Harvey Spector

The BC Real Estate Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

On 5/24/2017 at 7:55 PM, Harvey Spector said:

Sky-high condo prices aren’t a supply problem

Have you heard the one about how supply is going to solve the great Canadian housing crisis?

 

If you've listened to the real estate industry or our political leaders, you likely have. A lack of supply is the great culprit behind soaring prices and the lack of affordable homes. Just build more condo towers and presto, problem solved.

 

Well, they're building them in Metro Vancouver and Greater Toronto – lots of them. The Onni Group is now marketing a building in downtown Vancouver with units starting at $1.7-million. Another developer, Intracorp, is advertising Belpark, on the city's west side, where you can get a two-bedroom, plus a den for $1.5-million. And on it goes.

 

These prices are not dissimilar to what people are being asked to pay for the stock going up in downtown Toronto.

 

This is the so-called supply that is going to solve our housing crisis.

 

The truth is the problem of high costs, and access to reasonably priced accommodation in our two major cities is not being addressed. That is a simple fact. People will say that the condo towers I highlighted are in downtown Vancouver, so what do you expect? Well, the fact is those prices set a standard for the region. They are driving up the cost of housing miles away.

 

The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. sounded this alarm just this month in a new report. "Increases in home prices in the city of Vancouver had a spillover effect in surrounding British Columbia municipalities," the corporation said. And that effect was "measurable," it reported.

 

The same thing is undoubtedly happening in Toronto.

 

Here is the other brutal reality about the great supply argument: vast swaths of these units are being built and presold to foreign purchasers. These buyers, in turn, are either flipping the properties for a profit before they are even finished or hanging on to them as safe investments and renting them out. Sure, that might help bolster the rental stock, but why are locals who earn incomes in Canada and pay taxes here being shut out from buying these homes?

 

The problem is this type of foreign-investment activity is helping drive up prices. Everyone knows it and yet little is being done about it. Some of these offshore purchasers are, in fact, flipping the condos for a profit before final sale and avoiding paying the 15-per-cent foreign-buyers tax in the process.

 

No, there is lots of "supply" in Vancouver and Toronto. That isn't the issue. It's who's getting access to that supply that is a big part of the problem. And it's also the type of "supply" being built.

 

Many of the condos being constructed are designed to be purchased by wealthy investors, the Lamborghini crowd. They aren't being built for a couple of young professionals starting a family. Not unless you consider $1-million for 1,000-square-feet on the 10th floor of a tower in suburban Burnaby, B.C., reasonable. No, somehow, some way, governments need to encourage developers, through incentives or whatever it takes, to start building housing that the middle class can afford.

 

Right now, developers are getting everything their way. They are putting pressure on local politicians to speed up the approval process so they can erect more towers, more quickly, but they are doing nothing – nothing – about the costs of the units they are constructing. In fact, you could argue they are engaging in activity that is helping ensure the costs keep going up.

It's ridiculous.

 

I understand that governments are reluctant to intervene in the normal ebb and flow of the market place. That is why the 15-per-cent foreign-buyers tax applied in Vancouver and Toronto was seen to be so controversial. But governments did it because they have an overriding obligation to the people they represent.

 

Right now, not enough is being done to protect the interests of average citizens as it concerns access to reasonably priced housing. The foreign-buyers tax had a momentary impact on prices in B.C.; now they are starting to escalate again, especially condos, which young people have been told is their housing of the future. Forget a detached home. So what is happening?

 

No, the great supply argument is a myth, a dodge. It is not solving anything. On housing, our political leaders continue to fail us.

 

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/sky-high-condo-prices-arent-a-supply-problem/article35091277/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=Referrer%3A+Social+Network+%2F+Media&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links

I disagree.

 

It's supply and demand...So both are factors contributing to costs. The extra demand is coming from foreign investment and low domestic interest rates. The lack of supply is caused by Vancouver's archaic and corrupt zoning laws and the government's inaction towards cracking down on empty units. 

 

Condos trickle out, and demand is never reached. Due to the increased price, it only makes sense to create luxury units. If demand were to be hampered, via cutting down on foreign investment, and the supply were to increase dramatically, via higher density, we'd finally see a drop in prices. There are entire swaths of the city that need to be converted into towers, but red tape is holding up the process. For example, the areas around commercial, main street, terminal avenue, west hastings, etc... are all prime examples of areas that should be high density already. Instead the city allows a few permits to preferred developers. They trickle out a few luxury units and supply never catches up to local demand. 

 

Anyways, it's clearly both increased demand and lack of supply that are the issue. That's how simple economic pricing works. Stating that it's not one or the other is ridiculous. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2017 at 10:32 AM, taxi said:

I disagree.

 

It's supply and demand...So both are factors contributing to costs. The extra demand is coming from foreign investment and low domestic interest rates. The lack of supply is caused by Vancouver's archaic and corrupt zoning laws and the government's inaction towards cracking down on empty units. 

 

Condos trickle out, and demand is never reached. Due to the increased price, it only makes sense to create luxury units. If demand were to be hampered, via cutting down on foreign investment, and the supply were to increase dramatically, via higher density, we'd finally see a drop in prices. There are entire swaths of the city that need to be converted into towers, but red tape is holding up the process. For example, the areas around commercial, main street, terminal avenue, west hastings, etc... are all prime examples of areas that should be high density already. Instead the city allows a few permits to preferred developers. They trickle out a few luxury units and supply never catches up to local demand. 

 

Anyways, it's clearly both increased demand and lack of supply that are the issue. That's how simple economic pricing works. Stating that it's not one or the other is ridiculous. 

 

Edited by kingofsurrey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, kingofsurrey said:

100 % right.  An honest ethical government would focus on both the supply and demand side of affordable housing.....

Too bad in BC , have had a provincial liberal party working primarily for rich developers that support the Liberal Party...

The NDP is in the pockets of the unions and developers too. BC has not real choice for good government. Both major parties were bought a long time ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2017 at 10:59 AM, taxi said:

The NDP is in the pockets of the unions and developers too. BC has not real choice for good government. Both major parties were bought a long time ago. 

 

Edited by kingofsurrey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

Pretty sure the Condo King of Vancouver isn't donating to the NDP.

 

Last time i heard he was the  top fund raiser for the BC Fibs.

The liberals receive more donations, as they're the ones in power. I wouldn't worry about the donations though, these are small potatoes compared to the billions made off real estate development. 

Edited by taxi
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Region’s Stock of Move-In-Ready New Homes “Falls Off a Cliff”

Joannah Connolly
May 29, 2017
 

Inventory of completed, unsold new multi-family homes plummets to almost zero, with not one finished townhouse available in Vancouver proper, says report

 

The available stock of new multi-family homes that are finished and unsold has “fallen off a cliff” and is now at record lows, according to a report issued May 29 by the Urban Development Institute (UDI) Pacific Region.

 

UDI’s first-quarter State of the Market 2017 Research Report, prepared by research group Urban Analytics, examines the supply of new housing – including housing starts, inventory (available units that are built or under construction) and standing inventory (completed and unsold units) – across Metro Vancouver.

 

It found that townhomes are extremely scarce, with zero completed units available for purchase in Vancouver proper, only seven new townhouses available in the Inner Metro region, and nine in the Outer Metro region. 

 

UDI Townhomes Graph

 

New concrete condos told a similar story, with standing inventory reaching a record low of 11 units in the first quarter of 2017 – compared with more than 700 units in Q4 2013.

 

UDI condos graph

 

Standing inventory of new, unsold wood-frame condominiums also hit all-time lows, at just four units across the whole of Metro Vancouver. This is down from 164 units in the same quarter last year and down from around 1,000 units in Q1 2014

 

UDI wood condos graph

 

The report said that housing starts are not a good measurement of supply, because at least 80% of these are pre-sold before they’re built to meet financing requirements. “While pre-sales in various forms of construction were available for purchase as part of overall ‘inventory’, that doesn’t help someone who’s just moved here for a new job with a family, and needs a new home today,” observed the UDI.

 

Anne McMullin, UDI president and CEO, said, “What’s causing the supply shortage is the restrictive single-family home neighborhood zoning on 85% of our residential land base, available to a select few high income earners who can buy there. That keeps out young families, middle income earners and renters, who can’t afford single-family homes.

 

“We clearly need a regional housing strategy with more homes for more people,” she added. “That means more high-rise apartments along rapid transit corridors and more townhomes, rowhomes, multi-family low-rises, duplexes and laneway homes in traditional single-family neighborhoods.”

 

However, not everyone agrees that increasing supply will help ease housing shortages. Frank O’Brien, editor of REW.ca’s sister newspaper Western Investor, said on the Real Estate Therapist radio show on the May 20 edition, “We cannot build enough supply to match demand from speculators, offshore and domestic. If you build more and more higher-density housing, you’ll just drive up the price of land. Look at Hong Kong – it has densities that would give Vancouverites heart attacks, but it has among the highest real estate prices in the world. The only way to reduce home prices is to ease demand – and you can’t ease demand.

 

Vancouver’s high real estate prices will continue.”

 
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

False Creek is Vancouver’s ‘next generation of building’

The last new neighbourhood in downtown Vancouver won't be like anything else the city has ever seen.

 

The northeast corner of False Creek, now a stretch of empty, polluted former industrial land, partially blocked by the viaducts that currently connect downtown to the city's east side, will be transformed, promise city planners, architects and urban designers who are about to launch their plans for the area this week to get public feedback.

 

It will become Vancouver's first lively destination park in a continuous line along the waterfront, packed with restaurants and activities.

 

It will introduce a new style of architecture for the new residential neighbourhood, home to as many as 15,000 new people, that ditches the city's podium-and-tower style of the 1990s.

 

It will create a new kind of "lane district" next to the existing Chinatown that will house dozens of independent stores and cafés.

 

It will see the long-awaited arrival of the city's largest downtown park, after Stanley Park, that will include a miniature version of New York's High Line on one remnant of the viaducts.

 

It will include a small section that will acknowledge and provide spaces for the city's black community that was pushed out of what was known as Hogan's Alley near Main and Union half a century ago. And it is supposed to become a socially mixed community, with a substantial amount of low-cost housing.

 

"This is an opportunity to express a new piece of the Vancouver DNA. This is the next generation of Vancouver building," said Gil Kelley, the city's new head city planner who arrived from San Francisco last fall.

 

As well, he said, it's a chance for the city to heal some wounds from the past for the Chinese and black communities, which had their neighbourhoods first cut off from the False Creek waterfront, then partially or completely eradicated by a plan to build a freeway through the area in the 1960s.

 

"It's just a really social and emotional piece," he said.

 

But the plan for northeast False Creek is also likely to set off an intense round of debate as people question whether there are enough social benefits, especially low-cost housing, and whether the city is getting a big enough payment from the private developers in the area to cover the cost of all the new community amenities.

 

Those questions are being raised already by one man who has been active in working to see Hogan's Alley remembered. He is concerned that the members of the black community who have been part of a city working group are giving up too much.

 

"I think this is a gentrification plan and the working group is being uncritically supportive," says Daniel Tseghay, who was not included in the city's working group. "The city is making trivial concessions but it doesn't meet the real needs of black people."

 

In particular, he's alarmed about how little subsidized, low-cost housing will be available in this huge new development.

 

"What I want would be truly affordable housing at welfare rates."

 

Planners say that 20 per cent of development in the parcels owned by the private developers in the area – Concord Pacific and Canadian Metropolitan Properties – will be social housing, as will 35 per cent of the units developed on city land that now sits under the east end of the viaducts.

 

But the city's definition of social housing does not mean 100-per-cent subsidized housing. Instead, in recent developments, it has meant having about a third at welfare rates, a third at below-market rates geared to lower incomes and a third at near-market rates.

 

That means very few units in the community of as much as 15,000 will be for truly poor people, Mr. Tseghay says.

The other big question still to be settled is how much private developers will provide for community benefits, along with the housing.

 

It's a tricky issue, as it depends on the density they get.

 

For Concord Pacific, it's complicated by the fact that, as a result of the contract signed with the provincial government 30 years ago, the company has to give the province a bonus payment because it will be getting much more building space than the original limit envisioned. That may make the company argue that it has less available to give to the city.

 

"This has to be the right project financially and not driven by any timelines," said Councillor Geoff Meggs, who has been an early and consistent advocate for taking down the viaducts in order to be able to create a more coherent new neighbourhood with some social housing.

 

"I hope people will finally see the possibilities there. They're very, very significant," he said. "But the city will have to make sure the financial arrangements are appropriate."

 

The planning for the neighbourhood has been one of the most complex the city has undertaken.

 

If approved, it will involve removing the 50-year-old concrete viaducts, building a new road network, connecting with the proposed new St. Paul's Hospital to the east, collaborating with two private developers and the province's PavCo, which owns a chunk on the western end, working with two communities that have been trampled on in the past, working out complex legal agreements with land swaps among different groups, bringing Georgia Street down an escarpment to the waterfront and creating multiple new public spaces.

 

Those who have been working with the city on the project say, however, that the spirit of collaboration and creativity has been unusual.

 

"We've been working on this site for eight years but it didn't go far because there wasn't an overall plan. What broke the ice was when the city decided to take the viaducts down. Suddenly everyone is looking at this as a comprehensive plan," said architect James Cheng, who has been working on concepts for how to arrange building masses on the Canadian Metropolitan site, the current site of the Plaza of Nations.

 

His early designs show terraced buildings that frame the new BC Place. The idea is to provide as much public space as possible overlooking the False Creek Harbour and taking advantage of the south-facing shore.

 

On the Concord side, one of Vancouver's legendary urban designers, Joe Hruda, proposed the idea of creating a public plaza at the foot of Georgia Street that mimics the public plaza in the Italian town of Portofino.

 

Concord may be given permission to build some extra-tall towers at the entrance to that, as gateway markers.

 

Then, in one part of the residential area closest to Chinatown, Mr. Hruda has come up with the concept of a lane district, similar to one that exists in Melbourne, Australia, where the entire area will have small commercial spaces at the ground level with housing above.

"I called it an 'indie lane district,' a place for small business, an incubator district," Mr. Hruda said.

 

Part of the Dunsmuir viaduct, under the current plan, will be saved and used as a way for cyclists and pedestrians to get from the lower level under the viaducts to the downtown streets above.

 

Concord is planning to adopt a completely new style of architecture for the area, different than what it built over the past 20 years, said Mr. Hruda, with buildings lining the planned city park that are more mid-rise with a consistent horizontal line, like the buildings that line New York's Central Park.

 

The plan for the new 13-hectare park is getting help from James Corner, the man who helped design New York's now hugely popular High Line Park.

 

The city will be showing off all of its and the partners' plans for the area in a big fair June 10 on Carrall Street.

 

Planners such as Kevin McNaney, who is directly overseeing the Northeast False Creek plan, are hopeful.

 

"This could be reconciliation in action."

 

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/false-creek-is-vancouvers-next-generation-of-building/article35142257/?ref=https://www.theglobeandmail.com&service=mobile

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harvey Spector said:

Planners say that 20 per cent of development in the parcels owned by the private developers in the area – Concord Pacific and Canadian Metropolitan Properties – will be social housing, as will 35 per cent of the units developed on city land that now sits under the east end of the viaducts.

Im gonna call B.S. on this right now. They dog and pony these numbers to the public but somewhere along the line they always disappear as the projects move ahead and we once again get no new social housing in the core. How much of the former Olympic Village was originally planned to be social housing? All of it was removed from plans before construction even began. Long before the cost overruns and other problems became clear.

 

 P.S. The liberals have been in power in BC since 2001. The province has been in a massive housing price increase wave since 2001. The fact that they did nothing to stop or even slow it at all until just recently is appalling and inexcusable. Yes, Christy Clark and Gordon Campbell before her are the reason you cannot afford to buy in this city. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-5-26 at 2:03 PM, taxi said:

The liberals receive more donations, as they're the ones in power. I wouldn't worry about the donations though, these are small potatoes compared to the billions made off real estate development. 

At the expense of people who are NOT speculators and developers.   Look, my property has quadrupled in value since I bought it but that's not the only thing I care about.  Seeing my city dismantled and bungalows with yards replaced with resorts with parking lots in front does not enrich my life.  I live here...so how much my property is worth doesn't determine my happiness.  Quality of living.  A green city.  All that is being threatened at the moment.  

 

I am worried about the donations...because politics shouldn't be swayed by money.  It should be about doing what's right, not what's right for the highest bidders.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, debluvscanucks said:

At the expense of people who are NOT speculators and developers.   Look, my property has quadrupled in value since I bought it but that's not the only thing I care about.  Seeing my city dismantled and bungalows with yards replaced with resorts with parking lots in front does not enrich my life.  I live here...so how much my property is worth doesn't determine my happiness.  Quality of living.  A green city.  All that is being threatened at the moment.  

 

I am worried about the donations...because politics shouldn't be swayed by money.  It should be about doing what's right, not what's right for the highest bidders.

I guess we'll see now if the donations stop now that someone else is in power. I have a feeling they won't. And the only reason I stated that the donations were small potatoes is that some people are making billions off this situation. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

newsflash.png

 

June 2, 2017

 

Market activity picks up in May

Home buyer activity returned to near record levels across the Metro Vancouver housing market in May.

 

Residential property sales in the region totalled 4,364 in May 2017, a decrease of 8.5 per cent from the 4,769 sales in May 2016, an all-time record, and an increase of 22.8 per cent compared to April 2017 when 3,553 homes sold.

 

Last month’s sales were 23.7 per cent above the 10-year May sales average and is the third-highest selling May on record.

 

"Demand for condominiums and townhomes is driving today’s activity," Jill Oudil, Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver (REBGV) president said. “First-time buyers and people looking to downsize from their single-family homes are both competing for these two types of housing.”

 

New listings for detached, attached and apartment properties in Metro Vancouver totalled 6,044 in May 2017. This represents a 3.9 per cent decrease compared to the 6,289 units listed in May 2016 and a 23.2 per cent increase compared to April 2017 when 4,907 homes were listed.

 

The month-over-month increase in new listings was led by detached homes at 27.1 per cent, followed by apartments at 22.7 per cent and townhomes at 14.1 per cent.

The total number of properties currently listed for sale on the MLS® system in Metro Vancouver is 8,168, a 5.7 per cent increase compared to May 2016 (7,726) and a 4.5 per cent increase compared to April 2017 (7,813).

 

"Home buyers are beginning to have more selection to choose from in the detached market, but the number of condominiums for sale continues to decline," Oudil said.

The sales-to-active listings ratio across all residential categories is 53.4 per cent. By property type, the ratio is 31 per cent for detached homes, 76.1 per cent for townhomes, and 94.6 per cent for condominiums.

 

Generally, analysts say that downward pressure on home prices occurs when the ratio dips below the 12 per cent mark for a sustained period, while home prices often experience upward pressure when it surpasses 20 per cent over several months.

 

“While sales are inching closer to the record-breaking pace of 2016, the market itself looks different. Sales last year were driven by demand for single-family homes. This year, it's clear that townhomes and condominiums are leading the way,” said Oudil. “It’s important to work with your local REALTOR® to understand the different factors affecting the market today.”

 

The MLS® Home Price Index composite benchmark price for all residential properties in Metro Vancouver is currently $967,500. This represents an 8.8 per cent increase over May 2016 and a 2.8 per cent increase compared to April 2017.

 

Sales of detached properties in May 2017 reached 1,548, a decrease of 17 per cent from the 1,865 detached sales recorded in May 2016. The benchmark price for a detached property is $1,561,000. This represents a 3.1 per cent increase over May 2016 and a 2.9 per cent increase compared to April 2017.

 

Sales of apartment properties reached 2,025 in May 2017, a decrease of 5.8 per cent compared to the 2,150 sales in May 2016.The benchmark price for an apartment property is $571,300. This represents a 17.8 per cent increase over May 2016 and a 3.1 per cent increase compared to April 2017.

 

Attached property sales in May 2017 totalled 791, an increase of 4.9 per cent compared to the 754 sales in May 2016. The benchmark price for an attached property is $715,400. This represents a 13.1 per cent increase over May 2016 and a 1.9 per cent increase compared to April 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So here is my story for the week.

 

I was out in Richmond this week, an area I rarely do business in but I have one client looking for a one bedroom for her daughter and they are Chinese and like the Richmond area.

 

So Tuesday I show a one bedroom to my client in a highrise, 16th floor.  Listed at $399,000.  The listing realtor was taking offers that night.  Based on the fact it was a multiple offer situation and looking at some recent sales I advised to go in at $435,000 with a subject to financing as my client needs a mortgage.  I sent the offer in and a few hours later the realtor emails me saying the property was sold all cash, no subjects for $465,000 and deposit cheque in hand.  Considering that condos have all sorts of strata docs to look over and a 9 year old building usually requires an inspection, I just couldn't believe other realtors were going in all cash no subjects and $65k over listing price for a one bedroom.  I was pretty frustrated and my client was in shock.  I called the listing agent afterwards and she told me she had 9 offers and most were all cash.  She also told me she just sold a condo a few blocks away on Monday and had 13 offers, listed at $320,000 and sold at $388,000.  It was a 24 year old low rise building.  I thought maybe this is my last adventure into Richmond.

 

So on Wednesday we see another place and my client wanted to try one more time.  Same scenario, offers to be presented that night.  List price was again $399,000.  My client tells me she really likes the place and so wants to go in at $458,800.  I said okay, thinking that price is nuts but the other one sold for $465,000, so at least we might have a chance.  Sent the offer in and again same sh*t, they got like 10 offers and it sold all cash no subjects with a deposit cheque in hand for $475,000.

 

I told my client we should probably look in a different area.  This looks to me like it is foreign money coming in and we will never be able to compete out here.  She agreed and I'm taking her out to New West on Sunday to hopefully find something out there for a better price.  And hopefully not competing with 9 other all cash offers.  I have been in multiple offer situations before and won a few of them, but I always have a financing clause in the contract and most of the time subject to reviewing all the strata docs if it is a condo.  I have won even with my subjects in place, so the Richmond adventure was very disturbing to me.  I will probably never go out there again.  It's not even a place that is very appealing anyways, for me and most of my clients.  I think Richmond is just a place where the Chinese park their laundered money.  Hate to say it but it's probably true.  Pretty sad.  The Westside of Vancouver is even worse, I don't even go anywhere near that side of Vancouver.  Downtown is worse than ever.  

 

I feel sorry for the kids out there and the first time home buyers.  Our City has been destroyed.  There is no going back really.  If you are looking for a house and are on a budget then you have to go east, Maple Ridge, Abbotsford, Chilliwack, etc.  If you want a nice condo, then you have to start in Burnaby and go east from there.  Even condos in Burnaby are pricey now, new one bedrooms starting around $450k.  Even in Coquitlam the new condos are almost as expensive as in Burnaby, one bedrooms starting around $410k.  A starter house in Burnaby is $1.5 million and in Coquitlam it's around $1.2 million.  

 

That's my rant for the day.  I'll share some May statistics as soon as they come out.  it won't be pretty.  The last two months have been absolutely insane, especially in the condo market.  Scary sh*t really...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is by far the most depressing thread in the history of internet forums.:(

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Harvey Spector said:

So here is my story for the week.

 

I was out in Richmond this week, an area I rarely do business in but I have one client looking for a one bedroom for her daughter and they are Chinese and like the Richmond area.

 

So Tuesday I show a one bedroom to my client in a highrise, 16th floor.  Listed at $399,000.  The listing realtor was taking offers that night.  Based on the fact it was a multiple offer situation and looking at some recent sales I advised to go in at $435,000 with a subject to financing as my client needs a mortgage.  I sent the offer in and a few hours later the realtor emails me saying the property was sold all cash, no subjects for $465,000 and deposit cheque in hand.  Considering that condos have all sorts of strata docs to look over and a 9 year old building usually requires an inspection, I just couldn't believe other realtors were going in all cash no subjects and $65k over listing price for a one bedroom.  I was pretty frustrated and my client was in shock.  I called the listing agent afterwards and she told me she had 9 offers and most were all cash.  She also told me she just sold a condo a few blocks away on Monday and had 13 offers, listed at $320,000 and sold at $388,000.  It was a 24 year old low rise building.  I thought maybe this is my last adventure into Richmond.

 

So on Wednesday we see another place and my client wanted to try one more time.  Same scenario, offers to be presented that night.  List price was again $399,000.  My client tells me she really likes the place and so wants to go in at $458,800.  I said okay, thinking that price is nuts but the other one sold for $465,000, so at least we might have a chance.  Sent the offer in and again same sh*t, they got like 10 offers and it sold all cash no subjects with a deposit cheque in hand for $475,000.

 

I told my client we should probably look in a different area.  This looks to me like it is foreign money coming in and we will never be able to compete out here.  She agreed and I'm taking her out to New West on Sunday to hopefully find something out there for a better price.  And hopefully not competing with 9 other all cash offers.  I have been in multiple offer situations before and won a few of them, but I always have a financing clause in the contract and most of the time subject to reviewing all the strata docs if it is a condo.  I have won even with my subjects in place, so the Richmond adventure was very disturbing to me.  I will probably never go out there again.  It's not even a place that is very appealing anyways, for me and most of my clients.  I think Richmond is just a place where the Chinese park their laundered money.  Hate to say it but it's probably true.  Pretty sad.  The Westside of Vancouver is even worse, I don't even go anywhere near that side of Vancouver.  Downtown is worse than ever.  

 

I feel sorry for the kids out there and the first time home buyers.  Our City has been destroyed.  There is no going back really.  If you are looking for a house and are on a budget then you have to go east, Maple Ridge, Abbotsford, Chilliwack, etc.  If you want a nice condo, then you have to start in Burnaby and go east from there.  Even condos in Burnaby are pricey now, new one bedrooms starting around $450k.  Even in Coquitlam the new condos are almost as expensive as in Burnaby, one bedrooms starting around $410k.  A starter house in Burnaby is $1.5 million and in Coquitlam it's around $1.2 million.  

 

That's my rant for the day.  I'll share some May statistics as soon as they come out.  it won't be pretty.  The last two months have been absolutely insane, especially in the condo market.  Scary sh*t really...

Vancouver.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

used to be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Harvey Spector said:

So here is my story for the week.

 

I was out in Richmond this week, an area I rarely do business in but I have one client looking for a one bedroom for her daughter and they are Chinese and like the Richmond area.

 

So Tuesday I show a one bedroom to my client in a highrise, 16th floor.  Listed at $399,000.  The listing realtor was taking offers that night.  Based on the fact it was a multiple offer situation and looking at some recent sales I advised to go in at $435,000 with a subject to financing as my client needs a mortgage.  I sent the offer in and a few hours later the realtor emails me saying the property was sold all cash, no subjects for $465,000 and deposit cheque in hand.  Considering that condos have all sorts of strata docs to look over and a 9 year old building usually requires an inspection, I just couldn't believe other realtors were going in all cash no subjects and $65k over listing price for a one bedroom.  I was pretty frustrated and my client was in shock.  I called the listing agent afterwards and she told me she had 9 offers and most were all cash.  She also told me she just sold a condo a few blocks away on Monday and had 13 offers, listed at $320,000 and sold at $388,000.  It was a 24 year old low rise building.  I thought maybe this is my last adventure into Richmond.

 

So on Wednesday we see another place and my client wanted to try one more time.  Same scenario, offers to be presented that night.  List price was again $399,000.  My client tells me she really likes the place and so wants to go in at $458,800.  I said okay, thinking that price is nuts but the other one sold for $465,000, so at least we might have a chance.  Sent the offer in and again same sh*t, they got like 10 offers and it sold all cash no subjects with a deposit cheque in hand for $475,000.

 

I told my client we should probably look in a different area.  This looks to me like it is foreign money coming in and we will never be able to compete out here.  She agreed and I'm taking her out to New West on Sunday to hopefully find something out there for a better price.  And hopefully not competing with 9 other all cash offers.  I have been in multiple offer situations before and won a few of them, but I always have a financing clause in the contract and most of the time subject to reviewing all the strata docs if it is a condo.  I have won even with my subjects in place, so the Richmond adventure was very disturbing to me.  I will probably never go out there again.  It's not even a place that is very appealing anyways, for me and most of my clients.  I think Richmond is just a place where the Chinese park their laundered money.  Hate to say it but it's probably true.  Pretty sad.  The Westside of Vancouver is even worse, I don't even go anywhere near that side of Vancouver.  Downtown is worse than ever.  

 

I feel sorry for the kids out there and the first time home buyers.  Our City has been destroyed.  There is no going back really.  If you are looking for a house and are on a budget then you have to go east, Maple Ridge, Abbotsford, Chilliwack, etc.  If you want a nice condo, then you have to start in Burnaby and go east from there.  Even condos in Burnaby are pricey now, new one bedrooms starting around $450k.  Even in Coquitlam the new condos are almost as expensive as in Burnaby, one bedrooms starting around $410k.  A starter house in Burnaby is $1.5 million and in Coquitlam it's around $1.2 million.  

 

That's my rant for the day.  I'll share some May statistics as soon as they come out.  it won't be pretty.  The last two months have been absolutely insane, especially in the condo market.  Scary sh*t really...

Story reeks of foreign investment. Can't imagine anyone who actually plans to live in a condo agreeing to purchase without inspection.

 

The government is failing us. We need knew political parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gfs sister bought a house in Langley for 800,000 it's a nice house it's almost a decade old but with a new school just built it's a desirable area.but a similar house if I decide to stay in Calgary or Airdrie which is pretty much the same as Langley I could spend 400,000.Taxes are cheaper gas is cheaper wages are better and food is pretty much the same price.But hey it's bc and it's nice just not if your gonna spend any money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, taxi said:

Story reeks of foreign investment. Can't imagine anyone who actually plans to live in a condo agreeing to purchase without inspection.

 

The government is failing us. We need knew political parties.

in strata complexes don't you think a recent depreciation report is nearly equivalent to an inspection ?   it doesn't inspect the specific unit but at least you're informed about the buildings condition as a whole. can't imagine if there weren't depreciation reports available as the requirement is fairly new.

 

that's what I was forced to do when I bought mine in Coquitlam last April... sh*t was a bidding war from the start with zero conditions so I had to comb through the strata documents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chicken. said:

in strata complexes don't you think a recent depreciation report is nearly equivalent to an inspection ?   it doesn't inspect the specific unit but at least you're informed about the buildings condition as a whole. can't imagine if there weren't depreciation reports available as the requirement is fairly new.

 

that's what I was forced to do when I bought mine in Coquitlam last April... sh*t was a bidding war from the start with zero conditions so I had to comb through the strata documents

Not the same. It won't cover issues with the individual unit and non-strata property.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Harvey Spector said:

So here is my story for the week.

 

I was out in Richmond this week, an area I rarely do business in but I have one client looking for a one bedroom for her daughter and they are Chinese and like the Richmond area.

 

So Tuesday I show a one bedroom to my client in a highrise, 16th floor.  Listed at $399,000.  The listing realtor was taking offers that night.  Based on the fact it was a multiple offer situation and looking at some recent sales I advised to go in at $435,000 with a subject to financing as my client needs a mortgage.  I sent the offer in and a few hours later the realtor emails me saying the property was sold all cash, no subjects for $465,000 and deposit cheque in hand.  Considering that condos have all sorts of strata docs to look over and a 9 year old building usually requires an inspection, I just couldn't believe other realtors were going in all cash no subjects and $65k over listing price for a one bedroom.  I was pretty frustrated and my client was in shock.  I called the listing agent afterwards and she told me she had 9 offers and most were all cash.  She also told me she just sold a condo a few blocks away on Monday and had 13 offers, listed at $320,000 and sold at $388,000.  It was a 24 year old low rise building.  I thought maybe this is my last adventure into Richmond.

 

So on Wednesday we see another place and my client wanted to try one more time.  Same scenario, offers to be presented that night.  List price was again $399,000.  My client tells me she really likes the place and so wants to go in at $458,800.  I said okay, thinking that price is nuts but the other one sold for $465,000, so at least we might have a chance.  Sent the offer in and again same sh*t, they got like 10 offers and it sold all cash no subjects with a deposit cheque in hand for $475,000.

 

I told my client we should probably look in a different area.  This looks to me like it is foreign money coming in and we will never be able to compete out here.  She agreed and I'm taking her out to New West on Sunday to hopefully find something out there for a better price.  And hopefully not competing with 9 other all cash offers.  I have been in multiple offer situations before and won a few of them, but I always have a financing clause in the contract and most of the time subject to reviewing all the strata docs if it is a condo.  I have won even with my subjects in place, so the Richmond adventure was very disturbing to me.  I will probably never go out there again.  It's not even a place that is very appealing anyways, for me and most of my clients.  I think Richmond is just a place where the Chinese park their laundered money.  Hate to say it but it's probably true.  Pretty sad.  The Westside of Vancouver is even worse, I don't even go anywhere near that side of Vancouver.  Downtown is worse than ever.  

 

I feel sorry for the kids out there and the first time home buyers.  Our City has been destroyed.  There is no going back really.  If you are looking for a house and are on a budget then you have to go east, Maple Ridge, Abbotsford, Chilliwack, etc.  If you want a nice condo, then you have to start in Burnaby and go east from there.  Even condos in Burnaby are pricey now, new one bedrooms starting around $450k.  Even in Coquitlam the new condos are almost as expensive as in Burnaby, one bedrooms starting around $410k.  A starter house in Burnaby is $1.5 million and in Coquitlam it's around $1.2 million.  

 

That's my rant for the day.  I'll share some May statistics as soon as they come out.  it won't be pretty.  The last two months have been absolutely insane, especially in the condo market.  Scary sh*t really...

Curious about your thoughts about new builds (including those that are still in development).  The entry level costs of new builds has risen so high that I can't see how there is any room for growth in value in them in the long term.  As you mentioned, new build1 BRs from Coquitlam Centre to Brentwood seem to be at least $400k.

 

My own sense is that contracting for a new build right now is particularly risky if it's not expected to be completed for another 1-3 years since that extends the window in which a correction could take place (as remote of a possibility as that may seem).  While there is always risk in owning property, those that will not be completed in 1-3 years extends a person's risk of the property not even being completely built.  Now, I'm sure there is a sense that the risk of a development defaulting and not completing is very low, but in a particularly severe correction, it would still be a super uncomfortable situation if people had to close on a unit that is worth a great deal less than what they contracted for (not to mention my understanding is that they would need the banks to be willing to finance on the contracted amount).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.