unfolding in the U.S. Anyone wanna buy BC, Ontario provincial government bond at 9%? You start printing enough money until the federal currency is eventually debased and has little incremental value left.
After having met recently with “respectable mortgage brokers” who have been in the business for over 25+ years, I am now firmly convinced that this market is going to have a crash landing like one never experienced before. Pre-sales “pink paper” flipping (as what was called in the U.S.) where respective condo owners would trade condos like call options by purchasing condos without any intention of taking possession of the unit(s) and thus procuring further the housing bubble, funky appraisals based on comparable sales only with little to no historical economic fundamentals in place, liar loans (i.e. stated income (NIQ loans), stated assets) etc. are all hallmarks of the impeding and most definitely inevitable collapse of housing prices in Canada.
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Amen!
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:20 pm
11- patriotz – I’ve been reading and re-reading “The Ascent of Money” by Niall Ferguson. He states flatly that Bonds basically control everything – but doesn’t really connect the dots. The only thing that makes any sense to me is that there is a difference between a bond (as issued by a country or corporation) and the BOND MARKET.
In other words, once an entity issues a bond, those bonds can be traded or sold on a bond market. That means that every NEW bond that they issue, has to compete with the bonds they previously issued, and as a result must be issued with increasingly attractive rates – hence interest rates start to climb.
That’s why government has two options: raise taxes to pay out the rates, or raise the rate on the bond. Either way someone has to pay, either directly or indirectly.
Comments?
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:53 pm
@Drachen:
Warren Buffett’s methods are not scientific.
Value investing is a technique and a strategy. That’s not science.
Technical analysis and using valuation formulas is not science.
I’m not sure why you would think this.
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:55 pm
@patriotz: I think what the original poster implied (or this was how I interpreted it anyway) was not that foreigners can not buy these bonds but that they are unwilling to, given the low coupon rates.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:09 pm
San Franciscan: a word of advice – NEVER talk like that in mixed company in Vancouver! Like sleepwalkers, Vancouverites often respond violently if awoken from their precious delusion! Or if you do, expect blank stares, sulking, and social ostracism.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:18 pm
One worrying aspect concerning the stimulus we are getting is that is it centrally planned and appears to have a narrow emphasis on construction projects.
The financial crisis can be essentially summed up as a misallocation of capital to housing. The fault can be put on the markets but it can just as well be put on policies of central bankers and various housing entities like FHA, CMHC, Fanny and Freddie who influenced and shaped the the markets.
Although it was necessary for governments to step in to prevent a depression 2.0, the question still remains whether the stimulus money will be spent wisely and whether it will benefit us more than allowing the (ill gotten in my view) gains of homeowners to be put back into the economy by deflating housing prices.
For example, it would appear we are entering an era of reduction in services and higher taxation while at the same time money is being pumped to build and support such things as the olympic village and new civic plaza. So yes we are getting the stimulus in one area but seeing a depression in others.
Case in point. It appears there are proposals to cut the central library operating hours and city staff (to be discussed tonight at city hall 7:30pm). While this may not seem like a big deal, it is the kind of subtle and slow decline that builds up to significant cumulative negative value for the community.
Put another way, who is to say that the stimulus money isn’t better spent on more access to books for our youth than construction jobs? Sure, I see that keeping the library open more doesn’t help employment numbers or gdp figures much and it doesn’t produce concrete results (pun intended). But what if our very own Bill Gates doesn’t develop because the library was closed and it was simply easier to making money doing construction. What’s the loss to our city if that happens?
Don’t get me wrong, the construction industry is a vital part of our economy, one that we should foster. But only to moderation and in line with its actual worth and potential. I would be the first to concede it simply isn’t clear what activities will produce best value. But the government does seem to centrally deciding such matters and I wonder if it is being short sighted in some of the decisions. One thing that should be clear to anyone to see is that while construction stimulus is good to get the economic indicators moving up in the short term, it isn’t the kind of thing that has a lasting effect.
So once interest rates rise and the stimulus projects end, then what? Back to square one and hope for the best? I say it would be better to hedge one’s bets and try to invest in other things besides RE. And I say RE because it is conspicuous that with all the stimulus money geared towards infrastructure and construction, the most important infrastructure projects that would benefit Vancouver don’t seem to be being built (i.e. expanded transit lines). A new line or two would be infinitely better than an unneeded new civic plaza.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:23 pm
@observer:
Cuts to library hours and the services are red herrings. Some of these cuts are trivial to the big picture. The purpose of these cuts are to convince the public to accept a tax increase. We are being presented with a false dilemma. If the City were to use zero based budgeting, they could easily find enough money to make up the deficit.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:23 pm
@realpaul:
Remember, the government doesn’t “fund” putting people into condos. CHMC insurance hasn’t cost the tax-payer anything… yet.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:44 pm
@Dave: I fear you are right that the cuts are red herrings, however I do not think that they are trivial to the big picture. You will find what makes a society great are the little things that are valued and emphasized as well as the tall buildings that are built. I do agree that they are trivial in monetary value considering the amount of money that is earmarked towards RE, like the olympic village and new civic plaza. But I suppose you are right that the public, being faced with the necessity of higher taxes, will be sufficiently placated by such efforts.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:50 pm
@observer:
I was only referring to monetary value and I agree that some services are not trivial to some people.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:52 pm
If I saw Dave and punched him in the mouth he wouuld probably fall to the ground and cry.
Then we he finally got back on his feet he’d claim that it was him that hit me and that his teeth are now worth more because they are in the street.
Then I’d hit him again and he’d be out cold.
Only to get up and say that it never happened.
At that point I’d smack him and he wouldn’t get up
“After having met recently with “respectable mortgage brokers” who have been in the business for over 25+ years, I am now firmly convinced that this market is going to have a crash landing like one never experienced before.” « Vancou Says:
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 pm
[...] position of being able to experience both, first hand. This lengthy anecdote and opinion from San Franciscan in Vancouver at vancouvercondo.info 3 Dec 2009 12:06 pm [...]
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:54 pm
And some services may be trivial to some people but be non-trivial in the big picture.
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:00 pm
@Anonymous:
That’s ummm… Unnecessarily violent don’t you think?
I mean he’s selling us a bill of goods that he doesn’t appear to entirely believe in, he’s disingenuous and he encourages people to spend recklessly and endanger their future financial well-being and he’s determined to use a system of forecasting that’s proven inaccurate in testing over a system that’s proven accurate in testing.
All of which makes him a bad person but all of us have our bad sides don’t we?
I say beating him up now will prove nothing, wait until AFTER the real estate collapse when he’s curled up in a foetal position contemplating how he could have been so terribly terribly wrong, THEN kick him while he’s down.
Nah, might hurt your toe, he’s not worth that.
Merry Christmas!
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:10 pm
@Anonymous:
I am betting you have never thrown a punch in your life. I bet you would piss yourself if I so much as raised my hand to you.
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:17 pm
@Drachen:
Endangering futures? That cuts both ways.
I don’t just look at technical analysis (i.e. graphing). I also look at fundamental valuation. I look at all the data and consider different opinions.
You have your beliefs and I have mine. I am not trying to sell anybody a ‘bill of goods’. People are free to make their own minds up.
Again… the facts are that I have been quite accurate to date. How are your predictions doing again? How many years have you been wrong now?
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:30 pm
None actually. As I said before, neither of our predictions have diverged from what has happened so far. I predicted a drop followed by a rise, followed by a big drop. You predicted a drop followed by stable prices (and they rose quickly instead of being stable) so technically I’ve been more accurate than you so far.
I’ve told you all that before. Did you forget or are you just being disingenuous again?
Also, on one out of five predictions you have not been proved wrong YET on the other four you failed. Don’t forget those predictions when you showcase your record.
You know I wouldn’t call you out so often if you weren’t so systematically dishonest about this sort of thing.
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Maggie’s latest post…
“If memory serves me right, it’s been early 2007 since we’ve seen lineups for Vancouver condo pre-sales but that changed on Saturday as the investors lined up (in the rain) to take advantage of the low prices at The Mark, on Seymour and Pacific.
Onni’s new building will be 41 storeys and prices started at $325,000. Given that completion will be 2013, it’s a no brainer that investors can only win as this is one of the final sites available in Yaletown and we assume prices will be higher in 2013 than they are now.”
Hahah yes…. no brainer indeed
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:47 pm
@Drachen:
I did say prices would recover after correcting, but I did not predict the level of the recovery.
I don’t remember your predictions of the above. All I recall is that you have been calling for a 40% correction. Feel free to back up your assertion, not that I won’t take you on your word.
My predictions have all been mostly correct. As far as calling for a listings peak, you have to admit that I was more correct than anybody else including yourself. I said listings would peak after the Summer of 2008 and not continue rising as had been the general bearish sentiment. I picked a number and barely missed it. You are splitting hairs. Imagine if I had said the DOW would correct to 6,500 a couple years ago. Would you really say I was wrong because the recent Dow low was 6,550? No, it would be stupid to make such a claim. I’m not sure why you would do so in my case. It only makes you look petty.
December 3rd, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Your joke of the day, courtesy Remax.
http://smr.newswire.ca/en/rema.....te-in-2010
Look for it tomorrow as a thinly re-written puff piece in the Vancouver Sun.
December 3rd, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Your joke of the day, courtesy Remax.
http://www.vancouversun.com/bu.....story.html
December 3rd, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Ignore the first link
December 3rd, 2009 at 3:16 pm
You can say what you want about Dave, but his penmanship is impeccable – a rare quality these days.
December 3rd, 2009 at 3:32 pm
@Dave:
God… Your predictions are so bad that you keep bringing up an instance where you were somewhat close (but still wrong) as an example of how prescient you are. That’s really sad.
I’m calling for prices to fall TO 40% of what they are now, a 60% correction.
My prediction, from about a year and a half ago (no I’m not going to waste the time to look it up, if you want to go right ahead) was that prices would fall in the fall of 2008 and either flatline or trend upwards in the spring of 2009, then the serious drop would start in 2010 with prices reaching bottom winter 2011 or later at 60% or more off current prices with a stabilization point of approximately 60% of current prices. If you want to bother to look for it I’m pretty certain it was within a month or two of our last peak.
December 3rd, 2009 at 4:06 pm
I am not sure why everyone seems to be bickering around here about the future of housing prices in Canada. Housing prices are just outside of the economic fundamentals. They are most out of whack in the foremost western provinces in Canada. An October 2009 IMF report even confirmed that. Knowing the track record of the IMF, I wouldn’t necessarily rely on their technical analysis, however it is still a point of reference. In my opinion, it is almost with mathematical certainty that housing prices in Canada are destined to go down, i.e. return to long-range equillibrium – whatever that may have been for the last 30+ years based on income, rent and occupancy and population levels and growth prospects of the latter etc. An example for a long-range (30 year +) housing price equillibrium given at last year’s California Bankers Association convetion in Rancho Mirage, CA showed housing prices roughly 3.3x annual gross household earnings and debt to income ratio of less than 40%. Last time I checked both of these were in multiple above this threshold in Vancouver, BC. Perhaps, Vancouver and the province itself have a more desirable real estate market than California as a whole. Who knows? Maybe, economic fundamentals are different in Canada than the rest of the world.
December 3rd, 2009 at 4:34 pm
@San Franciscan in Vancouver: Things are different here, for the moment at least. We’re living inside a bubble and our reality is distorted because we’re inside the bubble rather than outside.
December 3rd, 2009 at 4:52 pm
How do we captalize on that? I am thinking of shorting the Canadian housing market. The problem I have encountered so far is that 1) there are few publicly traded home builders (if any), 2) no tradable sector-wide indices (except banking which I would ignore for the moment as banks in Canada have been smart to pass on the mortgage risk to the government thanks to the explicit guarantee through entities like CMHC. The only exception being the confluence of multiple risk factors to bring about systemic risk in the financial system just like in the U.S.), 3) most financial bellweather companies outside of banks and holders of income producing real estate (e.g. pension funds, life companies, REITs etc) are also privately held and not tradable. The problem is that the market appears to be much more closed and not easily permeable than that of the U.S. In that sense, the most direct effect of a decline in the sector in the future would be a sudden and severe decline in gross domestic output against which the government is going to have to print out a whole bunch of inflated Canadian dollars to counteract that. Betting on cyclical changes in output is a painstaking undertaking and not very lucrative, either.
I guess the Canadian dollar appears to be the only viable proxy for a possible future hedge betting on housing prices decline in Canada. However, housing price adjustments can take place over multiple years (e.g. the United States), and often without a clear and immediate shorting target it would be very difficult to make money this way. Any suggestions in an open forum?
December 3rd, 2009 at 4:56 pm
@oneangryslav2:
Yes, foreign purchasers of Canadian debt would get low yield combined with exchange rate risk. But the real reason there is little holding of Canadian debt abroad is that the country hasn’t had to borrow abroad – until very recently Canada had a longstanding current exchange surplus. In other words, Canada had been lending to the rest of the world, not the other way around.
Note that USD debt has a low yield as well but is widely held abroad, for the simple reason that the US has to borrow abroad. As well a number of the US’s trading partners (e.g. China) have an interest in supporting the USD and so will buy their debt at a low yield.
But now Canada is running a current account deficit, for the same basic reason as the US has been for years – a very low savings rate. And need I mention that the policies of our “Convervative” government have abetted that low rate. If our savings rate does not improve soon, interest rates will have to go up to attract foreign lenders.
http://www.economist.com/marke.....d=15020004
December 3rd, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Excuse me, that’s “current account”, not “current exchange”.
December 3rd, 2009 at 8:46 pm
San Fran in Van: whoa there cowboy, homework time. apart from some macroeconomic differences vancouver is not like san fransisco due to much stronger in-elasticity of demand. you have to get into factors like immigration trending, land constraints, etc that can be specific to a region. you have to put in a bit more work than paraphrasing garth turner.
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:07 pm
So, you all remember when Vanoc gave the DTES crack whores and all other prostitutes a flyer about how to deal with Olympic vistors. I think it said something like “Be nice and don’t say anything bad about Vancouver’.
Well obviously Vanoc is saying to the Olympic committee “hey guys, we’ve greased up the pig, now get out there” with the purchase of 100,000 condoms to be distributed amognst the Olympic organizers. These cracked up yahoos will be cruising the streets on your dime!!!!
Is this also why Campbell decided to close all the elementary schools? So that a few stray kiddies might get dragged in to the bushes by a ‘visitor’. Of course he’d have diplomatic immunity and get away with it. This is our gift to the world. Abundant whores and poverty stricken single moms desperate enough to have to streetwalk. Don’t you feel proud to be a Canadian.
http://www.vancouversun.com/Sw.....story.html
A very astute reprter in Aussie during the Sydney games picked out a group of ‘visiting Olympic dignitaries’ and followed them straight from the airport to see where they went. They all went straight into the prostitution area and he photgraphed them in the act.
These are the type of scum who are involved in the Olympic Committee. And now you know. You not only pay for this but are expected to like it.
December 4th, 2009 at 4:00 am
#11 Patriotz, I meant that foriegn investors ‘can’t’ buy CDN bonds at .40% compared to the 3.75% they can get from the Oz bonds. Its a case of ‘they won’t’ buy CDN bonds because the CDN government is buying up all its own debt to keep from having to go into the open market. Sorry for the confusion. PS Garth has done again on his latest posting, suggested reading for sure.
#32
T192,
1)Debt obligations are a liability. Its costing Canadians plenty to utilize the 800 billion used to backstop the CMHC debt orgy as debt instead of capitalizng into other areas of the economy. Thats a philisophical argument though and I am not on the side of socialism in the marketplace. It always ends badly for the taxpayer.
2)The failure stats are not public information so we don’t really know what the cost to Canada is. We will find out eventually through FOI or the Auditor general but both systems are fraught with delay. Guaranteed, this massive debt overhang is far from ‘free’.
“No Brainer… or Madness?” « Vancouver Real Estate Anecdote Archive Says:
December 5th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
[...] 5 December 2009 · Leave a Comment This from realtor Maggie Chandler’s blog 1 Dec 2009 (hat-tip to Starving Artist at vancouvercondo.info)- [...]
December 6th, 2009 at 12:13 am
@stagnate:
What land constraints?
There is plenty of land in the Lower Mainland.
Aston Lau – How the Canadian housing market doesn’t make sense Says:
April 26th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
[...] A roundup of bubble comments that the major banks have been making lately. The prevailing sentiment is that a bubble is forming or has already formed, and come mid-2010 when the Bank of Canada raises rates, we might see the start of a shake-up in the real estate market. Bad news like this is rarely seen in the mainstream media, so when so many noted economists publicly voice this opinion, it’s a good idea to perk up and listen. [...]