Real Estate

Vancouver housing bubble?

  • Last Updated:
  • Aug 21st, 2019 1:28 pm
Tags:
None
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
11107 posts
4509 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
Seems like Ontario has a documented problem with laundered money as well... - Police allege ‘crime family’ busted in mob raid laundered more than $70M through Ontario casinos

The proceeds of these crimes, police say, were then funnelled through legitimate businesses and real estate transactions as a means of cleaning the dirty money.

“They have legitimized themselves by funnelling illegal profits through business; including financial institutions, car dealerships, finance companies and even charities,” said York Regional Police Chief Eric Jolliffe during Thursday’s press conference.
Like I said earlier, BC isn't the only one with a money laundering problems that was funnelled into RE.
Deal Addict
Oct 7, 2007
4775 posts
1590 upvotes
While I appreciate the NDP's efforts to cool the housing market, BC's taxation measures at the provincial and municipal level are getting way out of control. I think the unions are running our cities and province and they continue to expand in numbers and in their salaries while the ever-shrinking private sector must continue to pay for their needs and wants. This doesn't look sustainable to me. Sure, it is nice to have free childcare and free housing but how much is the government supposed to provide and at what cost? I think if the government just enforced the laws (strictly), the dirty money would quickly leave or be confiscated and most of the "affordability" issues for people in the province would become normalized. Instead, our governments continue to say they need more money to tackle these problems which only seem to fester and grow in magnitude.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
11107 posts
4509 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
choclover wrote:
Jul 19th, 2019 12:04 pm
While I appreciate the NDP's efforts to cool the housing market, BC's taxation measures at the provincial and municipal level are getting way out of control. I think the unions are running our cities and province and they continue to expand in numbers and in their salaries while the ever-shrinking private sector must continue to pay for their needs and wants. This doesn't look sustainable to me. Sure, it is nice to have free childcare and free housing but how much is the government supposed to provide and at what cost? I think if the government just enforced the laws (strictly), the dirty money would quickly leave or be confiscated and most of the "affordability" issues for people in the province would become normalized. Instead, our governments continue to say they need more money to tackle these problems which only seem to fester and grow in magnitude.
I don't mind if there are temporary increases in outlays as long as there is a viable plan so that those measures are actually temporary and we don't create a permanent arm of the civil service for a temporary plan.

A good example is the housing for the homeless. All of this stuff is built as temporary housing but how temporary will it be if prices don't come down OR (probably more probable) we can't increase the incomes for the homeless so that they can afford to live in homes? Sure, some of the homeless will, with this small handout, be able to get themselves back on their feet and move on with their lives. But do we have a plan to help the rest of them (ie teach them how to fish) or will we be constantly providing fish? So far, all I see is the provision of fish without any plans for job training or rehab/councilling for their many ills. It's almost like the plan is to house them first and then figure out what's next.
Sr. Member
May 1, 2018
909 posts
571 upvotes
Vancouver
It's comical for me to read comments on Facebook on news outlets where people are asking for a portion of that $1.5 billion back in tax credits because of all this taxation. As if that's ever going to happen.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
11107 posts
4509 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
Alivenate wrote:
Jul 19th, 2019 2:54 pm
It's comical for me to read comments on Facebook on news outlets where people are asking for a portion of that $1.5 billion back in tax credits because of all this taxation. As if that's ever going to happen.
I'm just happy that the NDP didn't announce a massive spending program just because there was money left over. Hopefully, they will do the smart thing and put that $1.5 Billion in excess taxes towards retiring some of the debt.
Deal Addict
Oct 7, 2007
4775 posts
1590 upvotes
craftsman wrote:
Jul 19th, 2019 8:45 pm
I'm just happy that the NDP didn't announce a massive spending program just because there was money left over. Hopefully, they will do the smart thing and put that $1.5 Billion in excess taxes towards retiring some of the debt.
I agree with you but something tells me that they will want to spend it in a way that makes them look like Santa Claus.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
11107 posts
4509 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
choclover wrote:
Jul 20th, 2019 2:22 pm
I agree with you but something tells me that they will want to spend it in a way that makes them look like Santa Claus.
Ohh... I'm sure of it. They might be waiting for additional revenue dollars to kick in from more tax hikes.
Deal Addict
Apr 10, 2011
1245 posts
737 upvotes
Vancouver
Real Estate Stats Week #28

Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver

LISTINGS:

This week 947 ($1.38 Billion)
1 week ago 1,060 ($1.30 B)
2 weeks ago 1,001 properties ($1.26 B)
3 weeks ago 904 properties ($1.21 B)

A slight drop in listings, but the highest total value. Implication? Lower priced homes selling faster than higher priced homes? Agents seem to be confirming that it's the difficulty in selling higher priced condos and houses that's pulling down the numbers.

SOLD PROPERTIES:

This week 37 properties ($37.66 M)
Average price: $1.017 M

1 week ago 41 ($44.20 M)
Average price: $1.078 M

2 weeks ago 25 properties ($24.98 M)
Average price: $0.999 M

3 weeks ago 37 properties ($42.74 M)
Average price: $1.155 M


Source: Fisherly
Deal Addict
Apr 10, 2011
1245 posts
737 upvotes
Vancouver
"Pre-sale contracts abruptly terminated at Richmond, B.C., apartment building"

Developer sued for $4.6 million by project's construction company, say ousted home buyers

A Richmond, B.C., developer has cancelled pre-sale contracts for a 15-storey residential building in the city centre.

Anderson Square Holdings, directed by Sunny Ho — president of the Business Association of Richmond — will provide pre-sale buyers of the Alfa building with full deposit refunds plus interest.
Newbie
Dec 5, 2009
97 posts
23 upvotes
RxMills wrote:
Jul 21st, 2019 2:21 pm
Real Estate Stats Week #28

Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver

LISTINGS:

This week 947 ($1.38 Billion)
1 week ago 1,060 ($1.30 B)
2 weeks ago 1,001 properties ($1.26 B)
3 weeks ago 904 properties ($1.21 B)

A slight drop in listings, but the highest total value. Implication? Lower priced homes selling faster than higher priced homes? Agents seem to be confirming that it's the difficulty in selling higher priced condos and houses that's pulling down the numbers.

SOLD PROPERTIES:

This week 37 properties ($37.66 M)
Average price: $1.017 M

1 week ago 41 ($44.20 M)
Average price: $1.078 M

2 weeks ago 25 properties ($24.98 M)
Average price: $0.999 M

3 weeks ago 37 properties ($42.74 M)
Average price: $1.155 M


Source: Fisherly
Ive been tracking east side detaches houses, partly because i would like to buy one. Seems like a standard lot with laneway potential and a decent, maintained house (ie. Bungalow or van spec) will sell the moment it hits that 1.2 to 1.3 range. The only homes ive seen sell for less are small/irregular lots, no laneway potential, or tear downs. Been tracking for the last 4 months, and seems like a ton of buying support at those levels.
Deal Addict
Apr 10, 2011
1245 posts
737 upvotes
Vancouver
Alpine84 wrote:
Jul 21st, 2019 3:25 pm
Ive been tracking east side detaches houses, partly because i would like to buy one. Seems like a standard lot with laneway potential and a decent, maintained house (ie. Bungalow or van spec) will sell the moment it hits that 1.2 to 1.3 range. The only homes ive seen sell for less are small/irregular lots, no laneway potential, or tear downs. Been tracking for the last 4 months, and seems like a ton of buying support at those levels.
If you're buying long-term, it sounds like a good strategy.

The east side can be tricky. I know someone who buys east side lower end priced houses, renovates them, and resells. A few years ago, he was ahead. Now, he says he can't make money doing it due to the declining market, higher renovation and building costs, transaction costs, and surprise unanticipated costs.

I also know people who bought east side houses, rebuilt plus a laneway. They're invested to $2.5 now. If they have to sell, their neighbours might be $1.2-1.5 and there may be west side properties for $2.75.

East side buyers are more price sensitive and have stricter budgets. The majority of wealthy buyers won't touch the east side. But there's a growing group that can only buy on the east side and distance matters more than street address.

If you definitely won't be selling it in the next 5-7 years, you're probably fine.
Deal Addict
Dec 4, 2016
1267 posts
507 upvotes
choclover wrote:
Jul 19th, 2019 12:04 pm
While I appreciate the NDP's efforts to cool the housing market, BC's taxation measures at the provincial and municipal level are getting way out of control. I think the unions are running our cities and province and they continue to expand in numbers and in their salaries while the ever-shrinking private sector must continue to pay for their needs and wants. This doesn't look sustainable to me. Sure, it is nice to have free childcare and free housing but how much is the government supposed to provide and at what cost? I think if the government just enforced the laws (strictly), the dirty money would quickly leave or be confiscated and most of the "affordability" issues for people in the province would become normalized. Instead, our governments continue to say they need more money to tackle these problems which only seem to fester and grow in magnitude.
NDP is not really interested in dealing with money laundering. Only Eby is. NDP just want an excuse to pay their union buddies, and laundered money is as good as clean money.
Deal Guru
Jan 27, 2006
11107 posts
4509 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
BlueSolstice wrote:
Jul 22nd, 2019 1:12 pm
NDP is not really interested in dealing with money laundering. Only Eby is. NDP just want an excuse to pay their union buddies, and laundered money is as good as clean money.
I would go further to say that the NDP is really just interested in keeping the money laundering issue alive for the next election. If they were really interested in dealing with it, they would have approached each Federal party with the Fall Federal election coming up about this issue in order to make it a Federal issue.... and that hasn't happened and probably won't happen. Instead, we get talk about asking the Feds for more money for transit and other large infrastructure projects that will be exclusively built by NDP approved union members.

Top