Monday, June 25, 2007

Whose Buying Anyway? Redux

Great set of stats and corresponding report released recently by the Government of BC.

Let's see if we can make some sense of the stats.

I'm not sure why I've been having such a hard time finding more current income levels for the CRD. Apparently I'm not the only one. Gov.bc.ca has 2000 numbers. City hall has 2003 numbers (which are actually less than the 2000 GovBC numbers). Anyway, if you live in the capital and are a member of the defined family group (meaning married, with or without children, or unmarried with a child) there is a good chance you make just slightly more than your peers elsewhere in BC.

What if you're not married or don't fit into the above? Well the numbers change a bit when you factor in whether or not you work.

It seems fitting that we in the CRD seem to work a bit less than our provincial counterparts, except that those of us who do work 'enjoy' full-time work more than the rest of BC. We seem to have a few more entrepreneurs amongst us too. What 's telling though, is less of us here in the capital make more employment income. This means our wages are less and that 'family income' isn't indicative of employment; rather much of it may come from RE and other investment income.

So we know that employment and investment income isn't a part of the astronomical RE prices in Victoria. After all, when is the last time you heard a bull proclaim "we're all just making so much money these days; it's got to go somewhere?" Nope, Bull lines of the Bubble are "everyone wants to be here. People are coming in droves. Don't you see all the foreign license plates?"

Well apparently that's simply not true. We in Victoria trail the rest of BC by 0.5%. Who leads? Shuswap Lakes, Squamish and the rest of the Okanagan. Turns out when people want cottages and other secondary homes, they buy not in cities, but where other cottages and secondary homes can be found. But the most telling stat is over the past 10 years our average population growth rate hasn't changed at all. Put that in your pipe and smoke it Bulls.

And because no post on HHV is complete without a current RE price rant I give you this dandy chart:

I'd like to point out that in 2001 (6 years ago, before the boom) 19% of homeowners were spending more than 30% of their gross income on their housing costs. Think that number has gone up at all? Renters were obviously higher. But guess what? Rents only climbed from $726 to $892 or 19% compared to almost 100% increases in housing ownership costs.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi, Nice stuff. I found a cool news widget for our blogs at www.widgetmate.com. Now I can show the latest news on my blog. Worked like a breeze.

greg said...

hhv-

nice stats, I particularly like the rent has increased 19% while ownership cost has increased 100% stat. Sounds sustainable to me.

Anyway, in case you care, I accepted the tag and attempted to put an arm lock on Aastra over you know where...

Anonymous said...

This is interesting ...

A great house one a great street in Oak Bay just sold for $150,000 under asking. Views everything.

Isn't that something. I had never seen that before.

vg said...

"A great house one a great street in Oak Bay just sold for $150,000 under asking. Views everything.

Isn't that something. I had never seen that before. "


Not sure if you saw a post of mine the other day,a big one in the Uplands after over a year on the market sold for $400,000 below asking. $2.75 ask ,sold at $2.3 mil.

Anonymous said...

VG,

Saw it. Another house just sold in Broadmead. $100,00 below asking. Again it was a great house. One of the nicest in Broadmead.

Well...

Anonymous said...

Guys, it's most interesting to hear about these selling price reductions but if you can, please tell us the asking prices and selling prices in order to bring some relevance to the whole exercise;).

VicREBear

hhv said...

On some of these high end homes $100K drops can be just a few % of asking prices... I agree, list to sales price ratios are important

Anonymous said...

Sorry! Maybe these price drops are not relevant. All I know is that last year high end homes were selling within days and multiple offers and well over asking.

$3,890,000 dropped to $3,250,000 ($640,000 under asking) This has not sold - it was just a price change.

VG
3045 Beach was sold then the buyer changed his mind - sold again and then the 2nd buyer changed his mind. This happened within 2 days. The Property has been on the market for over a year. Now it is back on the market. (Originally sold for $400,000 Under asking) but it is back on.

$1,500,000 sold for $1,350,000 ($150,000 under asking)

$1,195,000 sold for $1,100,000 ($95,000 under asking).

Yes ithey are all million dollar plus properties. Often things start collapsing at the top. My RE just told me today that Albertans, Torontonians and Europeans are buying up all the property in Victoria. Where are they? Who are they?

Apparently "The Falls" is 90% sold out. To who? No Victoria is not over building (because it was being compared to Vancouver).

He says the market is not changing. Where are the multiple offers???? Why are there price declines?

I am fed up with these RE agents and their bulls--t. I just don't think I can talk to another one again. I was the one who had a real estate agent tell me the best thing I could do for my children would be to buy a house selling for 1.3 million (with rat s__t in the basement) - when I told him it was too much money. They are smug and make you feel bad if you don't have the money. They are a bunch of used car salesmen.

I just can't take it anymore.

(thanks for listening to my rant - I shall have a cup of tea).

olives said...

In the past couple weeks an aquaintance of mine purchased house that was listed at $670,000 for $640,000. I don't know if that is a substantial reduction in that price range or not. I think he was expecting a counteroffer, but got none.