Here's today's story: Real estate market hits soft patch, B.C. sales show modest rebound but Greater Victoria numbers lag.
I won't quote the article, you can read it over there just fine I'm sure. There's a few notables in there though that should be discussed:
- The BCREA reported average price was $485,459. This is "for all types of housing." It's basically meaningless, because the markets shouldn't be blended like that. Essentially they take the sum total of mobile home, condo, town home, single family dwelling, mansion, waterfront property and acreage sales and divide it up by the total number of unit sales. This is different than the VREB reported data, which breaks it down by unit type and is also different than what is commonly reported on HHV.
- At first glance, total listings appear to have fallen off a cliff, being reported at nearly 800 less than what VREB reports, despite using the same sales total. I'm not sure why this is the case, but I can only guess that BCREA is excluding some areas (maybe Sooke, Gulf Islands and Malahat?) as these aren't really Victoria. But why use the sales totals from VREB that includes those areas if you're excluding some of the listings unless your trying to purposely make things appear better than they are? Even given this incorrect calculation, the sales to active listings ratio is still bad, so it's either really bad, or just bad. I'm inclined to think it's really bad.
- Muir still makes reference to the dubious theory that things aren't bad this year because they were "phenomenal" last year. To which I give you this...
It's refreshing to see an article about the BC market applied to the local data, even though the data wasn't really questioned (it should have been IMO), using accurate statements like "But that does not appear to be the case in Victoria" and "Compared to last September, the Victoria numbers look even worse."