Buying a house over 1 million?

[nzwasp]

I heard this on the weekend and I didn't know if true so i'll ask the experts here:

If you buy a house in Canada under 1 million you can put any amount down but putting down 20% avoids CMHC fees.

If you buy a house over 1 million you put 20% down for the portion of 0 to 1,000,000 and then anything over the 1 million dollar mark you have to put down 50%???

Ie.

Buy a house for $1,500,000 you have to put down 450k? This seems unobtainable for most people even the more well off ones.

[FraserB]

Wouldn't this be a policy of individual lenders? I thought you couldn't get CMHC for anything over a million?

[nzwasp]

You cant. Im not asking about cmhc. I just thought it was wierd about the 50% down for amounts over 1 million.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[mazdavirgin]

Mortgages over a million dollars do not qualify for CHMC insurance so it's between the bank and yourself to sort out how much down they would like before they are willing to give you a mortgage. So it would be more like the bank wants 50% down on the whole thing not the first million dollars. So potentially 750k down on a place worth 1.5 million.

[nzwasp]

Must be the bank this person was with. I cant imagine every bank requiring that. I would think the house and land would be security enough with 20 or 25% down

[ExtraSlow]

Most banks would be happy to lend you the $800k for your $1million mortgage.
Just checked realtor.ca and there are 774 homes listed in the Calgary area over $1million.
Heck, just in my nighborhood there are six, and I'm not anywhere that I'd consider "Ritchie Rich".

[M.alex]

Originally posted by nzwasp

Buy a house for $1,500,000 you have to put down 450k? This seems unobtainable for most people even the more well off ones.

then they can't afford a 1.5M house?? SHOCKING :eek: :eek: :eek:

[oz388]

I'm wondering if in 10 years, 1M will be the average price of single houses?!

[Yuubah]

It's called sliding scale, and it depends on where you buy the house, and the lender on the percentages.

For ex.. if you buy a house worth 1.5 million. some banks will give you 80% of the first million, and 50% of the remaining amount. So maximum total lending will be $800,000 + $250,000 = $1,050,000 mortgage.

And it is definately attainable especially if you bought pre-boom.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by nzwasp
Buy a house for $1,500,000 you have to put down 450k? This seems unobtainable for most people even the more well off ones.

uh....IMO, I don't think anyone should have a $1M mortgage for a single primary home. If you need to borrow that much, you should downsize to something you can actually afford.

It's also a very bad investment. I'm not surprised bank asked for 50% down over $1M. It's hard to move properties over $1M unless it has excellent location. And that's a price range that is 1st to drop and last to raise when an adjustment comes.

I'm looking at a property at the end of the street and they asked for $1M which had no taker for 8 months and 3 real estate agents later. It has just been adjusted to $890K. The problem is that old mansions has elements that is deemed ugly 20 years later (In Hamptons, it's the oak color from the 90s). This property needs at least $150K of renos to bring it to today's standard.

So luxury mansions will rely on the lot to keep most of it's value. The house on top of it won't increase in value when you consider the maintenance/reno needed over time to keep it current.

[tpurcell4]

Originally posted by Yuubah
It's called sliding scale, and it depends on where you buy the house, and the lender on the percentages.

For ex.. if you buy a house worth 1.5 million. some banks will give you 80% of the first million, and 50% of the remaining amount. So maximum total lending will be $800,000 + $250,000 = $1,050,000 mortgage.

And it is definately attainable especially if you bought pre-boom.

In addition to this, it is a lender by lender policy. Most have a sliding scale, but where the lender starts the scale varies. Most start at 20% on the first million and 50% on the rest, while there are still a couple lenders who will go up to 20% on the first two million and 50% on the rest.

In our experience this has not been an issue for most buyers in the market for million plus homes. Most are only looking for mortgages between 50 - 65% LTV, and have a plan to pay this amount off within 5 years anyway. To quote one client, "When the money is essentially free I'll take it even if I do not need it right now".

This does however squeeze anyone out of the market that truly cannot afford to and should not purchase a home over one million.

Cheers,

Todd

[nzwasp]

I wasnt asking for myself. Im happy with my 600k house in the burbs.

A friend of mine is looking to buy around the million dollar range for something in the inner city ie in scarboro.

It seems though despite the fact theres houses over or close to a million dollars in scarboro they all look like they would require 200k worth of renovations to be up to todays standard.

[G-ZUS]

Pfffft I didn't even need a mortgage for my million dollar Mansion :poosie:

[Sugarphreak]

...

[G-ZUS]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak


Did you get the T-shirt?

http://skreened.com/render-product/x/w/w/xwwgwiaoftktraaqyiyl/sorry-i-m-a-baller.american-apparel-unisex-fitted-tee.gold.w760h760.jpg

Yep but on a extra deep v-neck t-shirt :bigpimp:

[you&me]

Some of you guys are talking like a million dollar mortgage is some obscene luxury.

"If you need that, you can't afford the house"??? Pfft, give your head a shake.

A million dollars hardly buys you a "mansion". If we're talking about million dollar homes in the fucking Hamptons (no offence :D ), then the whole significance of a "million dollar home" is lost. Hell, most attached infills you see being built in Marda Loop, Altadore, Hillhurst, Parkdale are all well over a million dollars, let alone the stand alone homes in those areas and all of those being built in Mt Royal, Elbow Park, Briar Hill, Aspen, etc...

The average house hold income in Calgary nearly hits the TDSR for a million dollar mortgage. Now, I'm not saying million dollar mortgages should be handed out to marginal qualifiers like that, but there is absolutely no shortage of families (dual-income or single) that can comfortably service a mortgage of that size in Calgary and that's pretty clear by all the construction activity at that level.

As Todd said, the money's too cheap to say no to...

[Sugarphreak]

...

[SkiBum5.0]

Originally posted by you&me
Some of you guys are talking like a million dollar mortgage is some obscene luxury.

"If you need that, you can't afford the house"??? Pfft, give your head a shake.

A million dollars hardly buys you a "mansion". If we're talking about million dollar homes in the fucking Hamptons (no offence :D ), then the whole significance of a "million dollar home" is lost. Hell, most attached infills you see being built in Marda Loop, Altadore, Hillhurst, Parkdale are all well over a million dollars, let alone the stand alone homes in those areas and all of those being built in Mt Royal, Elbow Park, Briar Hill, Aspen, etc...

The average house hold income in Calgary nearly hits the TDSR for a million dollar mortgage. Now, I'm not saying million dollar mortgages should be handed out to marginal qualifiers like that, but there is absolutely no shortage of families (dual-income or single) that can comfortably service a mortgage of that size in Calgary and that's pretty clear by all the construction activity at that level.

As Todd said, the money's too cheap to say no to...

Glad someone said it - if you choose to live inner-city, and want/need more than 3 bedrooms you are looking at $1M.
And if you are able to put 20% down, there is no reason to put down more than that. There is no benefit unless you get a better rate.
It comes down to cash flow - if you can service the debt comfortably (important), then I don't see an issue.

Housing has appreciated by 10% inner city in ~12-18 months in some parts - 10% of $1M is larger than 10% of $600,000

[G-ZUS]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
^^ Yep, million bucks doesn't get you much

Gets the city like 6000$yr/500$ a month in taxes though, that is criminal



I went for the double popped collar one in neon orange myself, haha

Should have went for hot pink, do more b!tches holla with a double popped coller?

[HiTempguy1]

If a couple dinks earn $200k a year together, is a million dollar mortgage really that far out there?

I mean, if a couple dinks who earn $120k together own a $500k+ home, I don't see the big issue that everyone has :dunno:

[JamMan23]

Originally posted by you&me
The average house hold income in Calgary nearly hits the TDSR for a million dollar mortgage.

The average household income in Calgary is less than 100k, not even close to enough to service a million dollar mortgage.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[nzwasp]

My friend is willing to have a 800k mortgage on a million dollar house. Thats probably 4k a month atleast to mortgage payments. I would not like to have to pay that monthly if I lost my job/got sick etc.

[you&me]

Originally posted by JamMan23


The average household income in Calgary is less than 100k, not even close to enough to service a million dollar mortgage.

My bad. I had a few trains of thought going and got a little mixed up.

What I meant to say was that with 20% down, a million dollar house is close to the TDSR... But since that's not what we're talking about... :nut:

Anyways, my point stands that a million dollar mortgage isn't as far out of reach from even the average household in Calgary... Certainly closer here than anywhere else and far from some sort of extravagance based on affordability.

[msommers]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
Keep in mind that people who can afford homes in this price range tend to be more savvy with money in the first place, so much so that I'd say most million dollar homes have a smaller mortgage than the 600K McMansions in the wannabe neighborhood down the road.

Lots of people with million+ homes also are in debt up to their eyeballs, people with really good jobs too. It's always amazing to hear these guys that seem to have everything but really the bank owns most of it :rofl:

[ExtraSlow]

I know a guy with a $million house, and I'm 100% certain he owns 20% of it, and plans never to pay it off. He's living far beyond his means though, and i housing crashes, he'll be totally screwed.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by you&me
Some of you guys are talking like a million dollar mortgage is some obscene luxury.

"If you need that, you can't afford the house"??? Pfft, give your head a shake.

A million dollars hardly buys you a "mansion". If we're talking about million dollar homes in the fucking Hamptons (no offence :D ), then the whole significance of a "million dollar home" is lost. Hell, most attached infills you see being built in Marda Loop, Altadore, Hillhurst, Parkdale are all well over a million dollars, let alone the stand alone homes in those areas and all of those being built in Mt Royal, Elbow Park, Briar Hill, Aspen, etc...

The average house hold income in Calgary nearly hits the TDSR for a million dollar mortgage. Now, I'm not saying million dollar mortgages should be handed out to marginal qualifiers like that, but there is absolutely no shortage of families (dual-income or single) that can comfortably service a mortgage of that size in Calgary and that's pretty clear by all the construction activity at that level.

As Todd said, the money's too cheap to say no to...

This thinking is why Albertans have 2x more debt than the rest of the nation.

I'm not worried about people who has a couple millions and want to borrow a couple more because loan is cheap. I'm worried about people who worried about the down payment they need to get into a $1M+ house and hopes they will get crazy equity appreciation in the years to come hopes to be ahead in the future.

I totally understand that $1M doesn't buy you much these days but it's still 2x the average price of housing in Calgary.

And betting on $1M+ inner city properties (Marda Loop, Cresent Height) seems to be a safer bet than the $1M+ properties in the burbs (Aspen, Hamptons).

[Pacman]

It's always interesting to read these types of threads.

Perhaps I'm a bit naive, but I just assume when I see young, hard working, professional couples in their late 20's to early 40's buying million dollar homes, driving newer BMW SUV's etc that they are earning well above average incomes and carefully saving up their money to make huge downpayents, max out their RRSP's and TFSA accounts etc and then have enough money left over to buy a nice car.

You guys make it seem like everyone is one paycheck away from losing their house and being forced to eat at the soup kitchen.

I suppose there really isn't an accurate way to tell, until a housing crash occurs. The ones with lots of equity in the house will continue living there and the ones who are upside will probably walk away.

[max_boost]

A couple professionals dinks can get a million dollar mortgage and yes that is almost full retard but on a 25 year amortization they will get approved lol

Look around 1mill homes in the inner city will get you a nice infill. Go further out and your house will be nicer. Altadore has a look cool modern luxury homes but 1.3 for a 25' lot. Fuck I went to high school across the street from there I have zero vision. Every .1 is $100k and we are talking like it's no big deal oh 1.1 vs 1.5 lol fuck Calgary so baller now

[taemo]

Originally posted by msommers


Lots of people with million+ homes also are in debt up to their eyeballs, people with really good jobs too. It's always amazing to hear these guys that seem to have everything but really the bank owns most of it :rofl:

yeah no kidding, right now I owe the bank 22 years of mortgage and 2 years car finance, the sooner I get them paid off the sooner I'll feel accomplished and secure.
been tempted on getting a bigger house and trading for newer cars but what for?
I rather be debt free than owing the bank money for most of my life

[Sugarphreak]

...

[suntan]

According to my accountant, the high earners are the ones that are up to their eyeballs in debt, mostly mortgage.

[civic_rida]

I saw a duplex listed for 1.3 million and the realtor was feeding me the line well its inner city.
To think of spending that much money and still having someone on the other side of the wall.

[you&me]

Originally posted by Xtrema


This thinking is why Albertans have 2x more debt than the rest of the nation.

I'm not worried about people who has a couple millions and want to borrow a couple more because loan is cheap. I'm worried about people who worried about the down payment they need to get into a $1M+ house and hopes they will get crazy equity appreciation in the years to come hopes to be ahead in the future.

I totally understand that $1M doesn't buy you much these days but it's still 2x the average price of housing in Calgary.

And betting on $1M+ inner city properties (Marda Loop, Cresent Height) seems to be a safer bet than the $1M+ properties in the burbs (Aspen, Hamptons).

I'm less worried about someone with the means to come up with 20+% (even if it is a bit of a struggle) and the employment history to qualify for the million dollar + mortgage than I am about the people that have an equally hard time scrapping together the 20% for a more average home...

As Sugarphreak said, the people at that level tend to have a better handle on their finances and money in general. That doesn't mean some don't scrape by, or squeak into qualifying, but I would imagine the average $1MM+ home "owner" (/mortgager) is more secure that the rest of home "owners" (/mortgagers).

[ExtraSlow]

Yeah, I'm in a duplex infill, and while it's not bad, and certainly not cheap, I think I would have a hard time justifying seven figures for half the building. Airflow sucks, so AC is a neccessity, the yard is small, no room for a big garage.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[suntan]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
I've never used an accountant, not for personal or business. Couldn't justify the expense when a software package will do it all for you if you put in an hour or two worth of data entry.

This is kind what I am talking about when I say some people are more savvy I have a business, it's sorta handy to have an accountant do your books. So she also does my personal taxes and my wife's for about $110. How much is QuickTax? $50?

Do you really think it's $60/year that makes or breaks someone's finances?

I suppose I could do my postings myself, but QuickBooks costs money too.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[suntan]

Only personal is $110. Business is around $700. Sometimes more if I annoy her with a ton of questions :)

I also end up doing about $500-$1000 worth of IT services for her every year, so it's all good.

I should mention that wealthy people often have trusts, and yeah, you need an accountant for those.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[suntan]

Nah, people who are wealthy are lucky.

"Small things to save up cash"? Well, whatever. I have $18K sitting in my petty cash and I've been spending like a drunken sailor recently.

I find budgeting makes the biggest difference.

[ICEBERG]

I don't know. I live in a 900K+ home with my mortgage almost paid off. Wife want's to move into a bigger home and we were looking around 1.2 to 1.5 mil homes but they were not that much special than what i have now. Also i don't want another big mortgage that i will be paying for the next 20 years. I think you need to move up to like 2mil+ homes to be considered a baller these days.:bigpimp:

My first house i bought almost 20 years ago was $126K. Sold that house for almost 300k To buy my next home which i sold for almost 600K to move into my house now. Back then it was easier to get into a nice home with low mortgage but now with average house prices around $450-550K it is though for young couple to start out.

The day i sell my house, i am moving into a nice condo paid off and pocketing rest of the money to travel with my wife. Also might sell everything to buy a nice house in Nice France for my retirement. Then drive around Europe like Monaco, Madrid, ect.. and enjoy life..

Now need the kids to grow up fast + get a nice education and to get the hell out. Hopefully 10 more years...:-D

[benyl]

Yup, the 1.0-1.5 range is just bigger yards or bigger houses. Nothing special.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[max_boost]

Originally posted by ICEBERG
I don't know. I live in a 900K+ home with my mortgage almost paid off. Wife want's to move into a bigger home and we were looking around 1.2 to 1.5 mil homes but they were not that much special than what i have now. Also i don't want another big mortgage that i will be paying for the next 20 years. I think you need to move up to like 2mil+ homes to be considered a baller these days.:bigpimp:

My first house i bought almost 20 years ago was $126K. Sold that house for almost 300k To buy my next home which i sold for almost 600K to move into my house now. Back then it was easier to get into a nice home with low mortgage but now with average house prices around $450-550K it is though for young couple to start out.

The day i sell my house, i am moving into a nice condo paid off and pocketing rest of the money to travel with my wife. Also might sell everything to buy a nice house in Nice France for my retirement. Then drive around Europe like Monaco, Madrid, ect.. and enjoy life..

Now need the kids to grow up fast + get a nice education and to get the hell out. Hopefully 10 more years...:-D Yup. Agree with you and similar situation minus the kids part and my house not as much as yours lol

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by ICEBERG
Back then it was easier to get into a nice home with low mortgage but now with average house prices around $450-550K it is though for young couple to start out.

Two kids come out of college/university at the age of 22 with diplomas/degrees, go directly into jobs making $60k each. Its not hard for two people living together who are educated to afford a $450k-$550k house :dunno: And that buys you a LOT of house compared to even the houses I grew up in back in the 90's that were new.

The monthly mortgage payment would be 1/3 of net take home, about 1/4 of gross monthly pay.

What it is harder to do nowadays is be SINGLE and own your own place IMO.

[D. Dub]

Hate to be holding that 1.6 million dollar house when a "black swan event" of some type or sort or kind causes oil and gas to catastrophically drop and Calgary becomes the next Detroit, Winnipeg, Manchester, or Gold Coast -- the only thing that lasts forever is, well, nothing.

I'd rather buy an affordable starter to mid range house in a "good" not great family or transitioning neighbourhood and let all you ballers inflate my value without taking half the risk.

[ExtraSlow]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1
What it is harder to do nowadays is be SINGLE and own your own place IMO.
This has always been true. That's why it's been common for young single people to rent until they are in a stable dual-income situation.

Ask your parents or grandparents, this is nothing new.

[pheoxs]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Two kids come out of college/university at the age of 22 with diplomas/degrees, go directly into jobs making $60k each. Its not hard for two people living together who are educated to afford a $450k-$550k house :dunno: And that buys you a LOT of house compared to even the houses I grew up in back in the 90's that were new.

The monthly mortgage payment would be 1/3 of net take home, about 1/4 of gross monthly pay.

What it is harder to do nowadays is be SINGLE and own your own place IMO.

It comes down to priorities and debts. A house is easily affordable. Making 75k alone you'll take home 2k biweekly and a 400k house would be a 1700$ mortgage. Including taxes and utilities your at 2300$. That leaves 1700$ for living expenses, food gas etc which is doable.

But the people want a new car. Oh and new furniture might as well finance that. Plus a trip every year of course to somewhere fancy. And Starbucks daily. And all of a sudden they can't afford to live.

If you budget properly and not love beyond your means home ownership is easy. The problem is everyone wants to keep up with the jones and ends up paying a grand a month financing shit they don't actually need.

[benyl]

Originally posted by D. Dub

I'd rather buy an affordable starter to mid range house in a "good" not great family or transitioning neighbourhood and let all you ballers inflate my value without taking half the risk.

The upside on the $1.6M house is way better than the above. The downside is no different between the two. Can't go past zero / bankruptcy.

risk-reward.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[msommers]

Originally posted by pheoxs


It comes down to priorities and debts. A house is easily affordable. Making 75k alone you'll take home 2k biweekly and a 400k house would be a 1700$ mortgage. Including taxes and utilities your at 2300$. That leaves 1700$ for living expenses, food gas etc which is doable.

But the people want a new car. Oh and new furniture might as well finance that. Plus a trip every year of course to somewhere fancy. And Starbucks daily. And all of a sudden they can't afford to live.

If you budget properly and not love beyond your means home ownership is easy. The problem is everyone wants to keep up with the jones and ends up paying a grand a month financing shit they don't actually need.

Everyone I know who has experience with budgeting has said that half your income (let alone over half) should not be going to your living expenses. You should leave money for car problems, emergency funds, putting some money into savings, etc.

The exception of course comes when you're a single person buying your first home, like myself. Unless you're living at home until your late 20's or getting major assistance it's very difficult to save up enough money for a large downpayment. Or you focus on everything going to your downpayment for a couple years and not do anything during your 20's, which is a personal choice I suppose. It is tough to find a good place as your first home on a single income in Calgary. Everyone knows (and something I learned) that property virgins want it all for nothing but Calgary is just in a whole other realm.

I'm not spending half my monthly income on living expenses and I'm not living some baller lifestyle or anything close either. However when looking at income vs. living costs in Calgary as a percentage, I bet Calgary has never been more expensive to live in than right now.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by pheoxs


It comes down to priorities and debts. A house is easily affordable. Making 75k alone you'll take home 2k biweekly and a 400k house would be a 1700$ mortgage. Including taxes and utilities your at 2300$. That leaves 1700$ for living expenses, food gas etc which is doable.

But the people want a new car. Oh and new furniture might as well finance that. Plus a trip every year of course to somewhere fancy. And Starbucks daily. And all of a sudden they can't afford to live.

If you budget properly and not love beyond your means home ownership is easy. The problem is everyone wants to keep up with the jones and ends up paying a grand a month financing shit they don't actually need.

I completely agree :) But on a comparative basis, I still think as a single income individual, it is harder to own a home now then it was before. On the flip side, especially in the 80's-ish, it the job market was a lot worse.

[RX_EVOLV]

It's not too hard to imagine two O&G Professionals affording a $1M+ house. O&G engineers, PMs and accoutants easily making 6 figures, making a combined household income of $200K+

The 3 immediate neighbours to my left here in mount pleasants are all working younger (~early to mid 30s) O&G professionals either expecting or have younger children and their houses are $1M+.

[pheoxs]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


I completely agree :) But on a comparative basis, I still think as a single income individual, it is harder to own a home now then it was before. On the flip side, especially in the 80's-ish, it the job market was a lot worse.

Oh I absolutely agree with you! But talking with my parents my 400k house and their 80k house have almost the same monthly payment (adjusting for inflation) due to stupidly low interest rates right now

It just frustrates me that I properly manage my finances so I was able to afford my home by myself at 25 and I have friends/coworkers complaining that things are too expensive and they can't keep up when they all have brand new cars, brand new furnishings, decided it's summer and wanted to ride a bike so bought brand new 1000$+ road cycles, etc. they just spend spend spend then complain they have no money

[SkiBum5.0]

Originally posted by msommers


Everyone I know who has experience with budgeting has said that half your income (let alone over half) should not be going to your living expenses. You should leave money for car problems, emergency funds, putting some money into savings, etc.

The exception of course comes when you're a single person buying your first home, like myself. Unless you're living at home until your late 20's or getting major assistance it's very difficult to save up enough money for a large downpayment. Or you focus on everything going to your downpayment for a couple years and not do anything during your 20's, which is a personal choice I suppose. It is tough to find a good place as your first home on a single income in Calgary. Everyone knows (and something I learned) that property virgins want it all for nothing but Calgary is just in a whole other realm.

I'm not spending half my monthly income on living expenses and I'm not living some baller lifestyle or anything close either. However when looking at income vs. living costs in Calgary as a percentage, I bet Calgary has never been more expensive to live in than right now.

Up to what point? Makes sense if you net 4,5 or $6,000 per month. But if you make 10,15, $20,000 per month? Why do you need so much safety net?
Provided you already have your rainy day fund, contribute to retirement, and can service your big ol mortgage.
My example would be two lawyers, or other professional with 7-10 years experience.

[msommers]

If you're making $20K/month and spending half on a mortgage, that's a 2M mortgage!

It's a general rule and certainly doesn't apply for people with gobs of money like two doctors out of residency, for example.

[ZedMan]

Originally posted by ExtraSlow

This has always been true. That's why it's been common for young single people to rent until they are in a stable dual-income situation.

Ask your parents or grandparents, this is nothing new.

I disagree. Both my parents and grandparents did buy after they were married, but the difference was they bought on single incomes. Having the wife working was definitely not common in our grandparents time, or even really our parents. Good luck doing that now. My grandpa was an Engineer and my dad a Geologist, so they made good but by no means insane money.

[nzwasp]

Originally posted by D. Dub
Hate to be holding that 1.6 million dollar house when a "black swan event" of some type or sort or kind causes oil and gas to catastrophically drop and Calgary becomes the next Detroit, Winnipeg, Manchester, or Gold Coast -- the only thing that lasts forever is, well, nothing.



I'd be interested why you lump the gold coast in with that bunch. Thought they were always ballin there with the beach and tourism.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by nzwasp


I'd be interested why you lump the gold coast in with that bunch. Thought they were always ballin there with the beach and tourism.

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/504536/20130909/australia-s-property-crash-gold-coast-homes.htm#.U-Kjd_ldWlY

Exactly like Vegas.

or Greece

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/28/home-ownership-greece-property-market

Playground real estate is based on how many $ does the world has the play with and will also go south first on a down turn.

[mrsingh]

Originally posted by RX_EVOLV
It's not too hard to imagine two O&G Professionals affording a $1M+ house. O&G engineers, PMs and accoutants easily making 6 figures, making a combined household income of $200K+

The 3 immediate neighbours to my left here in mount pleasants are all working younger (~early to mid 30s) O&G professionals either expecting or have younger children and their houses are $1M+.

Lol, everytime I start to feel like I am doing pretty decently financially, a thread like this make me feel very un-baller.

A $1M home seems totally out of reach to me right now, and I am not a big spender overall with lavish vacations and a garage full of toys.

$200k doesn't seem enough, I would think you would need to be at $300k+ a year to afford all that, or have bought pre-boom and had some solid equity prior to upgrading.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by mrsingh
$200k doesn't seem enough, I would think you would need to be at $300k+ a year to afford all that, or have bought pre-boom and had some solid equity prior to upgrading.

Comfort level is different among people.

$200K single income should yield $140K net. $1M mortgage is ~$60K and you spend another $60K for taxes, food and cars. and you can still put in another $20K toward RRSP/rainy day.

If $200K from 2 incomes, should net a bit more and safer as unlikely both incomes come to an end at the same time. So $200K can definitely "service" a $1M mortgage.

$300K tho will mean you will be mortgage free sooner and lose less money to interest and to me, a bit more comfortable.

[Twin_Cam_Turbo]

I just want to be mortgage free, I don't care about owning a million dollar home lol.

[mrsingh]

Originally posted by Xtrema


Comfort level is different among people.

...$20K toward RRSP/rainy day.

I think that's what it boils down to. I don't doubt I could service the mortgage; but at the expense of saving that little, or sacrificing other opportunities down the road just wouldn't be worth it to me. Best of luck to those who can make it work!

[The_Rural_Juror]

$1 mil home gets in the way of a $300k car. Priorities.

[msommers]

Article made me think of this thread

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/07/23/calgarys-britannia-tops-list-of-communities-with-high-income-households

[Sugarphreak]

...

[D. Dub]

Originally posted by benyl


The upside on the $1.6M house is way better than the above. The downside is no different between the two. Can't go past zero / bankruptcy.

risk-reward.


If you're not upside down in the crash. The other advantage is that I'm betting owning more or all of a few cheaper homes will be much more liquid, much longer in a crash.

[D. Dub]

Originally posted by Twin_Cam_Turbo
I just want to be mortgage free, I don't care about owning a million dollar home lol.

Me too. I'm old 40+ and risk averse.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by D. Dub

If you're not upside down in the crash. The other advantage is that I'm betting owning more or all of a few cheaper homes will be much more liquid, much longer in a crash.

:thumbsup:

[benyl]

Originally posted by D. Dub



If you're not upside down in the crash. The other advantage is that I'm betting owning more or all of a few cheaper homes will be much more liquid, much longer in a crash.

The impression that I got of the crash you are talking about is like Armageddon. Everyone loses. Those cheaper houses in the semi not nice places usually end up worthless (look at Detroit).

There are plenty of "nice" areas of Detroit, Vegas, etc that have held some equity. They are given away for $1k and the property taxes (like Detroit).

Location is key, not the price of the house.

[D. Dub]

Originally posted by benyl


The impression that I got of the crash you are talking about is like Armageddon. Everyone loses. Those cheaper houses in the semi not nice places usually end up worthless (look at Detroit).

There are plenty of "nice" areas of Detroit, Vegas, etc that have held some equity. They are given away for $1k and the property taxes (like Detroit).

Location is key, not the price of the house.



Obviously location is important in real estate. I'm talking about affordable family homes in good family neighbourhoods -- affordable, generic single family is always going to be safer/more liquid than the top end of the market.

I'm not talking flipping condos, I'm talking long term capital risk aversion. Besides, do you have any idea how much you can make investing when have no or a tiny mortgage?

[D. Dub]

oops Firefox is glitching.

[max_boost]

Originally posted by D. Dub




Obviously location is important in real estate. I'm talking about affordable family homes in good family neighbourhoods -- affordable, generic single family is always going to be safer/more liquid than the top end of the market.

I'm not talking flipping condos, I'm talking long term capital risk aversion. Besides, do you have any idea how much you can make investing when have no or a tiny mortgage? Ya that's how I interpreted your post as well. It's what got me thinking too that eventually I probably move back to the suburbs and get an affordable, generic house haha

[Disoblige]

Originally posted by mrsingh

I think that's what it boils down to. I don't doubt I could service the mortgage; but at the expense of saving that little, or sacrificing other opportunities down the road just wouldn't be worth it to me. Best of luck to those who can make it work!
Same thoughts here.

[Twin_Cam_Turbo]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
You say that now... but one day you are going to be looking at a house with a 3 or 4 car garage and it will get you!

Lol at my job I'll never be able to afford that.

[Strider]

Originally posted by RX_EVOLV
It's not too hard to imagine two O&G Professionals affording a $1M+ house. O&G engineers, PMs and accoutants easily making 6 figures, making a combined household income of $200K+

The 3 immediate neighbours to my left here in mount pleasants are all working younger (~early to mid 30s) O&G professionals either expecting or have younger children and their houses are $1M+.

Would love to know where this is - I can only think of 2 or 3 spots where there's 3 $1M+ homes side by side in Mt Pleasant. Might be nice to live beside other young professionals instead of tenants / future construction zones.

My wife and I are on the cusp of entering this market. The problem for us is that we're currently in somewhat of a "starter infill" and anything around the $800k mark isn't worth upgrading to (not any bigger, just fancier finishes) when we'll ultimately want more space. Truth is, $1M doesn't buy much anymore, especially if you're attached to the inner city lifestyle.

We've been in our house for 5 years and have paid off well over half of it, and are fairly budget conscious in other aspects of our lives - pack our lunch and bring our own lattes every day, carpool, pay for cheap beltline parking, 1 vacation per year... etc. There's no doubt in my mind that we'd be able to service the mortgage on a $1M home, but at the same time seeing the interest portion would make me :cry:

In my mind, we may as well buy now for $1M instead of taking an intermediate step (moving and paying Realtor fees twice) and watching a $1M house go to $1.2M.

[msommers]

If that's your gameplan, look into Killarney or Bridgeland.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Strider


In my mind, we may as well buy now for $1M instead of taking an intermediate step (moving and paying Realtor fees twice) and watching a $1M house go to $1.2M.

Girlfriend and I have been talking about moving in together next year when her lease expires on her current place and she is done her degree. We're hoping to bypass buying a condo and go straight into a house, because of exactly what you've said.

Obviously, we are talking $450k to $550k house, but the same principles apply.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[roopi]

I think you meant riff raff. :rofl:

[J.M.]

Originally posted by roopi
I think you meant riff raff. :rofl:

Riff Raff

http://www.acclaimmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/RIFF.jpg

[Sugarphreak]

...

[msommers]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
Both areas suck IMO... Killarney is a high rental area, parking is terriable and when I lived there shit was being stolen out of the yard all the time.

Bridgeland is more up and coming which is pushing out the rift raft, but still gets a lot of the petty crime from bums/addicts that wander over across the bridge from the DI. They are lazy, so they don't go up the hill... they just stay in that lower area.

Personally for similar houses and price I like the Spruce Cliff area in the west, also Acadia if you go south a bit.

I think you mean more right on 17th ave are where the old rental places are. I randomly picked a spot in the middle of Killarney and this is what showed up lol made me laugh.

http://goo.gl/maps/BqFQ7

[rage2]

I'm glad I'm a suburbanite and don't have to worry about $1m homes. Even when looking at moving, I refused to look at anything $1m+ because it's just overkill. Does that make me savvy? :rofl:

[Strider]

Originally posted by msommers
If that's your gameplan, look into Killarney or Bridgeland.

Killarney is definitely starting to develop nicely... it's on our watchlist, but there doesn't seem to be as many of the larger homes going up there.

Bridgeland seems more expensive (for the same size house) as where we're currently looking... add on the transients that cross the river, and it's pretty much a no go.

Renfrew and Winston Heights look like pretty decent prospects though (although it's a NE address :eek: )

West Hillhurst is right at the top of our list for areas, but the price of admission is even higher.

[Strider]

Originally posted by rage2
I'm glad I'm a suburbanite and don't have to worry about $1m homes. Even when looking at moving, I refused to look at anything $1m+ because it's just overkill. Does that make me savvy? :rofl:

Not really overkill when 1900 sq ft attached infills are listing/selling at $850-900k+ :(

Maybe it's time to give up on the dream of inner city and move to the 'burbs... then I could justify a fancier car :D

[msommers]

Ahh ok I see what you're after. Yeah Hillhurst, Parkdale, Rosedale, Crescent Heights, Renfrew, Briar Hill, St. Andrews Heights, Scarboro, West Sunalta (it's a tiny but nice community; https://goo.gl/maps/8Z1zc).

Personally I believe Wildwood has a lot of potential as well. Not inner city but Aspen Woods is favoured by a lot here and the appreciation in the area has been impressive.

[max_boost]

The NE discount is a real thing lol Definitely worth looking into haha

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by max_boost
The NE discount is a real thing lol Definitely worth looking into haha

Yeah it really, really is. If you're not worried about living in an "ethnic" neighbourhood you can get a lot for your dollar, although appreciation will clearly depend on locale. Don't go so far north you fall under the new flight paths, though.

[you&me]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat


Yeah it really, really is. If you're not worried about living in an "ethnic" neighbourhood you can get a lot for your dollar, although appreciation will clearly depend on locale. Don't go so far north you fall under the new flight paths, though.

I don't want to speak for him, but I think Max was referring to inner-city communities in the NE (Winston Heights, Bridgland, etc) having a "NE discount" applied... The definitely do.

[max_boost]

Lol yep. You&me are on the same page bro lol

Good value to be had in renfrew tuxedo and Winston heights.
Also highland park if you consider that inner as well south of McKnight. But even bridgeland is $$$ with their NE code.

[you&me]

Originally posted by max_boost
Lol yep. You&me are on the same page bro lol

Good value to be had in renfrew tuxedo and Winston heights.
Also highland park if you consider that inner as well south of McKnight. But even bridgeland is $$$ with their NE code.

As far as quality of amenities and vibe, find Bridgeland to be far, far (far!) superior to Marda Loop. And I say this having lived in the ML for 10 years. If you could rip up Bridgeland and plunk it down between Crowchild and 14th, you'd have the best of both worlds.

Instead, you have the DIC across the river (I love using that acronym) and all of the joys that come with proximity to so many, um, colourful people. And you can definitely see that same-for-same, the properties in Bridgeland are significantly cheaper than ML.

Plus, I have this aversion to having 'NE' as a suffix to my address... Ewwww ;)

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Strider]

Originally posted by msommers
Ahh ok I see what you're after. Yeah Hillhurst, Parkdale, Rosedale, Crescent Heights, Renfrew, Briar Hill, St. Andrews Heights, Scarboro, West Sunalta (it's a tiny but nice community; https://goo.gl/maps/8Z1zc).

Personally I believe Wildwood has a lot of potential as well. Not inner city but Aspen Woods is favoured by a lot here and the appreciation in the area has been impressive.

Yup, those are the areas we're focusing on ... not so much Briar Hill and St Andrews though, very few infills in those communities and the land is ridiculously expensive.

Sunalta/Scarboro scare me after reading Finboy's thread.

If we did go suburb, Aspen is probably among our favourite communities. Problem is, our kids would be the poor kids in school that 89coupe's and benyl's kids make fun of.


Originally posted by Sugarphreak
Misty Ridge is developing soon, entry prices are not bad when you consider your bang for buck compared to houses in the area. In 5 years time when people settle in the values will be a lot higher in comparison. You can get into a high value 1/4 acre lot with a $$$ home for around 1.3m, whereas lots accross the road are tiny as shit and selling with cookie cutter homes for 800K~1M+.

Where's that? Google is failing me.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[nzwasp]

Originally posted by rage2
I'm glad I'm a suburbanite and don't have to worry about $1m homes. Even when looking at moving, I refused to look at anything $1m+ because it's just overkill. Does that make me savvy? :rofl:

Your house on the lake must of been close to 1 million when you bought it though. Either that or in the 9s.

I remember a bunch of houses next to you for sale for the same sort of price when I lived there.

[benyl]

Originally posted by Strider



Where's that? Google is failing me.

Google is failing you because it is called Mystic Ridge. It's a misnomer as it is in a valley. Fail.

http://www.calbridgehomes.com/communities/mystic-ridge/

It's right here https://www.google.ca/maps/place/8451+26+Ave+SW,+Calgary,+AB+T3H/@51.0304497,-114.2088025,19z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x53716debde62eaf9:0x5334fbf5e407b014

[rage2]

Originally posted by nzwasp
Your house on the lake must of been close to 1 million when you bought it though. Either that or in the 9s.

I remember a bunch of houses next to you for sale for the same sort of price when I lived there.
My house isn't on the lake. The closest I came was making an offer on one, lowballed at 995k or something and they basically told me to fuck off and sold for 1.1m haha.

I'm just walking distance from the lake.