News   Jun 14, 2024
 2.1K     1 
News   Jun 14, 2024
 1.6K     1 
News   Jun 14, 2024
 803     0 

Baby, we got a bubble!?

I know Ka1 you like to stir the pot.

I am not a doom or gloom sayer. Simply hopefully a realist.

I believe fundamentals are important and at some point (I can't say when) they will come back into play. If one chooses to ignore all fundamentals, then everything will just keep increasing at say 6%/year forever with no corrections. Oh, and rents will stay the same as they have for the past 10 years. And incomes will hardly rise, and people will just spend more and more of their income until housing represents 100% of disposable.

I think you get my point. At some point, there has to be a realignment. I believe it will be coming but governments so far have tried their best to meddle to prevent it. Even the government is now taking steps (30 year mortgages, larger downpayments for investors etc.) because they realize this is not sustainable. Ask yourself, this is not a politically popular move and yet they are doing it... shoud tell us that there are very real risks.

But in conclusion, we could be wrong and there is no bust.

that would really be nice. A new "norm".... everything only goes up from this point in history onwards.

I am sure Ka1 you appreciate my humour.

To start with, I am not stirring any pot -- just trying to educate myself.

I have neither heard nor read about investors/buyers of units -- rather residences -- in Ritz-carlton or Trump Plaza refusing to close the deals because of anticipated decline in the value of their units. Soon, residences in Shangri-La will also be up for closing. Any purchaser on this thread willing to openly declare that, in view of the anticipated decline in the values, he/she will not close the deal?

Obviously those investors know something that some of us do not know. Once again, I am just an observer. And I take a long term view of the situation. I bought a unit in RoCP1, where I live, in November 2001 -- deep in the middle of the recession. Staff in the sales office were desperate for a vistor and a sale. It took me 2 weeks to make a decision. I needed a unit -- rather a residence -- and I bought it, recession or no recession. There are plenty of indiviuals like myself, including investors from mainland China. Bubble? Perhaps. Bust? Definitely no.

Let the 'wise men' now educate me a bit more.
 
Hi KA1,
why didn't you include the next sentence from my post?

>>> In my case, I wish stability and no bubbles ...

Trust me. I am a property owner. Solid, minimal leverage ... I don't want it, no benefit there for me. But this cannot continue and I say we're beyond a point where Carney or anybody can ensure "soft landing". Too many factors indicate (at least to me, and I see many others) that changes have to come.

Let me ask you something: would you actually buy a condo / house with 25% down (as an investor) today in GTA? In other words, would you be afraid that there's a good chance of losing your downpayment / equity? If you answer yes - there's your answer for my position .... otherwise, we cannot reconcile our views and we will have to wait and see what happens next.

To start with, I did not, in any way, intend to mis-represent your views by eliminating a sentence from your post. My apologise.

The short and blunt answer to your question is that, No, I will not buy a condo/ house with 25% down for investment purposes. For living purposes, yes. However, knowing myself, I will buy a unit even in the current situation if I have saved almost full price.Over the long term horizon, prices will go up, but, definitely not at the rate they have been going up in the past.

I will be very careful as to where I buy a unit. I will avoid the 'herd' mentality. In a little while, individuals who have bought units in places like City Place will rue the day they purchased their unit. That place is on the way to become another St. James Town. Yonge and Sheppard corridor is another such locality. Developers are required by the City to warn prospective purchasers of traffic gridlock in the area.

The fact still remains is that it is all relative

Recession might mean a 'severe shave' for some. However, for the Trustees in Bankruptcy it is a bonanza.

Having said all, I agree with you that stability, slight movement up and down and sideways for a while, yes. Bust, NO.
 
when did DNA3 go on sale? less than 5% sold as of Dec '10 doesn't sound promising.
do you know as of end of February 2011, how many are sold?


That's 5% in the month of DECEMBER alone...they sold most of their good nicely priced units by July
 
Ka1:
First, in Ontario, one cannot just walk away from one's property. Once can but is still responsible. The developer can pursue for the difference.
So, that is not really an option. Unlike the US where if you had 5% downpayment and the property is down 25%, you rather lose the 5% and walk away.

Your example of the Ritz: most of those sales (70%) were made 5-6 years ago. Price appreciation in that time is probably 60-80%. I know the preliminary purchasers at Ritz were looking at around $600/sq.ft. or even less (the price of average product now). Most investors making $1mill+ investments(who were not absolute speculators only) are in a position to not only close but ride out any downturn. In any event there is so much profit on paper built in that even a 25% decline while not invited would not put them in the red.

Trump as well has purchasers who bought in 2005 and 2006 and even 2007 are in a similar boat to those who bought at Ritz.

Even in my case, I purchased in 2007 at about $865/sq.ft. what is now offered from builder at $1250/sq.ft. (I have a 200 sq.ft. terrace). So even a 25% decline means $938/sq.ft. Prices would have to decline 31% from present ask from developer to make a break even for me even as a purchaser at 2007 prices.

So, do I expect a price decline in 2012-13 when SL will be ready. Might well happen. If I was a speculator buying to flip, I might sell. If I was an investor looking at long term potential and rent, probably won't make much sense but I could hold on. If it is to live, it is a non issue as you have eluded to.

The more important question I feel would be this: Would you buy today at these prices. You have said yes for a residence but it implies that you too would not buy as an investment at these prices. Why? I assume it is because fundamentals don't make sense. I would suggest at SL, Trump, Ritz and 4S there are no investors or very few buying at these prices. Rather, end users are now buying. Investors would have been in at the very beginning.

Are investors in at other projects? Don't know for sure but suspect so.

I am not in the camp who believes we will see a bust. I do believe as I have said many times, I think 10-15% decline and a retest of 2008-2009 not unreasonable.

As one of the "wise men", the only thing I can say with certainty is one can predict alot of things and eventually one will be right. I am still by the way waiting to be proven right on this one and I sincerely hope I am wrong and that prices just stabilize.

Regarding the response to Redfirm:

I agree somewhat with your assessment re City Place. I have never liked the development either. I personally don't understand Yonge Sheppard corridor pricing being as close to the core as it is but I am not sure I agree with the assessment that it will be similar in its final result to City Place. However, since Concorde is developing at the Leslie subway stop a large scale project, that particular project worries me similarly to City Place.

I would be worried buying a condo today, yes. For investment. For residence, a different story. And I think condo vs. house is a very different story. I would be less concerned buying an investment house than a condo as I believe the market has more to fall in condos. The reason for buying a condo is that it is easier to manage than a house. However, it goes up less in value and I believe has the potential in the present market to go down more than housing on a percentage basis.

This "wise man"(LOL) has now spoken his peace.
 
There is a Bank of Montreal report in today's The Globe and Mail, Report on Business secition on page 9, on house prices. A part of the report says that house prices in Ontario are moderately overvalued ut not in the bubble terrotory. Report talks about house prices and I am not sure if it is applicable to the condos as well.

I tried but could not find a link to the story on the internet.
 
Thanks Ka1. I will read it.

I note that historically, few recognize a bubble until after it deflates and then everyone looks in hindsite and wonders how something so obvious could have been missed.

That said, I agree overvalued but big price decreases (more than 15%), not likely. Again just my opinion.
 
From the star:
http://www.moneyville.ca/article/948110--canadian-housing-market-moderately-overvalued-bmo

The Canadian housing market is “moderately” overvalued, but a significant correction is likely not in the cards, says a report by the Bank of Montreal.

The ratio of average resale prices to personal incomes is currently 14 per cent above the long-term mean, suggesting that prices have gotten ahead of incomes, says BMO economist Sal Guatieri in a report to be released Friday.

“Home prices are expected to cool and prices stabilize this year in response to higher interest rates, tighter mortgage rules and lower affordability,” said Guatieri. “While we do not expect a significant correction nationwide, the risk of such would increase if prices were to continue to outrun incomes or if interest rates were to increase rapidly.”

During the last real estate bubble in 1989, prices were about 21 per cent above incomes in comparison. In the United States in 2005, prices were 26 per cent above incomes.

Guatieri says the relatively solid economy in Canada means that incomes are expected to rise over the next year and a half, catching up to prices.

“If incomes climb 8 per cent and prices stabilize as we expect, the current overvaluation would fall to 6 per cent, hardly the stuff of corrections,” said the economist.

Guatieri’s forecast is based on home prices stabilizing and incomes rising in order to head off any correction. If house prices continue to rise while incomes remain stagnant, then a correction would be more likely.

Some analysts have said that a price adjustment downward of anywhere from 5 to 25 per cent is not out of the question. The consensus estimate is that prices will remain flat over the next several years, allowing incomes to catch up with house prices.

Toronto housing economist Will Dunning says the employment market is showing signs of recovery, but it will take time to ignite demand, even if there is income growth.

“Housing demand is still showing the after-effects of the recession,” said Dunning. “The recent job creation will start to positively affect housing activity later this year and into next. It takes time for job creation to get converted into housing demand, and there I expect that the housing data will be tepid for a while.”

A report this week by Scotiabank says prices are still forecast to rise by the rate of inflation, or about 2 per cent. However, economist Adrienne Warren warned that there seemed to be a looming oversupply of condominiums in some cities.

As expected, the market is trending down from last year.

Existing home sales in the Greater Toronto Area for February were down by 14 per cent from a year earlier, according to figures released by the Toronto Real Estate Board Thursday.

The board reported 6,266 transactions last month, compared with 7,291 in February of 2010.

The average selling price of a home for February was $454,423, which is 5 per cent higher than the price reported a year earlier.

The bolded line particularly stood out to me. Who is expecting 8% income increases over the next year and 1/2? My understanding is that incomes have hardly budged in the past 10 years. Why would one work on this kind of assumption? Am I missing something or do others feel this prognostication is totally out to lunch?
 
^^^
I respect Paul Krugman but I disagree that the banks were not the problem. Banks lent money to everyone, flooding the US with cheap capital. People were encouraged to take on debt with no reasonable prospect of being able to service it. However, since they could walk away, any "gambler" would take it as a low risk proposal. It goes up, I make money, it goes down, I have virtually no equity anyhow to lose. This of course is not everyone but was alot of the subprime people and the lower quality ARM's.

However, looking at those graphs and the condensed the 6 year rapid expansion of the US and a slower but net effect similar type of rise for Canada, it is worrisome.

Perhaps most troubling is that the slower you inflate a balloon, the less concerned and observant individuals are that it is overinflating, whereas inflating it quickly people are more concerned.

I have to believe or hope that the message of Flaherty and Carney which is being carried constantly in the papers is getting through now. I hope prices hold or deflate slowly and not extremely and maybe we can skirt the US outcome.
 
The bolded line particularly stood out to me. Who is expecting 8% income increases over the next year and 1/2? My understanding is that incomes have hardly budged in the past 10 years. Why would one work on this kind of assumption? Am I missing something or do others feel this prognostication is totally out to lunch?

Do they know something we dont?

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil108a-eng.htm
 
^^^Exactly.
Incomes have gone up about 2-3%/year, so why would one predict 8% over 1 and 1/2 years unless they feel we are going to have massive wage inflation due to rising gasoline and food prices. I don't think the economy could withstand 8% income increases. And I don't believe we will suddenly find massive productivity improvements to justify this kind of improvement. In fact, the opposite has been a perennial problem for Canada... that we have not improved productivity to the same degree as the US. We relied on a low dollar for a long time and now that it is par (presently slightly above), this is creating problems.
I just don't get this prognostication.
 
^ ^ ^

i guess one can always go to their boss and say BMO economist Sal Guatieri said my income should be increasing at least 8% this 1 1/2 years to keep up with housing inflation, so better add a few more zero's to that figure.
 
^
I would like to know how they calculated these figures. 10% for Ontario??? Everybody else at 20%+??? Such difference doesn't make sense to me.
 

Back
Top