Imminent Housing Crash

[max_boost]

C/S my place. Don't congrats me yet until it's done done. Took about 33 days to find the right buyer. Good luck everyone.

[oz388]

Originally posted by Buster
That is because you still view your house as an investment, rather than as an expense.

If you are highly leveraged, and a correction comes, you probably get hurt.

But the only people who get hurt in pricing corrections, are the people that deserve it...

A huge housing correction in Vancouver would be a good thing for most residents, as it would allow people to actually buy houses. The same can be said here, just on a smaller scale.

But people are trained to view an illiquid asset, which they must own in some version to be rolled into what they view as their "net worth".

In my opinion most ppl would agree housing is an investment rather than an expense because housing is able to hold its value and has potential to gain value over time.

Vancouver's housing should be as expensive as it is because Vancouver is a much nicer place to live in every way. The ocean's value along is already priceless, unlike Alberta's oil sand, which has a price and it's very low now.

[Buster]

Originally posted by oz388


In my opinion most ppl would agree housing is an investment rather than an expense because housing is able to hold its value and has potential to gain value over time.

Vancouver's housing should be as expensive as it is because Vancouver is a much nicer place to live in every way. The ocean's value along is already priceless, unlike Alberta's oil sand, which has a price and it's very low now.

People can view things however they want. But the fact is that a house can never (almost by definition) be productive, and it costs you money. At the very least, it is a special asset class - unfortunately, people do not view it as a special asset class.

As for Vancouver, if you think that it has high property values because of some subjective/qualitative aspect of the real estate there, you are dreaming. There is no fundamental basis for the property values there. In other words the production inherent to the area cannot sustain the value of homes. So you are absolutely looking at a speculative bubble.

[A790]

Originally posted by oz388


In my opinion most ppl would agree housing is an investment rather than an expense because housing is able to hold its value and has potential to gain value over time.

At best, the principle residence you live in should be viewed as an asset with a forced savings component to it. The cost of ownership & maintenance, combined with taxes/mortgage/etc., negate nearly any value appreciation you will experience.

Your income property(ies) though? Different story.

[A790]

Originally posted by Buster
There is no fundamental basis for the property values there.

That statement could be applied to almost anywhere depending on what you consider a "fundamental basis".

Supply and demand is a strong driver, isn't it? I've been hearing about how Vancouver's housing is in a bubble for the last 10 years or so.

If the external forces driving demand in Vancouver continue to remain present - and there are plenty of indications to suggest that is the case - then what creates the bubble?

[Buster]

Originally posted by A790

That statement could be applied to almost anywhere depending on what you consider a "fundamental basis".

Supply and demand is a strong driver, isn't it? I've been hearing about how Vancouver's housing is in a bubble for the last 10 years or so.

If the external forces driving demand in Vancouver continue to remain present - and there are plenty of indications to suggest that is the case - then what creates the bubble?

When I say fundamentals, I'm really talking about a variety of factors...mostly empirical ratios, income to mortgage ratios, rental rates to mortgage ratios, etc.

The housing values in Vancouver are not even CLOSE to be normalized to the production/wealth generation of the actual residents there. Two outcomes: reduced local ownership and increasing leverage. Neither of these conditions are particularly sustainable.

I disagree with you on your last point. I think that China is unstable. I also think that Canada may, at some point in the future, start assisting China in asset seizures within Canada. Most of the Chinese money coming to Canada is a result of either corruption or outright fraud in China itself. Imagine if the Chinese gov't came to the Canadian gov't, and the Canadian gov't agreed to essentially extradite capital held in Canada which was gained illegally in China? (With a portion withheld in Canada, as a "fee" or a "tax" or a "penalty"?) I don't think this is outside the realm of possibility.

It's much more dangerous to have asset bubbles tied to foreign investment, rather than domestic production. FDI is much more efficient for an economy if it goes towards productive uses (commodity development, technology, innovation, etc), than if it simply inflates an asset class that is more of an expense than an investment. Tulips!

[imranm]

Originally posted by max_boost
C/S my place. Don't congrats me yet until it's done done. Took about 33 days to find the right buyer. Good luck everyone.

Congrats! What community was it in? And where are you moving? If you don't mind me asking...

[oz388]

Originally posted by Buster


People can view things however they want. But the fact is that a house can never (almost by definition) be productive, and it costs you money. At the very least, it is a special asset class - unfortunately, people do not view it as a special asset class.

As for Vancouver, if you think that it has high property values because of some subjective/qualitative aspect of the real estate there, you are dreaming. There is no fundamental basis for the property values there. In other words the production inherent to the area cannot sustain the value of homes. So you are absolutely looking at a speculative bubble.

Regardless of owning or renting you will always have a living cost. If you bought a house before 2005 you will have been laughing any year since then, but for those who have been saving and renting since 2005 they are truly hopeless.

Just ask yourself if Vancouver's property value is as low as Calgary will you still live in Calgary? The fundamental basis for Vancouver property value is simply the demand, because the world is never short of rich people who are able to afford that City.

[SilverRex]

Originally posted by Buster


When I say fundamentals, I'm really talking about a variety of factors...mostly empirical ratios, income to mortgage ratios, rental rates to mortgage ratios, etc.

The housing values in Vancouver are not even CLOSE to be normalized to the production/wealth generation of the actual residents there. Two outcomes: reduced local ownership and increasing leverage. Neither of these conditions are particularly sustainable.

I disagree with you on your last point. I think that China is unstable. I also think that Canada may, at some point in the future, start assisting China in asset seizures within Canada. Most of the Chinese money coming to Canada is a result of either corruption or outright fraud in China itself. Imagine if the Chinese gov't came to the Canadian gov't, and the Canadian gov't agreed to essentially extradite capital held in Canada which was gained illegally in China? (With a portion withheld in Canada, as a "fee" or a "tax" or a "penalty"?) I don't think this is outside the realm of possibility.

It's much more dangerous to have asset bubbles tied to foreign investment, rather than domestic production. FDI is much more efficient for an economy if it goes towards productive uses (commodity development, technology, innovation, etc), than if it simply inflates an asset class that is more of an expense than an investment. Tulips!

interesting take on the impact of China, I have always believed how the market in China unfolds may one day affect the housing in Vancouver, although affecting it from the gov't side. Do you honestly believe Canada will work with China to pull off something like that? especially if they know in advance it would crash the real estate here? And would you do it while oil is low and the current forecast is a soft economy with one of the only bright side is the east and west coast barely holding up its legs.

I have a feeling if there were some sort of gov't collaboration it may be done closed doors as far from public view as possible to curb panic. wasnt it months ago when our gov't put a hold or stop to foreign investment class immigrants? well thats a good step in the right direction I guess

[Cos]

.

[jwslam]

Originally posted by Cos
Don't remember where I heard this but 45 DOM is the line for a balanced market. Under 45 and it is a sellers market, over 45 days is a buyers market.

I'm pretty sure it's 3-6 month supply as per Jordan's emails.

[Buster]

Originally posted by SilverRex


interesting take on the impact of China, I have always believed how the market in China unfolds may one day affect the housing in Vancouver, although affecting it from the gov't side. Do you honestly believe Canada will work with China to pull off something like that? especially if they know in advance it would crash the real estate here? And would you do it while oil is low and the current forecast is a soft economy with one of the only bright side is the east and west coast barely holding up its legs.

I have a feeling if there were some sort of gov't collaboration it may be done closed doors as far from public view as possible to curb panic. wasnt it months ago when our gov't put a hold or stop to foreign investment class immigrants? well thats a good step in the right direction I guess

This is a complicated psychological and economic problem for Canadian gov't and policy makers. But it is mostly just a big version of a problem they have across the country.

A massive and panic-driven deflationary event (ie a crash in house prices) in Vancouver would probably be bad for the country as a whole. It's better to deflate bubbles slowly, than it is to pop them, even if you know the bubble exists.

But I think you and I would disagree about how positive the impact is of the influx of capital from Chinese elites is to Vancouver. I think it just generally leads to a mis-allocation of capital.

To answer your question, I don't think it is really likely. But I also don't think you want to get a reputation as a country where foreign oligarchs can park their capital, like Cyprus, or even Switzerland to a degree.

[phreezee]

Yup, we're holding steady at 40 DOM http://www.creb.com/Seller_Resources...ng_Statistics/

[Cos]

.

[avishal26]

Originally posted by macman64


Walden is less than 50% complete. They have another 8 years or so of building to go.

20k off list of 600k is only 3% and that is still on a finished home.

Oh - didn't realize Walden had another 8 years! Legacy has another 10 or so I believe.

My point was that prices are going DOWN in Legacy, so they shouldn't be going UP in Walden. I am pretty certain new builds have not gone up at all in Legacy.

[max_boost]

Originally posted by imranm


Congrats! What community was it in? And where are you moving? If you don't mind me asking...

Moved last month to Eau Claire (condo). House was a 2001 infill in Crescent Heights (no renos done).

Originally posted by oz388


Regardless of owning or renting you will always have a living cost. If you bought a house before 2005 you will have been laughing any year since then, but for those who have been saving and renting since 2005 they are truly hopeless.

Just ask yourself if Vancouver's property value is as low as Calgary will you still live in Calgary? The fundamental basis for Vancouver property value is simply the demand, because the world is never short of rich people who are able to afford that City.

Well I bet majority of those people 2005 prior have already refinanced/heloc either for improvements or already yolo'd it all haha

Originally posted by Cos


Don't remember where I heard this but 45 DOM is the line for a balanced market. Under 45 and it is a sellers market, over 45 days is a buyers market. Rough obviously but doesn't sound like you made out too bad.

Congrats.

Interesting. I did not know this. I was accustomed to seeing Lotoski's listing during the day and then at night he would put c/s. lol

I made multiple price adjustments to get it in line with market and had one interested party who was willing to work out a deal. I think I did "OK" however it's not done until it's done IMO.

[kenny]

Lot prices in the latest phase in Mahogany also went up (8-10% depending on the lot). Sales are definitely slower than Q4 last year though. During Feb - May there was a ton of people shopping for houses whenever I was in the area, but it has definitely slowed down now. No more traffic jams by the show homes.

Wonder what the incentives are now...

[oz388]

Originally posted by kenny
Lot prices in the latest phase in Mahogany also went up (8-10% depending on the lot). Sales are definitely slower than Q4 last year though. During Feb - May there was a ton of people shopping for houses whenever I was in the area, but it has definitely slowed down now. No more traffic jams by the show homes.

Wonder what the incentives are now...

Buy single house as soon as you can cause we are running out of developed land, that's what they say.

[stevelou]

i thought I had heard that Harmony and a new development called Providence where coming out eventually. If not it could be a result of Nenshi's attempt to curb the urban sprawl.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by oz388


Buy single house as soon as you can cause we are running out of developed land, that's what they say.

Supply and demand.

Until Asians start lining up overnight for a spot to buy a house, I'm not worried.