VCI: How it works.
There seems to be some confusion about moderation, censorship, etc on this site so let’s try to clear a few things up.
1. WHY ARE YOU DELETING MY COMMENTS?!?
No one is deleting your comments, but a bunch of people may have decided they are not impressed with them. There is only one kind of comment moderation on this site and that’s community moderation. Just as popular useful comments are voted up and get highlighted, if enough people vote your comment down it will go through the following stages: at minus four they shrink as a warning, at minus 8 they go into foreclosure and at minus 10 they are hidden behind an overgrown hedge, i.e. they vanish from view. If you want to read the unexpurgated comment stream you can always find them here. That link is kept handy at the bottom of the left hand column.
This system is under continual adjustment with the goal of keeping the comment thread useful and entertaining without too many trolls, spam or repetitive flamebait comments. The drawback with the current system is that it hides both the garbage comments and the unpopular ones. Please consider voting up comments that you disagree with that raise reasonable points. We’re looking into a hybrid system that will allow separate voting for garbage content aside from the current agree/disagree mode, but this won’t happen anytime too soon.
2. WHY IS MY COMMENT HELD FOR MODERATION?!?
If your comment doesn’t show up on the site as soon as you submit it, chances are you added more than two hyperlinks. This triggers the spam filter and holds the comment for manual approval, which may take many hours. The best way around this problem is to limit each comment to one or two external links only. If you saw the amount of garbage that gets swept up in the spam filter you’d understand why this system is in place.
If you’re linking to multiple external links as proof of your argument or research to back up your point, you may want to consider submitting an article. Original written material that relates to the vancouver housing market and economy is welcome and can be submitted here: http://vancouvercondo.info/submit
3. HEY! MY VOTE CHANGED THE SCORE DOUBLE!
If you click on a comment vote arrow and the score goes up or down by 2 points there are two possibilities: Either someone else made the same vote between the time that you loaded the page and the time that you clicked the arrow, or you’re a registered logged in user. Registered users who are logged in get double voting power because they tend to add consistent content to the site and are the ones who decide the direction of the site.
4. ANYTHING ELSE?
That’s it for now. This is the system for comment moderation that is in place for Vancouver Condo Info as of November 2010. You’re welcome to add comments or questions in the comment section below.
November 6th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
@A. Einstein: All granite is radioactive to some extent
November 4th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
@patriotz:
Why you always get so bent out of shape over little things?
Who cares who said it, or in what context? It's just a saying, that happens to be applicable to a range of situations.
But thanks for the history lesson.
November 4th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
Hmmm..not as many VCI FORECLOSURES today.
I better tell Muir, Tsur, Rennie {and of course Bill Goode ) that the RE market is doing fine.
BTW sell your precious metals stocks…it will collapse soon
November 4th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
@Poor Decision:
Sold in Feb 2008. Decision was looking pretty smart in the few months afterwards, but like you said prices started back on its uptrend.
Have been “throwing rent money away” for the past 2+ years.
This market may have some legs yet but even Achilles has a heel.
Too bad you are leaving for greener pastures.
I think you are going to miss out on one hell of a show in the next 3 years or so.
November 4th, 2010 at 4:09 pm
@Dave: “By this time next year, I think a lot more of you will be in my camp… or the 4 L’s… Lower sales, lower construction, level prices, less bears.”
I agree that this time next year we’ll have 4 Ls, though yours are a little different than mine:
Lower sales,
Lower construction,
Lower prices,
Less bulls.
November 4th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
@Poor Decision:
Moving to a different city for the sole reason that you can't buy real estate is a pretty silly reason to move, don't you think? And by silly, I mean retarded!
If you want cheap real estate close to a nice city… well, why not move to lovely Oshawa, just a 50-minute train ride to downtown Toronto. That's about the average commute for a downtown-Toronto worker who lives in the GTA (Greater Toronto Area).
For example, if you bought in Newmarket – 50 kms north of Union Station – a 2,400 sq. ft. house would run you $420,000. If you bought in Oshawa – 50 kms east of Union Station – that same 2,400 sq. ft. house would only be $280,000! What a deal!!! Why is Oshawa so cheap? Well… GM shut down that plant there…
If owning real estate is such an important thing… well, Vancouver Island is pretty damn cheap. So is northern Ontario. Quebec City is a great option, too; it's a magnificent and charming city, where a <a href="http://passerelle.centris.ca/Redirect2.aspx?CodeDest=ROYAL&NoMls=QC8411286&Source =WWW.REALTOR.CA&Langue=E” target=”_blank”>lovely 2-bedroom condo is only $180,000.
Well, my point here is that you should live in the city that you love… and don't let anything stop you from doing that.
I have another point to make… and that is that we're missing the elephant in the room here, folks!
What about the baby boomers? Imagine when those geezers start retiring and have to sell their houses, because 80% of all their net worth is in their houses. Their CPP, company retirement plans, and personal savings are nowhere near what they need… they were banking on selling that huge house to you! 2012 is when the shit starts hitting the fan… and it won't stop until 2031.
So… imagine if the bubble pops… and then real estate doesn't go up in price for the next two decades?!
November 4th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
“The only boomers that hve a somewhat secured future are those working in the public sector”
NO-OLY…
I think the public sector workers may be in a fool’s paradise.
At some point the government will have to go to the taxpayer and ask for more taxes to pay the government workers- I don’t think that will fly.
The resentment goes to deep; people in too large numbers won’t stand for it.
The HST is an example, it’s not just about the HST,there are undercurrents.
Some people can’t to get their kids braces, while they pay taxes so that the government workers can have deluxe plans.
There is just too much disparity, and the resentment is mounting.
November 4th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
BTW Todd….that was an additional 600 Billion to be spent between now and next June….the rest of the earmarked money is already in the pipeling…for a total of 1.1 Trillion…double the announcement. Why do you think gold and everything hard went up today…..gld up 50++ slvr past 26…….I'm giddy. The markets are doing in a day what a bond would in a year. If I had all my dough in the house I'd be mighty pissed that this opportunity is rushing by my impotent hands at a time when real estate is going down.
November 4th, 2010 at 3:38 pm
I have lived on my own for 20 years. 19 years as a home owner and just over 1 year as a renter. I can tell you if you choose your rental carefully (get a nice place and a good landlord) renting is BETTER. There are so many worries with owning it is not all it is cracked up to be. The only advantage to owning in my opinion is if it has a lower cost than renting over the term of ownership. If the cost was equal I would rent hands down. Obviously at todays prices there is not much chance owning will be cheaper over the long run.
I think why people hate renting is because they rent sh*t holes. They compare their $500 basement suite to their friends $4000 per month owned house. Try renting a place similar to what you would buy. If you look you can find a stable nice place to rent for the long term. And if for any reason you want to move you can with very little cost. Owning is like buying a time share. You lose flexibility and pay more. What is the advantage? There isn't one.
November 4th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
We're getting a slump in Canada whether we like it or not….even though they don't make any economic numbers that aren't favourable to the government….we can see by the long food bank lines that times is getting tougher. Our neighbour to the south of us won't help….they're still shinking.
Now that Obama can't extend the Unemployment cheques again as he did last fall giving the unemoplyed some breathing room when he gave them 99 weeks of pogey…these peoples benefits run out beginning next month and peak in April. There going to be a lot of new people on the street.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-04/initial-…
Inventory is going up not down in the US….repossesions have accelerating not clearing up…..none of this will cross the border you say? Vanshithoio is living on borrowed time.
November 4th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
I fear that there could be another bubble coming – the US has released $600 Billion through its banking system (quantative easing); this is going to see a flood of money from US to high-growth Asian markets generating bubbles – this in turn will bring rich investors to Vancouver to buy RE (what else can they buy).
The US should be more discipline in its monetary policy – these types of swings can really cause a real hard landing down the road.
November 4th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
@junius
"I am not the least bit cynical. I wasn’t really a bear until 2009. Frankly, I have a very hard time believing there were many bears in Vancouver in 2005 as your state. The US crash wasn’t until 2006 and very few would have even looked up before then."
I moved to Vancouver in 2005 and immediately knew something was wrong. People thought I was a nut when I told them Vancouver was in a bubble. What about the olympics? was the most common thing I heard.
I had the same experience in '99 in the states when I told people I was afraid that America was headed for a real estate bubble. At the time, the prices in silicon valley were at many multiples of income. I told them, as goes California, so goes the rest of the United States. People openly laughed in my face. It wasn't until 2005 when I saw people openly saying houses were over valued.
I will never forget the tv special showing a modest ranch house outside san francisco selling for a million dollars in 1999. It seems like a mansion now compared to the crack shacks selling for a million in Vancouver in 2009.
Most people dont remember this, or were aware of it that time. It was a harbinger of things to come…
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-666758…
November 4th, 2010 at 2:06 pm
@NO-LYMPICS: "even by simply looking in the ads"
Looking at ads only indicates market rent — and from my experience it's probably pretty accurate — but doesn't give much of an indication of rents of units already tenanted.
Another thing to consider is that average rents don't consider building depreciation. An older unit will generally rent for less than a newly minted one. Same-unit rents will generally lag the average. I haven't looked at CMHC's data in detail however it could be their average vintage has been relatively constant, in which case their data would show rental increases compared to a specific unit tracked over time.
November 4th, 2010 at 2:04 pm
I work in the public sector as a skilled trades worker. From my personal experience, I can tell you that we have not had any raises for ten years. I do occasionally take contracts in the private sector where I earn almost double my so called high government wage. Now, I am not saying that there aren't workers in the public sector that need to be cut. But, it's not as simple as just cutting everyone across the board because a small group of us are actually right in line with what we should be earning.
November 4th, 2010 at 1:25 pm
125 jesse
Stand corrected,…… I meant to imply public sector raises are often higher than the private sector raises. It will be interesting what happens when their contracts come up for negotiation soon .
November 4th, 2010 at 1:14 pm
So called illegal suites can be tracked….they can extrapolate, even by simply looking in the ads.
Often in an given City, one can read the ads and get a handle on what a basemnet suite rents for on average ie one bedroom , 2 bedroom etc.
Vancouver can have a differential of 30% when compared to say a similar suite in Richmond.
November 4th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
@Best place on meth: "so why did they forgo an increase the last 2 times around?"
Because the market is soft and, I'm guessing, they consider you a valuable tenant and are offering you an incentive of sorts. Still, the CMHC data still stand. Either the property managers or CMHC are lying or PMs are, on average, raising rents.
I think you have a good point that those who have serially raised rents year after year are coming up against stiffer resistance than they have in the past. For many tenants, hours have been cut or have been transferred to contract/part time. I haven't found data for median income in 2009/2010 but for the entire labour force I wouldn't be surprised if it's been flat.
November 4th, 2010 at 12:33 pm
@nth Beatle: "All I hear in the Private sector is cuts, layoffs, etc."
I know very few people on salary who didn't receive a pay raise last year. In many cases it may have been a meager raise but it was still a raise.
November 4th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
@Best place on meth: "Does CMHC survey home owners about how much they’re charging for their illegal suites"
Only indirectly because the secondary suite market is so spread out it would take a large sample to gain significance. They acknowledge their data for small-time landlords are spurious, however we know that professionally managed properties that are closely tracked by CMHC compete with basement suites to some degree.
Although the link is stale, Rich Toscano in San Diego did some research on rents in San Diego in the past 20 years. He found that generally they tracked incomes/CPI regardless of the price of housing.
November 4th, 2010 at 11:40 am
122 Devore
Inflation, Cost of Living, whatever. It is more cash out of out pockets that could otherwise help the economy.
The point is NO ONE I know except Gov't workers is getting any wage increases.
All I hear in the Private sector is cuts, layoffs, etc.
The latest buzzwords are " sustainability"
Gov't taxing and spending is simply UNsustainable.
November 4th, 2010 at 11:17 am
@NO – LYMPICS:
But what does inflation have to do with any of this? If there is inflation, then incomes are rising, and so is spending (things cost more), and (taxable) economic activity is growing, in nominal terms at least, and so would tax revenue, assuming a constant %-based tax rates. There should be no reason to raise tax rates. Only reason is because government is growing faster than inflation.
November 4th, 2010 at 10:53 am
sell and run for the hills
November 4th, 2010 at 10:50 am
@Ozzie Jurock:
Oz…….. Actually I noticed your buddy Bill Slut has eased of the peddle on the hype machine lately; do you know if perhaps he dumped a lot of his re holdings lately?
November 4th, 2010 at 10:48 am
99 Keeping An Eye On The Pimps
IMHO, I really wonder if people really understand the perks beyond the relatively high job security and wages in the Civil Service.
You have to wonder if the Civil Service has gotten so out of control that our higher and higher cost of living is based on empire building and entitlement. I really can't believe what gets rolled out as latest taxpayer gouging far beyond the rate of inflation.
The undercurrent IS there, and I really can't see why our politicans are so pussywhipped by them. If push comes to shove, do what Reagan did in 1980's , selective firing to send a message.
The status – quo is UNsustainable, that is UNdebatable, let alone any more entitlement ambushes.
November 4th, 2010 at 10:35 am
Metro Van casts five-year spell
Richmondites are being warned to brace themselves against skyrocketing Metro Vancouver utility rates.
By the year 2015, City of Richmond staff are expecting: solid waste tipping fees to spiral by 111 per cent; water costs to increase by 57 per cent; and liquid waste costs to rise by 35 per cent.
In Richmond, that could mean the average household being asked for $55 more next year and an extra $237 by 2015.
The city has to pay Metro Vancouver for Richmond's water and liquid/solid waste management, with the cost passed directly onto the taxpayer.
However, to mitigate the effect of anticipated hikes in regional utility costs, the city has been building up a rate stabilization fund for all three categories of utility.
City council was this week being asked if they want to dip into those funds to lessen the impact of the spikes on Richmond residents.
Across the Metro Vancouver region, a typical home will pay $513 next year for utility services (an increase of $44).
Water rates will rise 14 per cent next year as a result, and the average home will pay $213 for water alone, up $23.
More than $80 million is to be spent on sewer capital projects next year, including new mains and pumping stations to handle growth of the region's population.
Waste tipping fees are going up 18 per cent to $97 per tonne, ironically because recycling is on the upswing and less garbage is being generated.
====================
This what's wrong with the system.
The average taxpayer has sucker tattoed on their forehead by the system and is continually ambushed by those who think we have bottomless pockets.
We have to pay higher tipping fees because we are doing a better job recycling and thus dumping LESS in the landfills. That's very symbolic….sounds like entitlment by the buraucrats…so if we reduced garbage to ZERO our taxes would be astonomical ?!?!
F*ck…
November 4th, 2010 at 10:35 am
@Anonymous:
There's been an awful lot of stuff out lately about boomers not saving adequately for retirement. For example:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/savi…
That's why there's been a lot of talk about a mega-CPP that would be mandatory. Governments don't like the idea of a huge cohort of future retirees dependent on GIS or other kinds of social assistance.
November 4th, 2010 at 10:23 am
Liberal leadership race:
I'd pay to see Diane Watts and Carole Taylor in a cat fighting cage match.
Yessir !!!!!
November 4th, 2010 at 9:57 am
@Best place on meth: Count me as someone else who hasn't received a rent increase–nominal or real–in the last two years.
November 4th, 2010 at 9:52 am
poor decision says: I have made a very poor decision, and one that I will have to live with. While many of you will vote this diatribe down as a potential bull troll, or bitter renter bear, or someone that has capitulated, the fact remains that my poor decision has prompted me to seek a home elsewhere
couple things to consider, remember real estate is an imperfect market (so to speak). of the 2000 or so sales this month, approx. 10% will sell for less than their current market value and about 10% will sell for above their current market value. if you are on the winning end of either of those polars then you are looking good. easier to make money in a rising or falling real estate market but money can also be made in stagnant markets. i paid my way through university flipping in a stagnant market. it takes some work and fortitude though, for those that are too sensitive to read a minus ten comment-any type of real estate investing is not for you.
November 4th, 2010 at 9:51 am
@patriotz:
"An awful lot of boomers will be seriously hosed financially if they don’t sell near the top while they have equity. "
Only if they're reliant on that equity for their pension, i.e. they don't have another source of retirement income (e.g. company pension, private RRSP)
November 4th, 2010 at 9:40 am
#23 Poor Decision:
If natural market forces had been allowed to play out, your decision to wait would have worked, but in fact, with the unprecedented interference and meddling by central banks to keep bubbles inflated, the goal posts have been moved to protect the bumbling fools who are needed to keep the fake economy moving.
November 4th, 2010 at 9:34 am
New Listings 144
Price Changes 71
Sold Listings 97
November 4th, 2010 at 9:21 am
@EB: ….
I’ve never been happy with that definition – 22 years is an enormous span to collapse into a single column. As a 64 baby my lifetime experience has been utterly different from someone born in 46. I certainly don’t identify with the early boomers in any meaningful sense at all. …….
I bet you'll find that feeling witll change sooner than you think!
November 4th, 2010 at 8:56 am
John and George say hi
November 4th, 2010 at 8:51 am
sorry i meant to say "free month's rent"
November 4th, 2010 at 8:47 am
"Boomers were defined as born betweem 1946 and 1964. so are now (in 2010) between 64 and 46 years old."
I've never been happy with that definition – 22 years is an enormous span to collapse into a single column. As a 64 baby my lifetime experience has been utterly different from someone born in 46. I certainly don't identify with the early boomers in any meaningful sense at all.
November 4th, 2010 at 8:40 am
In 2007, when I moved in, my rent was $1180. It went up to $1200, but then went down to $1150. My rent has gone down in nominal dollars. That's the reality on the ground.
If an apartment building offers $800 rent for a one-bedroom but gives you a rent month's rent with a one-year lease, what do they tell the CMHC?
November 4th, 2010 at 8:38 am
@Dave:
CMHC knows nothing about rental suites and rented out condos. They would mostly look at purpose built rental properties, because that is where they can get their data from, no?