Vancouver Condo Info

Look at this garbage. It’s an article submitted by “The BC Real Estate Convention” and printed as if it’s actually news in the Vancouver Sun. First off, the writing is atrocious. Don’t they even have an editor read these advertorials before they’re printed? Second, there are lots of statements presented as fact that have absolutely nothing to back them up:

Experts claim that the Chinese Mainland buyers and investors will continue to seek for overseas investment opportunities, in Vancouver.

Which ‘experts’ are these? Oh never mind, we’ll just take your word for it then.

As it is more cost efficient to purchase a property rather than renting, and considering the long term returns of the investment, purchasing properties in Vancouver become high on demand.

Yeah, somebody is ‘high on demand’ if they really believe that current prices in Vancouver make buying ‘more cost efficient’ than renting. There are many many markets around the world where buying is ‘more cost efficient’ than renting, Vancouver ain’t one of them.

However, as much as Feng shui is a well respected practice by many Chinese immigrants and potential home buyers and investors, there are always those “intelligent” ones that seek to obtain the optimal economic value from their investment in Vancouver’s real estate.

Wow. I don’t even know how to respond to that.

If you go to the The BC Real Estate Convention web site you’ll see that this trade show is sponsored by The Vancouver Sun and Province.

Then there’s this piece over at 24 hours:

Metro Vancouver will receive an influx of businessmen from mainland Chinese this week, intent on spending their two-week Lunar New Year holiday with family, as well as scooping up significant amounts of real estate.

Julia Rowell, sales manager at downtown Vancouver’s Maddox development, said this phenomenon has been going on for over 25 years, but 2012 looks to be especially busy.

Yeah? I think TPFKAA says it best:

HAHAHAHAHA! That’s absolutely hilarious!!

So in 1987, (a full five years before Deng Xiaoping’s reforms that enabled creation of individual fortunes) HAM from mainland China was increasing sales just after CNY.

/facepalm.

The hype seems to be working on the listings side. This year started off with the second highest number of listings in the last ten years and has grown at a faster rate than any of those years, especially on the west side:

I’m sure those sellers are hoping this hype pays off, and maybe it will, but then again maybe our market isn’t driven solely by wealthy offshore buyers. Most local first time buyers aren’t in the market for multimillion dollar homes anyways, so how would this even affect them?

Blaming ‘Chinese buyers’ for out of control prices is simplistic and racist. This city is nearly half asian so of course ‘Chinese buyers’ have an impact, but what about easy credit, low rates, CMHC pumping and local speculators?

Just for comparison, the city of Monterey Park in California has the highest percentage population of Chinese Americans of any US municipality. Here’s what home values there look like over the last few years:

This post was submitted by RTYT.

Mark Carney is making new remarks about some Canadian real estate markets being “probably overvalued“.

It was the second time in recent days that Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney voiced concern about property prices, which surged after the financial crisis as borrowing costs tumbled.
“We see that in a number of real estate markets in Canada, valuations are at a minimum, firm; in others, they’re probably overvalued. So there are risks there. We’re watching it closely. We’re working with our partners, the federal government, the superintendent of financial institutions,” he said in an interview on “Question Period” on CTV.

“Measures have been taken. They’ve been effective. We’ll keep up that vigilance. If more needs to be done, I’m sure the appropriate authorities will take those measures.”
The federal government has tightened mortgage regulations several times in a bid to prevent a property bubble from forming. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said on January 17 that the government is watching the housing market closely and is ready to intervene if needed, but is not about to do so now.

Yes, the federal government has tightened mortgage regulations “several times”.. Here’s a timeline of those changes courtesy of Burbs Boy:

Jan 2006 – Minority Conservative Government elected
Feb 2006 – 25 year increase to 30 year on test basis
Jul 2006 – 30 year test affirmed and also increased to 35 year
Jul 2007 – 35 year increase to 40 year
Oct 2008 – 40 year decrease to 35 year
Mar 2010 – 35 year decrease to current 30 year

This post was submitted by wreckonomics.

Someone over at the Vancouver Courier is of the opinion that foreign buyers have driven up the cost of real estate in Vancouver.

Of course, capitalism requires competition, and free market principles should drive our housing market. But we no longer control that market. And despite growing evidence of market dysfunction, Premier Christy Clark, who could stiffen provincial regulation, and Mayor Gregor Robertson, who could increase taxes on foreign property owners, cede our land to foreign buyers.

Not so in Australia.

In recent years, Australian cities have experienced Vancouver-style real estate booms, with housing prices soaring from Sydney to Melbourne. Like here, buyers from China help drive Australia’s speculative real estate market. Faced with mounting public pressure, in 2010 the Kevin Rudd government introduced strict regulation aimed at foreign ownership. Under the new rules, the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) screens foreigners (including temporary residents and students) to determine their land purchase eligibility. Foreigners can’t buy existing properties and must build on vacant land within two years of purchase or face government-ordered sale. Scofflaws face capital gains confiscation. Finally, before foreign homeowners leave Australia, they must sell. No more overseas landlords Down Under.

Full article here. Is it time for BC to start looking at regulating home ownership and foreign buying?

This post was submitted by Spork.

BC Assessments are available for viewing for a limited time. These are based on sales at and around July 2011. A little bird told me a few people are getting some interesting increases in the mail. Given our collective nous, perhaps we can figure out which property types and neighbourhoods are going to see some marked increases in property tax outlays this year and give some guesses as to how much. Remember that the City of Vancouver uses 3 year averaging and that it’s the assessment value relative to all other properties, not the absolute value, that determines property tax outlay. As well there has been a shift in property taxes from businesses to households, something that is slated to end this year. One might think that a few households are going to be rather upset if redistribution were to continue.

I haven’t looked at the numbers yet but my guess is that detached houses, especially in west side neighbourhoods, are going to see the biggest tax rise this year, with condos seeing the least rise.

Over at the Financial Post there’s an editorial that’s pessimistic about the Canadian real estate market:

The arithmetic is simple, and some of the warning signals look uncomfortably like those of the days before the market implosion that brought the 1980s to a thumping, crashing close.

Start with resale home prices. A “matched sales” approach to measuring prices tracks, over time, multiple sales of the same properties — this reduces the likelihood of measurements getting skewed by cyclical or regional shifts in the price mixes of homes that happen to be selling. Over the past ten years, prices so measured, in Canada’s major markets, have doubled, increasing at more than 7% per year, at a time when consumer price inflation generally had been running at about 2%.

So why is that a problem? Because average wages have not been running much ahead of inflation, and that means that house prices have steadily been bubbling out of reach of workers’ abilities to afford them. The house price-to-income ratio last peaked and then plummeted from 1989 to 1991, and the ratio regained its prior peak in 2004-05. Since then? It has climbed steadily higher yet, the ratio now far outstripping anything seen in the past 20 years.

Eventually that makes housing affordability a problem, and quickly so when interest rates start to rise. Housing looks affordable now, given that mortgages remain on the market at rates near their all-time lows. However, carrying costs relative to income would rocket upward, were rates one or two percentage points higher. Such rate increases are not in the cards in Canada today — but they will arrive all the same, and sooner rather than later if inflation continues to test the upper bound of its target range, as it did through 2011.

Read the full article here.

This post was submitted by Karl Marx Carney.

For those that missed it, there’s an interesting article over at Canadian Mortgage Trends – the major banks have done away with their variable rate discount mortgages and are now charging a premium over prime.

Prime + 0.10% (i.e., 3.10%) is an interesting number. A few months ago consumers thought that fat variable-rate discounts were here to stay. Variables above prime will now come as a shock to some people.

The banks are well aware of that. They know that pricing above prime impacts consumer psychology.

They could have priced at prime. Spreads are not that horrendous. But pricing above prime makes more of an impact. It makes higher-profit fixed rates more appealing and it mentally prepares consumers for potentially higher VRM premiums down the road.

That said, banks are not just arbitrarily sticking it to borrowers. The main reason variable rates are worsening is that banks’ costs are rising, and they want to recoup those costs.

Read the full article for more on the factors at play in this move.

This post was submitted by Karl Marx Carney.

FishyRE points out that the latest housing market numbers out of Victoria look bad. Really bad.

House prices are down YOY for two years now. Condos are down YOY and flat over two. Attached is down 15% over two years. Yikes.

This post was submitted by teekay.

Not just any panel.. a “Blue Ribbon” panel to look at the underlying issues of housing affordability in Vancouver. I hope it’s a Pabst Blue Ribbon panel.

Saying that the high cost of housing is threatening to make Vancouver unlivable, Robertson said he wants the panel to come up with short and long-term solutions, including using more of the city’s own lands.

But he also acknowledged that the seemingly intractable issues around why Vancouver’s housing remains among the most expensive in Canada likely means his Vision Vancouver-led council won’t find solutions quickly, even within their three year term of office.

He said the “task force”, which will be named within weeks, will include advocates, architects, developers, building owners, financiers and citizens.

“They’ll identify ways we can increase Vancouver’s supply of affordable homes — both immediately, for the most urgent needs, and for the long term,” he said.

Why would they include advocates and citizens on this panel? Don’t architects, developers, building owners and financiers have all the knowledge this panel needs.

I’m no expert, but I’m guessing the advice will be something like this: Spend lots of money designing and building low income housing on city land, provide incentives to developers and building owners and encourage a system whereby financiers can skim a little more from the average Vancouverite that feels they just must get into the can’t lose housing market.

Likely not to be addressed: anything that discourages people from buying with as little down payment as possible backed up with CMHC insurance that removes risk from the lender.

This post was submitted by Jackson.

If you recently bought a condo in Vancouver this probably isn’t what you want to hear, but let’s just think about this situation realistically. Let’s pretend we get the ‘perfect’ scenario of constantly rising house prices. A young couple buys a condo to get on the property ladder and plans on starting a family and moving up to a larger home in a few years. When it’s time to sell, it’s a jackpot! Their condo has increased by $100 grand and they magically find a buyer at that price right away..

but wait. That home they wanted to buy is up $200 grand. Better hope their income has been increasing a lot faster than everyone else.

And that’s in the magic ‘balanced’ scenario where homes and condos increase at roughly the same percentage year over year. For a while here in Vancouver, house prices have lept up while condos have been mostly flat. The hypothetical move-up buyer is even more screwed.

Maybe it’s time to get some smaller furniture and turn the ‘den’ into a babies room, since we don’t seem to build many large family size apartments in Vancouver. It’s either houses or ‘junior’ one bedrooms with little in between.

Constantly increasing house prices means you only win if you sell and get out of town or sell and rent. The move-up buyer is screwed.

This post was submitted by John.

Interesting article over at the National Post on the ‘different here‘ argument.

If the Canadian housing market were to collapse, Canadian taxpayers would be hit hard. The federal government is fully liable for any losses incurred by the CMHC, which currently backs somewhere in the order of $600-billion worth of mortgages. It has been bailed-out by the government twice in the past.

The government needs to act quickly to remove the factors that are causing the market to expand so rapidly, as well as to disperse the risk across the financial system. The CMHC should be privatized, much like the Australians successfully did in 1997. Banks and insurance companies should be allowed to do what they do best — assess risk, without standards being forced upon them by government bureaucrats. Doing so would not only spread the risk throughout the financial system and protect taxpayers, it would also reduce the likelihood of Canada experiencing a U.S.-style housing crisis.