Vancouver's Real Estate Market

[Carl Johnson]

Originally Posted by Liquid_o2

Which just shows you can never predict the future. A lot of the times it is just luck.

Don't tell that to Garth Turner. This guy is the biggest idiot (more than 4444) who have been wrong on Canadian real estate yet still has a massive following.

[GLOW]

Originally Posted by Digitalis

Ok so you've been saying since the start of the thread that people shouldn't be putting money on black, yet you being a "finance" guy can't do any better than "going to vegas". I see

[4444]

Originally Posted by Carl Johnson

Don't tell that to Garth Turner. This guy is the biggest idiot (more than 4444) who have been wrong on Canadian real estate yet still has a massive following.

why is it binary to you?

wrong on Canadian real estate (in a specific time period), yet without doubt his net worth has grown significantly during this specific time period (this is a fact if you were to follow his advice).

again, all comes down to balance and management of risk - but of course, he is wrong, everyone in vancouver is right, yet somehow all these 'right' people are demanding government intervention in real estate.

[originalhypa]

Originally Posted by jackmeister

I wish I had that crystal ball as well since I bought into resources too. Then again, Canadian banking stocks are notoriously safe investments.

However, just remember in 2011 there was this thing in the US called Quantitative Easing, and the same thing in different names and forms around the world. The main purpose of QE was to bail out all the risky investors that lost money in poor investments, and thus allowed them to cash out and reinvest in "better" investments. Not only that, no one knew when the Feds would stop putting money into the market (somewhere around 80 billion a month?). The governments were backstopping everyone's stupidity/greed with no end in sight. Imagine going to PNE with a limitless ATM and playing the carnival games until you win that elusive big stuffed animal. The limitless ATM ended up being $4.5 trillion dollars.

Around that time interest rates were trending down, companies were merging or buying out each other, bidding wars for companies, credit was easy to obtain, commodity prices were stable, Osama was caught, US consumer spending was slowly improving. etc. I wouldn't dare to say "the writing was on the wall" but there were definitely more than enough signals to see where equity markets were heading and more importantly, how the major players (funds/conglomerates/state-owned companies) would benefit.

And in Vancouver, 2011 we were still thinking about the Olympics and too caught up with the Stanley Cup. I don't recall overnight lineups at condo presales or bidding wars. There were a lot of new immigrants and lots of new cars on the road, but nothing too much out of the ordinary. Houses were still being sold around asking, and property wasn't hard to find.

Not that it matters now, since that boat has long sailed. Maybe that fellow who sold the real estate, rented and invested all the capital is now on a hookers and blow diet or still working 9-5. But at that time a few years back, if you looked at the potential of RE and equity markets given your financial experience, you made a choice that seemed right for you. At that time you didn't anticipate 15% gains YoY on real estate.

You said it perfectly!
No one anticipated the RE to continue to boom like it has. The numbers are staggering, and it's now spread to the valley. When the luxury dealerships opened in Langley, I should have known. But I saw folks that I know were working class heroes, leasing Benzes and Range Rovers like they were Hondas. They were able to get financing through the increased value of their homes. To me, that's incredibly dangerous. But we're three years into this, and all that has happened is more increases in value.

I made a lot of money in RE since 2000. Buying a home, living in it for three years, then flipping it for $150k profit was the norm for us. To the point where I considered getting my RE license. Everyone I know was selling their million dollar properties. But this was also 2008, just before the big US crash. I saw folks lose millions in developments gone sour, and that's when I figured that we were in for the same.

But we weren't in for the same. I saw a lull in 2010 when I sold my last home in Morgan Creek. It took a year to move that place, and I had to fight to get my asking price.

Fast forward to 2014, and that same house that I sold for $1.2, sold for $1.45
WTF?! $250k in 4 years?

My only purchase after that was in Whistler in 2014. We're up about $120k on that already. But it does me no good, because I could never replace it for that kind of money.

Originally Posted by 4444

everyone in vancouver is right, yet somehow all these 'right' people are demanding government intervention in real estate.

Those folks who made the money have realized that everything has gone up at a similar rate. So they sell their $500k house for a million. But the minute they try to replace what they had, they find that it's also a million. They traded dollars for dollars.

What I'm hoping for is gov't intervention that will cause a drop in the value. So I can take my high selling profits, and use them to buy low again. But alas, I think those days are gone regardless of what the gov't does.

Originally Posted by unit

with your apple example, you'd be buying apple on sale in april 2013. in some cases it works much better in your favor, so it's a bit more complicated than what you've stated.

If it wasn't complicated, we would all be rich.

[alex.w *//]

hmm true, if you sell a property for high, buying another one is also going to be high

dollar for dollar

[quasi]

Originally Posted by alex.w *//

hmm true, if you sell a property for high, buying another one is also going to be high

dollar for dollar

I agree, didn't buy my home as an investment to flip but bought it as a place to raise my family and create memories in a space that is our own. We're thinking of selling and moving in the next 3 years because my son wants to go to a high school in a different catchment but I don't really care what housing prices do between now and then because prices moving up and down on my home or anything I'm looking at purchasing are intertwined.

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by alex.w *//

hmm true, if you sell a property for high, buying another one is also going to be high

dollar for dollar

That's why buying a place is a form for forced savings.
Thought about it long and hard with the wife and honestly, even if we have minimal $$$ in the bank, the minute either one of us croaks, the other person will be really well off.
Say I go, my life insurance will pay out tax free to my wife and she is free to sell and downsize our RE.

What sucks is getting into the RE market now.

[Tapioca]

^

Dying suddenly is the best way to go from a financial perspective. The trouble is is that you're more likely to die from a slow, degenerative disease such as cancer. If you don't have sufficient disability or critical illness coverage, this can screw your family finances for a long time. Imagine piling on a line of credit on top of your 700K mortgage. Your life insurance policy may not be sufficient to cover your line of credit and any existing mortgage you may have. The longer you live in a debilitated state, the harder it is for your family.

In this market, people need to make sure they're sufficiently insured. And never buy insurance from the lender who approves your mortgage.

[jackmeister]

Originally Posted by quasi

I agree, didn't buy my home as an investment to flip but bought it as a place to raise my family and create memories in a space that is our own. We're thinking of selling and moving in the next 3 years because my son wants to go to a high school in a different catchment but I don't really care what housing prices do between now and then because prices moving up and down on my home or anything I'm looking at purchasing are intertwined.

I thought they started to allow cross area students now?? I remember hearing its allowed now.

[quasi]

Originally Posted by jackmeister

I thought they started to allow cross area students now?? I remember hearing its allowed now.

It's more of a travel issue, it's kind of far.

[1.7El_guy]

Originally Posted by originalhypa

Those folks who made the money have realized that everything has gone up at a similar rate. So they sell their $500k house for a million. But the minute they try to replace what they had, they find that it's also a million. They traded dollars for dollars.

To consider how leveraged some are, these folks would use 500k proceed from the sale to purchase a more expensive home (ie. 2-2.5million) as they now have the down payment to support this. Brokers have ways to lend to people who has the cash. The koolaid keeps on going.

[m4k4v4li]

Originally Posted by originalhypa

6% per year on average is what I saw.

We all know that to make money in this game you need to sell high, and buy low.

you got average returns because you're an average investor who assumed average risk

[Drow]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

In this market, people need to make sure they're sufficiently insured. And never buy insurance from the lender who approves your mortgage.

Care to elaborate why not?

[UFO]

Originally Posted by 1.7El_guy

To consider how leveraged some are, these folks would use 500k proceed from the sale to purchase a more expensive home (ie. 2-2.5million) as they now have the down payment to support this. Brokers have ways to lend to people who has the cash. The koolaid keeps on going.

Yes but we also have to understand that is only true in some cases. As crazy as things are there are many who are not over leveraged, but then that doesn't make sexy headlines

[UFO]

you got average returns because you're an average investor who assumed average risk.

Well that's really the argument here no. How could I as a below average investor make above average gains, if it was easy and doable everybody would be doing it. Meet Vancouver RE. Im not saying its right or wrong, but you'd be foolish to ignore it. Things may sour in 6 months, or continue swing up for 5 years as impossible as it seemed 5 years ago.

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by Drow

Care to elaborate why not?

It's expensive for what it is. You pay a premium for a product that does the underwriting/assessment of risk on the spot vis-a-vis a full medical exam with blood work and a urine sample that would be required for a regular life insurance policy.

Secondly, whatever policy you get as part of your mortgage, the value of the payout decreases as you pay into your mortgage, yet the premium stays the same for the term of the policy. And it only pays out for one thing - your mortgage when you die and nothing else. Contrast this with a regular life insurance policy which pays out when you die and can be used by your estate or successors for whatever they please.

Mortgage disability coverage offered by lenders, which is pretty important, is pretty expensive too. You're better off assessing your own disability coverage with your company and then getting a top-up disability insurance policy through the regular channels, such as a life insurance broker. As long as you're in good health, 3rd party disability coverage is likely to be far cheaper.

If you're single and looking to mitigate risk with a mortgage, I would recommend that you have sufficient disability coverage because you're more likely to suffer from something that affects your ability to earn income rather than death itself. Even if you die, if you have no successors, are you going to care that your property returns to the bank?

[unit]

Originally Posted by m4k4v4li

you got average returns because you're an average investor who assumed average risk

nothing wrong with average returns, at 6% if you minimize taxes, you could double your principal investment in 12 years, triple it in 19, and quadruple it in 24.
sure real estate (detached housing, not condos) has been beating that in the last 10 years, but that's in one of the biggest RE booms in history vs average market returns.

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by UFO

Well that's really the argument here no. How could I as a below average investor make above average gains, if it was easy and doable everybody would be doing it. Meet Vancouver RE. Im not saying its right or wrong, but you'd be foolish to ignore it. Things may sour in 6 months, or continue swing up for 5 years as impossible as it seemed 5 years ago.

Arguably, the easiest thing for the average person to do is to invest in indexes with a low-cost institution or brokerage. The average investor in indexes would have experienced the bull run in the market following the financial crisis, but not to the extent that an experienced trader would have.

But, it's hard to argue the merits of a passive investing strategy when comparing the return on Vancouver real estate vis-a-vis the return that an average investor using low-cost index funds would have gotten over the same period. Sure real estate is not liquid, but if your overall investment strategy is a long-term one, you're probably not liquidating your indexes any time soon either.

I don't think anyone is arguing that investing in real estate in Vancouver makes any financial sense, given the cap rate. But, if you have to live here and are in the market, your net worth has increased far beyond what you would have gotten in the market using a low-cost, diversified, passive index investing strategy. If real estate in Vancouver returned to gains consistent with inflation (which is the historical trend), I reckon that it would take many years for a passive investment strategy to reach the same ROI that real estate in Vancouver has returned in the last 10 years.

With that said, if you're looking to get into the market now, it would suck big-time. If you're already in the market and are choosing to stay here, then, you'll be okay.

[originalhypa]

Originally Posted by quasi

I agree, didn't buy my home as an investment to flip but bought it as a place to raise my family and create memories in a space that is our own.

I think a lot of people are in the same boat as you. They didn't expect the market to boom like it did. We expected the same thing that our parents saw, which was moderate long term increases in our RE. I know a lot of folks who invested in their homes, with the plan that the sale of that home would help finance their retirement one day.

But with the market handing out money like it has over the last 15 years, those same folks have bought into the profit and upgraded their living areas. Many of them got into another mortgage in their 40's, hoping that the increases would continue.

[Digitalis]

So are you saying you did better than average investing?

Originally Posted by originalhypa

When you have something to lose, you tend to limit the risk. Unlike you, who probably doesn't have many assets to start with. You have no idea what you're talking about. Case in point,

Aren't you the kid who asked how futures were traded last year?
http://www.revscene.net/forums/69354...es-market.html

The same kid who posted about your buddy getting a DUI and swapping seats with you?
http://www.revscene.net/forums/681147-dui.html

Wasn't your username 6chr0nic4? The guy who was asking questions about what to do with your jars of spare change?
http://www.revscene.net/forums/678347-spare-change.html

You have the audacity to call me an average investor, knowing nothing about me. But the truth is that you're just a little shit selling off your $150 Michael Kors watches, Feragamo card holders, and Crooks and Castle used clothes.

I recommend that you read more, and post less. It will most likely limit the amount of embarassment you feel when someone calls you out on your bullshit.

[originalhypa]

Originally Posted by Digitalis

Ok so you've been saying since the start of the thread that people shouldn't be putting money on black, yet you being a "finance" guy can't do any better than "going to vegas". I see

Originally Posted by Digitalis

Anyone who buys into the market in single lump sump deserves to be taken to the cleaners or to jail for being an inside trader.

Originally Posted by Digitalis

So are you saying you did better than average investing?

FYI, this is how you get kicked out of a thread.
And not a single fuck was given.

[originalhypa]

I know that a lot of people on RS are young, and have an idea of how the world works based on reality TV, social media, and instagram. You are going to be disappointed when you find that your $20k life savings, is good for about 2% return. In fact, you'll be lucky to beat inflation.

From Forbes magazine, 2014

According to the latest 2014 release of Dalbar’s Quantitative Analysis of Investor Behavior (QAIB), the average investor in a blend of equities and fixed-income mutual funds has garnered only a 2.6% net annualized rate of return for the 10-year time period ending Dec. 31, 2013.

The same average investor hasn't fared any better over longer time frames. The 20-year annualized return comes in at 2.5%, while the 30-year annualized rate is just 1.9%. Wow! The average investor exclusively investing in just fixed-income funds has had an even worse experience.

The average investor exclusively investing in just fixed-income funds has had an even worse experience. The annualized return is 0.6% over 10 years, 0.7% over 20 years, and 0.7% over 30 years.

It is plain to see in the preceding chart that the average mutual fund investor has seriously underperformed against a variety of asset classes and has barely exceeded the rate of inflation. The average fixed-income investor has lost to inflation, losing valuable purchasing power.

When I see someone harping about how you could have made 300% on Apple stock, I know I'm dealing with someone who has very little experience in the market. Like digitalis, and his little friend chronic604 above who have absolutely nothing to offer this thread.

Just look at the 10 year returns from 2004 to 2013 for an idea of how challenging it is to make money as an investor.


Of course our homes market wasn't hurt by the crash of 2008. But for the most part, this is what experienced investors have seen over the last decade.

One last note on returns, this is a good article from the Financial Post on why 6% per annum is the magic number for investors.
http://business.financialpost.com/pe...-rule-of-thumb

[Drow]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

It's expensive for what it is. You pay a premium for a product that does the underwriting/assessment of risk on the spot vis-a-vis a full medical exam with blood work and a urine sample that would be required for a regular life insurance policy.

Secondly, whatever policy you get as part of your mortgage, the value of the payout decreases as you pay into your mortgage, yet the premium stays the same for the term of the policy. And it only pays out for one thing - your mortgage when you die and nothing else. Contrast this with a regular life insurance policy which pays out when you die and can be used by your estate or successors for whatever they please.

Mortgage disability coverage offered by lenders, which is pretty important, is pretty expensive too. You're better off assessing your own disability coverage with your company and then getting a top-up disability insurance policy through the regular channels, such as a life insurance broker. As long as you're in good health, 3rd party disability coverage is likely to be far cheaper.

If you're single and looking to mitigate risk with a mortgage, I would recommend that you have sufficient disability coverage because you're more likely to suffer from something that affects your ability to earn income rather than death itself. Even if you die, if you have no successors, are you going to care that your property returns to the bank?

Thanks for the insight. I do mortgages and i do sell the insurance as well.

[rb]

called about two places in the past hour.

First place, 448K in Burnaby - 2bed, 2bathin a 2011 built building. 744 sq ft. 2 offers over asking and both rejected by seller. They want more.

Second place, 379k in Burnaby near Brentwood, 1bed, 1den, 622 sq ft. Sold for 420k in 3 days.

..... ffs

[noclue]

Most realtor contracts have a clause that states if seller receives an offer at asking price or more they owe the realtor commission regardless if they sell or not.

Realtor can ask for commission and screw the seller if he/she wants to