The BC Real Estate Discussion Thread

[bishopshodan]

17 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Owner/manager is seeking term on tenancy

For 'short term' its not bad. My sis recently rented a house on Shawnigan lake, $600  a night but you could sleep 10 people and comes with lake toys. Way cheaper than hotels.

 

However with the place you posted, asking that for 'monthly' it's a joke.

[Gurn]

I tried to find the place on google earth, then check the bc assessment authority valuation.

 

I was not successful

[ronthecivil]

20 hours ago, Warhippy said:

well....

 

If this aint just the cake

 

a 3 bed 3 bath rental in naramata listed as an "executive rental" by Chad Wozniak of the Chamberlain gougers group (if you live in the area and have dealt with them you know) is up for $7500 a month.  That is $90,000 a year.

 

When I asked him how he thought any single person with $90,000 a year to spend would happily dump it on an unfurnished rental he scoffed and said it would happen.  I reminded him that anyone that could afford $90k a year would just be buying a home he laughed and said it doesn't happen.  

 

2 sides of the same idiocy.  On one side the belief is that people with that money will happily just burn $90k without a single return on investment.  On the other the belief is that people that can afford $7500 a month won't just buy their own place.

 

It's insane honestly.

 

The bottom HAS to fall out now that the average 1 bedroom is now $1700 in Penticton BC where the average post tax income is only $2400 a month.

 

Well, the catalyst to bottom out the market, higher interest rates, is already in place. It was putting a ton of people that had over extended themselves into dire situations. There was fear and news stories about prebuilds being worth less than what the people that put their deposit in being in very dire straights! But then the Feds came to the "rescue" and  instructed the banks to amortize to infinity if need be. So prices went up instead! This means that to finance a rental, you need to charge more in rent. A LOT more.

 

How or why, you would say corporations, but my place is was just the dude that owned it (my place used to be a rental), have turned literally every single place I lived in as a welfare kid into a strata corporation. Even the super ghetto Cottonwood! This transformation and the provision of social housing etc. asks for tons of public money to be put in from all sources, but really, this is the cities fault. They didn't have to allow the change. It's not like it would be hard to have bonuses (to say floor space ratio, etc.) and lower property taxes for purpose built and maintained rental properties. It would not be hard to have costs when someone wants to switch it to a strata. It would not be hard to deny a conversion if you stuck to your guns on places that used the bonuses to say put in a greater floor space ratio, to not be compliant with the zoning, and stick to your guns. It just requires zoning regulations that encourage rental properties, secondary suites, etc. that encourage rental properties.

 

Renter deserve protection and obviously you can't just toss people out in the streets, but the regulations are so much in favour of the tenants that many people don't even rent out things they could, because if you get a bad tenant, it's a LONG, DIFFICULT process to get rid of them, and they can continue to destroy the place and not pay you for a long time. It shouldn't be on small time secondary suite rental providers to cover the costs of housing the mentally ill or the drug dependent, covering the costs when they go through a crisis and can't/won't pay anymore, but that's exactly what happens. Needless to say that only happens once before people refuse to rent out anymore. Obviously that is an entirely separate conversation but it's part of the reason supply is limited and costs go up. Who to point the finger at for that? Pretty much everyone and every level of government.

 

The power of NIMBYism is a massive driver of the zoning regulations that keep single family suburban style houses in what should be dense areas. "No Towers At Safeway" I saw in a lawn the other day. This references the Safeway at Commercial drive station, the junction of two skytrain lines and like a LOT of buses. Which of course has a giant suburban style parking lot next to it. Literally any other planning option would be an improvement.

 

But does the bottom HAVE to fall out? So long as forces keep the bubble expanding, it's going to expand. It can keep expanding irrationally, for an irrational amount of time. Longer than most people can stay liquid. Given how property prices have doubled in the last five years, even a 50% drop would leave prices in the "very expensive" category. It wouldn't bother me, but it would cause massive economic damage and tons of misery, especially those that have big LOCs, but mortgages with little equity, etc. But what government wants to preside over that? The kind that doesn't want to be elected, that's who. Hence the decisions to keep everything working. That is, until it doesnt.

 

 

[Warhippy]

Well this is interesting 

 

https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/mobile/video?clipId=2755885&referrer=android-app%3A%2F%2Fcom.google.android.googlequicksearchbox%2F

[bishopshodan]

11 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Well this is interesting 

 

https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/mobile/video?clipId=2755885&referrer=android-app%3A%2F%2Fcom.google.android.googlequicksearchbox%2F

He says the bubble bursting is 'inevitable' then a min later says ' wouldn't say it's imminent'    

He couldve been talking about mortgage rates rising when he said the second part.

 

How long has the bubble been going/growing? 

What are the thresholds that signal the market is in a bubble? I figure someone on here can tell me...income to home price? some comparisons to the USA?

 

I have been hearing about a 'bubble' for over a decade. If I had panicked and got out of the market, or downsized, I would have missed out on a lot of money. In this very thread there were posters saying the sky is falling back in 2016. I remember well as I was gearing up to buy my biggest purchase. So glad I didn't listen. 

 

Not saying there isn't a downswing coming, not saying there isn't a problem, just saying that people have been calling this for a long time.....maybe it's just a long time coming?

 

 

In related news. My niece and nephew, along with their partners just bought 124 acres in Nanoose for $1.42 mil. It backs onto crown land with tons of great lumber.

Very happy for them and stoked at the opportunity. They can build a home for each couple and split the land.

 

Cost of build plus $721k for a home on 62 acres, per couple, in a great part of central island. That's a success story in the making. 

 

 

[Warhippy]

Interesting suggestions for sure in how to fund housing and infrastructure and while I don't support taxes I definitely don't oppose taxing those who pay less based on their wealth under the current system

 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/bc-news/tax-wealthy-homeowners-to-fund-affordable-housing-says-new-bc-proposal-7473117

 

[Warhippy]

More on the greatest bubble ever

 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-real-estate-housing-bubble-risk

[WeneedLumme]

2 hours ago, bishopshodan said:

He says the bubble bursting is 'inevitable' then a min later says ' wouldn't say it's imminent'    

He couldve been talking about mortgage rates rising when he said the second part.

 

How long has the bubble been going/growing? 

What are the thresholds that signal the market is in a bubble? I figure someone on here can tell me...income to home price? some comparisons to the USA?

 

I have been hearing about a 'bubble' for over a decade. If I had panicked and got out of the market, or downsized, I would have missed out on a lot of money. In this very thread there were posters saying the sky is falling back in 2016. I remember well as I was gearing up to buy my biggest purchase. So glad I didn't listen. 

 

Not saying there isn't a downswing coming, not saying there isn't a problem, just saying that people have been calling this for a long time.....maybe it's just a long time coming?

 

 

In related news. My niece and nephew, along with their partners just bought 124 acres in Nanoose for $1.42 mil. It backs onto crown land with tons of great lumber.

Very happy for them and stoked at the opportunity. They can build a home for each couple and split the land.

 

Cost of build plus $721k for a home on 62 acres, per couple, in a great part of central island. That's a success story in the making. 

 

 

Many people who like to talk about the "bubble" bursting seem not to be aware of the full term, which is "speculative bubble", meaning that a market is being driven by short term speculators betting that prices will continue to rise, allowing them to make a quick profitable flip, not by demand from actual end users. 

 

An example of a real estate bubble would be one of the Chinese cities where 20 or 30% of the homes are sitting empty because they were built and bought on speculation that prices would continue to rise, not for any underlying demand.

 

While a place like Vancouver can and does certainly have price corrections when prices get excessive, when there is an ongoing shortage of a commodity, ie: excess demand from end users, calling it a "bubble" and expecting a massive price crash is unrealistic.

[bishopshodan]

6 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Interesting suggestions for sure in how to fund housing and infrastructure and while I don't support taxes I definitely don't oppose taxing those who pay less based on their wealth under the current system

 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/bc-news/tax-wealthy-homeowners-to-fund-affordable-housing-says-new-bc-proposal-7473117

 

What about old folks sitting on legacy properties.

Would they be able to defer this 12% tax like regular property taxes still? 

 

 

[Warhippy]

1 minute ago, WeneedLumme said:

Many people who like to talk about the "bubble" bursting seem not to be aware of the full term, which is "speculative bubble", meaning that a market is being driven by short term speculators betting that prices will continue to rise, allowing them to make a quick profitable flip, not by demand from actual end users. 

 

An example of a real estate bubble would be one of the Chinese cities where 20 or 30% of the homes are sitting empty because they were built and bought on speculation that prices would continue to rise, not for any underlying demand.

 

While a place like Vancouver can and does certainly have price corrections when prices get excessive, when there is an ongoing shortage of a commodity, ie: excess demand from end users, calling it a "bubble" and expecting a massive price crash is unrealistic.

I think Canada is more unique in that it is the excessive increases of price that have so outpaced wages and income as opposed to the building or speculatory nauture.

 

Compared to China we have zero supply, but unlike China nobody can afford it.  3-5 homes bought in canada are now being done by corporations/businesses over the last 8 months.  Not people.

 

That can only end one way

[bishopshodan]

Just now, WeneedLumme said:

Many people who like to talk about the "bubble" bursting seem not to be aware of the full term, which is "speculative bubble", meaning that a market is being driven by short term speculators betting that prices will continue to rise, allowing them to make a quick profitable flip, not by demand from actual end users. 

 

An example of a real estate bubble would be one of the Chinese cities where 20 or 30% of the homes are sitting empty because they were built and bought on speculation that prices would continue to rise, not for any underlying demand.

 

While a place like Vancouver can and does certainly have price corrections when prices get excessive, when there is an ongoing shortage of a commodity, ie: excess demand from end users, calling it a "bubble" and expecting a massive price crash is unrealistic.

Thank you.

I have been thinking that for a long while.

 

We have such low inventory, and BC is such a desirable place to live...

Correction, sure...crash, I dunno. 

[bishopshodan]

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

3-5 homes bought in canada are now being done by corporations

whats the time frame of 'now'? where are your 3 in 5 stats from...

is it the same in BC?

 

 

[Warhippy]

This is something I have touched on in the Okanagan and across the province.  While only an opinion puece I am glad I am not the ONLY person thinking of how existing infrastructure will hold up to demanding smaller municipalities double their populations.

 

Parking doesn't hold up.  More cars on streets, no waste pick up.

Gas/Water/Sewer will need to be upgraded immediately.  Some communities have just finished a near decade long improvement that is already taxed now.

Waste and water treatment, can not hold up as it is.

Affordability is non existent.  Just because new homes are being built doesn't mean they're affordable as they are set at "market value"

 

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/carol-volkart-surprise-you-have-six-new-neighbours-all-without-a-place-to-park

[WeneedLumme]

2 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

whats the time frame of 'now'? where are your 3 in 5 stats from...

is it the same in BC?

 

 

I would call BS on claims that 60% of homes in Canada are being bought by corporations. That sounds like a totally fabricated number that is probably at least 10 to 20 times higher than the actual percentage.

[DeNiro]

5 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

This is something I have touched on in the Okanagan and across the province.  While only an opinion puece I am glad I am not the ONLY person thinking of how existing infrastructure will hold up to demanding smaller municipalities double their populations.

 

Parking doesn't hold up.  More cars on streets, no waste pick up.

Gas/Water/Sewer will need to be upgraded immediately.  Some communities have just finished a near decade long improvement that is already taxed now.

Waste and water treatment, can not hold up as it is.

Affordability is non existent.  Just because new homes are being built doesn't mean they're affordable as they are set at "market value"

 

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/carol-volkart-surprise-you-have-six-new-neighbours-all-without-a-place-to-park

All part of creating a welfare state where we’re reliant on the government for handouts.

 

The older I get the more I realize that the government is merely creating a system of dependency and bribing us with our own money.

[bishopshodan]

4 minutes ago, WeneedLumme said:

I would call BS on claims that 60% of homes in Canada are being bought by corporations. That sounds like a totally fabricated number that is probably at least 10 to 20 times higher than the actual percentage.

I was just reading this from Feb. of this year.

 

Reality check—foreign buyers aren’t buying up B.C.’s housing stock

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/reality-check-foreign-buyers-arent-buying-up-bcs-housing-stock

 

 

...Let’s take B.C. as an example, where there’s long been concern about foreign buyers particularly in the Lower Mainland. In 2020, non-occupant investors owned 23.3 per cent of units in the province. That seems to align with the foreign buyer story.

But when we drill down into the data, the story changes. Non-resident investors owned only 2.5 per cent of all houses while businesses owned another 2.5 per cent. The numbers are higher for condominium units, with 7.0 per cent owned by non-resident investors and 8.6 per cent owned by businesses. In other words, if a condo building has 100 units, we should expect foreign investors or businesses to own roughly 16 of them. That’s a far cry from claims that foreign investors and companies are buying up entire condo towers.

In reality, most investors who own housing units in B.C. are Canadian individuals rather than companies or foreign buyers. Of the 16.5 per cent of houses owned by non-occupant investors in the province, 9.8 per cent (much more than half) were owned by British Columbians and 1.7 per cent by other Canadians. Of the 36.2 per cent of condos owned by non-occupant investors, 18.1 per cent were owned by British Columbians and 2.6 per cent by other Canadians. In other words, Canadians own the majority of investment properties in B.C.

 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2023 by bishopshodan
I know its the fraser institute, just posting to show other opinions

[DeNiro]

3 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

I was just reading this from Feb. of this year.

 

Reality check—foreign buyers aren’t buying up B.C.’s housing stock

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/reality-check-foreign-buyers-arent-buying-up-bcs-housing-stock

 

 

...Let’s take B.C. as an example, where there’s long been concern about foreign buyers particularly in the Lower Mainland. In 2020, non-occupant investors owned 23.3 per cent of units in the province. That seems to align with the foreign buyer story.

But when we drill down into the data, the story changes. Non-resident investors owned only 2.5 per cent of all houses while businesses owned another 2.5 per cent. The numbers are higher for condominium units, with 7.0 per cent owned by non-resident investors and 8.6 per cent owned by businesses. In other words, if a condo building has 100 units, we should expect foreign investors or businesses to own roughly 16 of them. That’s a far cry from claims that foreign investors and companies are buying up entire condo towers.

In reality, most investors who own housing units in B.C. are Canadian individuals rather than companies or foreign buyers. Of the 16.5 per cent of houses owned by non-occupant investors in the province, 9.8 per cent (much more than half) were owned by British Columbians and 1.7 per cent by other Canadians. Of the 36.2 per cent of condos owned by non-occupant investors, 18.1 per cent were owned by British Columbians and 2.6 per cent by other Canadians. In other words, Canadians own the majority of investment properties in B.C.

 

 

 

And how much money is being funnelled from China to “residents” here?

 

That’s the figure they can’t seem to pin down.

[bishopshodan]

7 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

And how much money is being funnelled from China to “residents” here?

 

That’s the figure they can’t seem to pin down.

I heard there was a loop hole a few years back. As a foreigner, if you leased a commercial space ( tiny, cheap one if youre set to scam)  and claimed that you were intending to open a business there. Then you could purchase a home in Canada without any issues. Then simply let the lease run out and never open the supposed business. 

[Warhippy]

56 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

whats the time frame of 'now'? where are your 3 in 5 stats from...

is it the same in BC?

 

 

This came from a column I posted a few pages back regarding the financialization of canada's housing sector

 

Edit*. Added links

 

https://www.homelesshub.ca/resource/financialization-housing-canada-1

 

https://sicanada.org/program/financialization-and-housing/

 

https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/nhs/nhs-project-profiles/2019-nhs-projects/financialization-housing

 

https://socialinnovation.org/offering/financialization-of-housing/

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-financialization-of-housing-is-not-the-problem-in-fact-we-need-more-of/

 

https://housingrights.ca/national-housing-councils-first-review-panel-on-financialization-to-move-forward/

Edited August 31, 2023 by Warhippy

[Warhippy]

39 minutes ago, WeneedLumme said:

I would call BS on claims that 60% of homes in Canada are being bought by corporations. That sounds like a totally fabricated number that is probably at least 10 to 20 times higher than the actual percentage.

It's not JUST corporations, it's companies.  Companies from those papers are also designated as being people holding multiple homes (more than 2) for the sole purpose of investment/financialization and income return.

Edited August 31, 2023 by Warhippy