Real Estate

Vancouver housing bubble?

  • Last Updated:
  • Mar 30th, 2020 10:31 am
Tags:
None
Deal Addict
Apr 10, 2011
1434 posts
859 upvotes
Vancouver
adamtheman wrote: No surprise here. Condos are next. Prices down. Sales down. Listings WAY up. The market is being flooded with condos, plus there's all these new developments that are sitting on inventory. Who is going to buy all these $800,000 2 bedroom condos?
Lots of people bought $800k one bedrooms too. I know several of them. They bought with the attitude of "you can't loose".

Even worse, some of them are in "temporary" relationships. That means if/when their needed 2nd income relationship ends, it's usually an immediate sell (regardless of the current value).

Buy higher, sell lower, isn't fun.

Many real estate analysts (not realtors) continue to express their deep concern over the huge numbers of condo units being completed in the 2nd half of 2019. Most of which were bought by "investors", temporary residents, agents and "resellers". They're not going to wait 2-3 years for a possible turn around and be down 20-40%.

The people selling now would like to sell. The people selling September to March "have to" sell.

This fall/winter will be very interesting.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
12557 posts
5731 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
RxMills wrote:
Many real estate analysts (not realtors) continue to express their deep concern over the huge numbers of condo units being completed in the 2nd half of 2019. Most of which were bought by "investors", temporary residents, agents and "resellers". They're not going to wait 2-3 years for a possible turn around and be down 20-40%.
I suspect that the first groups that will be trying to sell are the agents and resellers as many of them (at least in the past) have purchased numerous properties during the presale stage so that they can flip them before completion so they won't have to go through the trouble for completing the sale. The investors and the temporary residents will be in the second group as many of them might not know what the current market conditions are as they might not be keeping up with the market since their purchase.
Deal Fanatic
Oct 7, 2007
6265 posts
2532 upvotes
craftsman wrote: We didn't mention it because we were comparing Y/Y numbers for the most part AND the industry never mentioned it as they were comparing those numbers with numbers from 6 months back. Have a look a that the post in this thread from January 2019 on the December's numbers starting at this thread with the first report of December numbers - http://forums.redflagdeals.com/vancouve ... #p30372828 - you'll notice that no-one talked amount M/M with most of the talk about Y/Y numbers.

Or how about January's numbers - http://forums.redflagdeals.com/vancouve ... #p30505424? Notice that we didn't talk about seasonality as well since we were using it with Y/Y numbers and NOT M/M like the industry is currently doing.

Or how about February's numbers - http://forums.redflagdeals.com/vancouve ... #p30630577? Once again, no mention about seasonality because the industry used Y/Y numbers.

Or how about March's numbers - http://forums.redflagdeals.com/vancouve ... #p30757626?

What it seems like to me is that the industry saw some 'good' (or what might be spun as 'good') news in order to drive some people back into the marketing betting on some FOMO to come back in so they switched their reporting style again.
But if real estate sales are seasonal, isn't it more scientific to compare Y/Y (e.g. May 2019 vs. May 2018) for the same month rather than M/M (May 2019 vs. April 2019)? Also, if we are going to compare M/M should we not compare M/M over the same period the year(s) prior (e.g. May 2019/April 2019 vs. May 2018/April 2018) to see the magnitude and direction of the percentage change between periods?
Newbie
Oct 16, 2018
10 posts
11 upvotes
its still 19 years low.
may 12 2853
may 13 2882
may 14 3286
may 15 4057
may 16 4769
may 17 4364
may 18 2833
may 19 2638
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
12557 posts
5731 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
choclover wrote: But if real estate sales are seasonal, isn't it more scientific to compare Y/Y (e.g. May 2019 vs. May 2018) for the same month rather than M/M (May 2019 vs. April 2019)? Also, if we are going to compare M/M should we not compare M/M over the same period the year(s) prior (e.g. May 2019/April 2019 vs. May 2018/April 2018) to see the magnitude and direction of the percentage change between periods?
That's correct. And that's something that the industry did not do this reporting period - ie they just reported/highlighted M/M sales for this year without putting it into the context of what happens every year at that time. This monthly report is clearly an example of the industry trying to spin things in the best light possible rather than providing clarity in the marketplace.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
12557 posts
5731 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
GuZ17681 wrote: its still 19 years low.
may 12 2853
may 13 2882
may 14 3286
may 15 4057
may 16 4769
may 17 4364
may 18 2833
may 19 2638
Exactly. A number by itself without the context of what happened in the past adds little to the real story of what's happening.
Deal Addict
Apr 10, 2011
1434 posts
859 upvotes
Vancouver
craftsman wrote: That's correct. And that's something that the industry did not do this reporting period - ie they just reported/highlighted M/M sales for this year without putting it into the context of what happens every year at that time. This monthly report is clearly an example of the industry trying to spin things in the best light possible rather than providing clarity in the marketplace.
That explains things. The news media had these excited reports of a big bounce back in sales, as if to imply that the slump was over.

They interviewed realtors who enthusiastically told their reasons why everything is on the way back up again.

I suppose their advertisers are pushing for that spin to get people buying and selling.

It seems difficult to get the "real news", insead of the news that news directors are told to "push out to the masses".
GuZ17681 wrote: its still 19 years low.
may 2012 2853
may 2013 2882
may 2014 3286
may 2015 4057
may 2016 4769
may 2017 4364
may 2018 2833
may 2019 2638
Deal Addict
Aug 21, 2007
4642 posts
405 upvotes
News media in Canada are like all canadians. Make cardinal error investing. Drink the real estate koolaid and put all eggs in one investment and fail to diversify and have a unilateral interest in being bullish on real estate. they are no better than agents.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
12557 posts
5731 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
RxMills wrote: That explains things. The news media had these excited reports of a big bounce back in sales, as if to imply that the slump was over.

They interviewed realtors who enthusiastically told their reasons why everything is on the way back up again.

I suppose their advertisers are pushing for that spin to get people buying and selling.

It seems difficult to get the "real news", insead of the news that news directors are told to "push out to the masses".
I wouldn't say that the news media nor their advertisers were pushing the spin on an 'uptick' in the market. I don't think they care either way as long as there are eyeballs on the screens looking that the ads! However, I would say that the media is doing a poor job on average of combing through the statistics presented by the industry and calling them out. I've noticed that this is a trend for the media that is NOT limited to real estate but for any report/study that is released - the media will just say 'according to a report by XYZ....' making it sound as if it was true rather than doing some (any) fact checking.

I suppose that this is the effect of the cost cutting we have seen for the traditional news media outlets with the rise of the internet AND how social media has become the judge, jury, and executioner of companies and people when it comes to things that might not fit a certain groups narrative.
Deal Fanatic
Oct 7, 2007
6265 posts
2532 upvotes
I think the whole topic of journalism could be thoroughly analyzed and critiqued based on what they have been feeding through the mainstream media lately. Once you know the real truth, it is hard to believe what they are actually getting away with reporting. I have a feeling based on some recent lawsuits that there is going to be a rude awakening in the media circles that puts accountability back where it belongs. Fake reporting has gone too far and some peoples lives have been terribly ruined by it in a manner that is wreckless, unfair and slanderous.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
12557 posts
5731 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
choclover wrote: I think the whole topic of journalism could be thoroughly analyzed and critiqued based on what they have been feeding through the mainstream media lately. Once you know the real truth, it is hard to believe what they are actually getting away with reporting. I have a feeling based on some recent lawsuits that there is going to be a rude awakening in the media circles that puts accountability back where it belongs. Fake reporting has gone too far and some peoples lives have been terribly ruined by it in a manner that is wreckless, unfair and slanderous.
I wouldn't call it fake reporting as they are reporting and they aren't saying that their research turns up certain 'facts' but according to a study published by XYZ organization. Having said that, I wouldn't call it journalism at all as there is typically little to no actual journalism other than reading/reporting what a study has said. There is very little basic journalism to do any type of investigation into the report facts or the report authors. Heck, they could be reporting on a subject one day and the same subject the next but from a different viewpoint without ever mentioning the previous viewpoint they just reported on.

As for accountability where it belongs, I believe for the journalist to live up to the ideals of the 4th estate they need to hold the report authors accountable for what's they are stating as facts in their studies as well as report some background information on the organization and their views - ie XYZ has been reporting of a pending market downturn for the past 6 quarters while the market has been going up, up, and up OR ABC previous called that market would be going up, up, up has changed their views in light of current events and now believe a downturn is on the way. They should also hold each other accountable but not in the way it's done in the US where it's a right vs left discussion that never gets anywhere.
Deal Addict
Mar 7, 2011
3471 posts
1610 upvotes
Vancouver
A renter that has 80k in savings and owns 2 properties (that he bought for less than the price of a car, but that's a different story) - what a fool... He should buy in Vancouver. No no no, Vancouver sucks, better do it in Toronto. Or Bangkok Face With Tears Of Joy
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 13, 2016
3197 posts
2599 upvotes
charlesd79 wrote: A renter that has 80k in savings and owns 2 properties (that he bought for less than the price of a car, but that's a different story) - what a fool... He should buy in Vancouver. No no no, Vancouver sucks, better do it in Toronto. Or Bangkok Face With Tears Of Joy
What are you on about again?
Sr. Member
Jun 7, 2017
811 posts
562 upvotes
BC
charlesd79 wrote: A renter that has 80k in savings and owns 2 properties (that he bought for less than the price of a car, but that's a different story) - what a fool... He should buy in Vancouver. No no no, Vancouver sucks, better do it in Toronto. Or Bangkok Face With Tears Of Joy
WTF you talking 'bout? 80k in savings? Small interest rate increase puts him in the soup line. You're full of sh$t.

Top