Monday, July 25, 2011

Monday market update: into July's home stretch

MLS numbers courtesy of the VREB via Marko Juras. These numbers are for the Victoria Real Estate Board's reporting area, including Sooke, Shawnigan Lake and the Gulf Islands.

July 2011 (last week's numbers) [previous week's numbers]
Net Unconditional Sales: 380 (270) [140]
New Listings: 1,062 (763) [407]
Active Listings: 4,902 (4,856) [4,756]
Sales to new listings ratio: 35% (35%) [34%]

July 2010 totals 
Net Unconditional Sales: 527
New Listings: 1,119
Active Listings: 4,477
Sales to new listings ratio: 47%
Sales to active listings ratio: 12% or 8.5 MOI


July is shaping up, just like the so-called summer weather, to be disappointing in the local real estate market. We're averaging just under 16 unit sales per day while inventory continues to rise at almost 3 times that pace. Sellers are thinking twice about listing, most likely because there isn't too much buying activity going on right now. The shine is off the market. Even the few people I know who have been, well perma-bull isn't an apt term, let's say firmly embedded in the it's always a good time to buy real estate camp, are starting to talk about other ways to make money.  

With six days to go in the month, can we hit 496 sales? Will some high-end home sales drag the average price back up or will we see a considerable decline? If we do see a decline, I think we'll witness a repeat of last August, and quite possibly into September too; two selling month's the local industry would love to never repeat. 

67 comments:

a simple man said...

This market has been too sick for too long. It is time for it to shift to decent levels of affordability for normal families.

People are waking up to the realization that being a slave to your uber-mortgage just is not worth it, even if it is beautiful here.

Now that housing has stopped its 6-7 years of unprecedented appreciation people can no longer depend on their house-secured LOC to bail them out. The cracks are starting to appear behind the tweed curtain, and as JJ has shown us numerous times, there are already crevasses in the Western Communities.

Rent until normalcy returns - there are more rentals popping up every day and lots sitting empty.

Marko said...

HHV guy - if you could link Marko Juras to www.markojuras.com that would be awesome.

Thnx!

a simple man said...

marco - what is the difference between that site and jmjrealty?

a simple man said...

apologize for spelling your name incorrectly, Marko.

Marko said...

Just switching over the url - not uploading listing to jmj anymore.

Marko

Alexandrahere said...

Good Monday morning all. Here are my stats for July 18 -24.

SFH: Min 2 beds & 2 baths, priced between $375K & $775K in the core municipalities of Victoria, Oak Bay, Esquimalt, Saanich East & Saanich West.

NEW: 39
SOLD: 24
P/C: 30
OM: 20

Avg selling price: $552K
Med selling price: $565K

42% of houses sold had reported suites.

38% of houses sold went for less than BC assessment.

At a glance most would think nothing has changed at all from one year ago. This week last year i.e. 19 - 26 July, within my exact criteria, 23 homes sold versus 24 this week and the average price last year was was $554K versus this year at $552K.

Condo's and Townhouses: Min 2 beds & 2 baths, priced between 250K & $585K in most areas of Victoria (not downtown) and Saanich East, all areas of Esquimalt & Oak Bay and Gorge, Tillicum & Interurban areas of Saanich West.

New: 12
Sold: 5 condos & 4 townhomes
P/C: 12
OM: 7

Avg condo selling price: $345K
Med condo selling price: $$315K

Avg t/h selling price: $333K
Med t/h selling price: $328K

One t/h and one condo went for below assessment.

This week, the average condo went for $12,000 more than the average townhouse. Just a stat though and really means nothing at these low levels of sales.

SilverSurfer said...

I'd love to poke fun at Ozzie, but I think the media did a good job calling it as it is this time around. In short, real estate newbies get handed the short end of the stick for following Ozzie's shitck.

Click the link to see the picture... It's awesome. I swear he's saying "WTF ?!".

Real-estate guru Ozzie Jurock knew of building’s problems and sold condos anyway, lawsuit alleges



dozens of buyers of B.C. condo units claim Jurock steered them into money-losing investments in problem-plagued complexes owned by Jurock and his partners. Jurock and two partners are facing legal actions alleging they failed to inform investors about costly deficiencies in the buildings.

“It was just sold that these were going to be amazing properties with cash flow,” said Jennifer Dom, a North Vancouver accountant and part of a group seeking class-action status for their lawsuit. “This was going to be great for us newbies.”

Just Jack said...

Which brings up a point. Is Ozzie in a conflict of interest? Or is he just a salesman putting spin on the properties.

Can he hold himself out as an expert in real estate giving opinions of the market. Or should he state in every seminar and written brochure that he has a personal stake in these properties and the market in general and may be biased.

I think any other profession would have to make it absolutely clear to the public their interests in the properties before giving advise. Or maybe I'm wrong. You be the judge.

a simple man said...

I know before I publish anything or give any lecture, I have to disclose all of my conflicts of interest for all to see. It is the only ethical way.

DavidL said...

Anything but full disclosure is sleazy, misleading and should be illegal.

HouseHuntVictoria said...

I find it hard to feel empathy for people who bought a product from an adviser who owned the product without asking themselves "if this is such a good real estate cash flow investment why is he selling it and not holding it?"

If they did come to any answer that led them to believe they weren't getting the short end of the stick then... well, I just don't know. Ethics & real estate, seems to be a growing gap between the two when "investment" gets involved.

Sweetrealtor said...

Only 14 condos sold so far this month in Saanich East. I'm trying to sell a condo there - tough to do. Only 29 sold in this area last month.

Interviewed for listing another condo in SE this morning. It's returning to the type of market that I have to turn down listings. Too many people trying to sell, especially for the summer season. I'm still undecided about taking this one on...

pod_x said...

HHV

Ethics & real estate, seems to be a growing gap between the two when "investment" gets involved.

No more than any other investment. the difference is people dealing in real estate are not under the same training, regulation and oversight. Salesmen will be salesmen, always good time to buy.

DavidL said...

@HHV wrote: I find it hard to feel empathy for people who bought a product from an adviser who owned the product without asking themselves "if this is such a good real estate cash flow investment why is he selling it and not holding it?"

Unfortunately, greed often clouds logic: "If it sounds too good to be true - it probably is ...".

DavidL said...

@Sweetrealtor wrote: It's returning to the type of market that I have to turn down listings.

What are the major "sticking points"? Are owners just expecting too high an asking price if they want to sell within a reasonable time period?

patriotz said...

"No more than any other investment"

I would differ, hardly anyone who buys stocks thinks they're a no-lose proposition.

There is just something about RE that brings out the inner fool, and that also applies of course to the majority who are buying just as a principal residence.

Marko said...

Last week I lost a listing because I suggested a price of $189,900.

Seller wanted over $200,000 and I told her for me to take the listing the max was $199,900.

Sure enough someone listed it two days later for over $200,000.

I find a lot of sellers are focused on their personal situation..."I need to net this much to do this, this and this." Unfortunately the market dictates the price.

Craig said...

Several years ago I bought a house for 150,000 in Parksville and flipped it several months later after doing 6 grand in renos. The agent I used to buy the house suggested 160,000, another said 190,000 and a third said 200,000.

I thought I had a pretty good handle of that market, took the third agent and had him list if for 205,000. Within days we got two offers at asking.

I see where Marko is coming from in being realistic with the client, but I also shudder to think that some agents can so completely misread their own market.

Marko said...

It’s pretty difficult to misread a condo where the unit above you is 199k and hasn't sold in 50 days.....

Just Janice said...

Learning that the market sets the price is a tough lesson, particularly on the way down.

Unlike the stock market - uneducated 'investors' are hugely leveraged in the housing market making the downward price adjustment even more difficult. The amount of 'leverage' in the market might be making prices stickier than they would be otherwise in that some sellers might be refusing to sell for 'reasonable' prices....

Anton said...

As for the folks who invested in leaky condos being sold by the condo guru at his investment seminars. Sheesh, P.T. Barnum was right. The fact that we are even hearing about a story like this is indicative of a depreciating market. I’m sure the investors that got in the early ‘00s had nothing to complain about, whether the condos leaked or not.

I have respect for a realtor who won’t take an overpriced listing. The seriously overpriced properties are wasting everyone’s time. In a fee for service model at least there is some cost to the owner for being ridiculous and some compensation to the realtor for time spent.

Just Jack said...

It's always a pleasure to nod in agreement with Just Janice over a cup of coffee in the early morning.

This is exactly what I am seeing too. Most of the re-sales were bought a half dozen or more years ago, while substantially more listings were purchased less than five years ago.

So, we'll just have to stick around to see what happens.

Pass the marmalade, please.

Mindset said...

This is an interesting conversation. I sold a house just when our neighbour (US) was crashing and had three different realtors in to provide estimates. The 3 strategies the realtors took was interesting:

Realtor 1: Price it right based on comparisons, and sell it in a reasonable amount of time. It was a logic-based appeal.

Realtor 2: Price it lower than market because nothing is moving, and get out. It was a fear-based appeal.

Realtor 3: Price it over market, you can make a bunch of money. It was a greed-based appeal. I knew he was just trying to 'buy the listing', because after a bit of discussion, he said I would have to move the price down rather quickly if the inflated price doesn't work. His strategy was to find a 'fool' who would pay more than market, and if one doesn't exist, reduce the price until I hit market levels.

If anyone here is or was selling today, which strategy would you choose?
1. Logical pricing
2. Fear based pricing
3. Opportunity/greed based pricing

I think Canadian sellers are sticking mainly with strategy 3, and USA sellers are deep into strategy 2. Strategy 1 is only good for balanced RE markets, which I haven’t seen a lot of lately.

Thoughts?

Just Jack said...

It costs the agent money to "buy" a listing. A good strategy when the number of listings is low. But an expensive decision when there are over 5,000 listings.

Canadians, for the most part, are polite people they will walk through your home and say how much they would like to own it, but if the price is just a little too high, they will not make an offer. As they have been conditioned not to insult the seller.

I don't know about you - but you can insult me all day long for half a million dollars.

Just Jack said...

The "stickiness" for homes bought in the last half dozen years does help support the prices of the newer condominiums such as:

A third floor condominium on Goldstream that was bought October 2008 for $208,400 and has just re-sold for $202,000 or $327 per square foot for a 5 year old condo.

As opposed to a similar condo on Peatt that was bought in 2006 for $191,000 and recently re-sold for $195,000 or $300 per square foot for a 5 year old condo.

I suspect, the agents are implying to the prospective buyers that the sellers will not entertain an offer less than what the sellers paid for the condominium.

So, most likely you're not going to get a steal of a deal on anything bought in the last three years. Better to look at properties that were bought 5 and more years ago.

Sweetrealtor said...

@DavidL

Sticking point is almost always the price. The public has a tendency to mistrust agents, thinking we're all out for a quick buck and underpricing their properties.

In a decent market, I have no problems taking overpriced listings as it will probably still get a lot of activity and, perhaps, some spin off business. And in a hot market, it's worth a shot.

In a slow market, an overpriced listing becomes a drain of advertising dollars and time. The seller will also hold me accountable for the lack of action - instead of the price.

By the way, I hate the phrase: "I don't want to give it away." All kinds of alarms and whistles go off in my head when I hear this.

I take my time suggesting prices to sellers. I'm not going to do an evaluation sight unseen, I have to take a look first. I have a few analytical approaches such as comparables (both sold and expired listings come in handy for this) and looking at market growth (or decline) as a percentage since the time of purchase. Once I've looked over the data, then I suggest a price range.

I still recommend sellers get more than one opinion on price, the more the better. I also tell them to ignore the high figures of those trying to "buy the listing." But I'll bet that isn't happening as much in this market.

In 2008, I had 10 listings that I couldn't give away. It cost me thousands of dollars and a summertime of hours. I've got 9 now, so I'm going to be picky.

a simple man said...

anyone know the story on the brand new house on Bowker and Beach - construction was just finished and now there is a agent's sign up with a sold sticker. I thought it was a custom build?

patriotz said...

"The amount of 'leverage' in the market might be making prices stickier than they would be otherwise"

If this were true the more the leverage, the more sticky the prices on the way down. In the US the reverse has generally been true - the most leveraged markets went down the fastest, because more owners got into trouble and had to sell or were foreclosed.

The market doesn't care what a seller "needs" to get for a property. Downward stickiness in prices exists because the market runs out of buyers willing to pay excessive prices slowly. Someone always has to sell, and they have to settle for what someone is willing to pay.

HouseHuntVictoria said...

^ I wish we had a reasonable breakdown of the reasons for selling locally; I guess the VREB agent monthly survey is the closest we have access to but I'd really like to see what percentage foreclosures, estates and divorce sales make up in the current market data. I'm guessing the "want to sells" still vastly outnumber the "need to sells" (maybe even 7, 8 or 9 to 1, making the "needs" less than 20% of the market); this would explain sticky prices more than most data we discuss, IMO at least.

patriotz said...

Almost all discretionary sales by owner-occupiers are to buy another property, so it makes little difference to the market whether they sell or not.

Non-discretionary sales by owner-occupiers are fairly static, so they don't move the market either.

What moves the market is an net increase in discretionary sales by investors, or a fall in demand by entry level buyers.

RE busts are never caused by owner-occupiers deciding to sell.

Marko said...

"anyone know the story on the brand new house on Bowker and Beach - construction was just finished and now there is a agent's sign up with a sold sticker. I thought it was a custom build?"

Definitely not a custom build judging by the pictures. Builder bought lot (old house that was demolished) for $562,000 and sold for $1.6 million.

Right location, right timing, and a bit of luck.

Just Janice said...

Patriotz - I agree with you but it takes time to move from 'want to sell' to 'need to sell'...

I also believe that 'cashing out' is easier when there's cash to be had at the other side of the deal and becomes much more difficult when it means that a loss will be realized. Unless of course you expect the loss will be larger at some later point in time...in which case there may be impetus to sell now.

I note that a big difference between the US and Canadian housing markets are non-recourse vs. recourse loans. It might change the role of 'leverage' in the market in the sense that in the US many just walked away, whereas in Canada people know that the debt will follow them long after the keys are handed to the happy new owner.

DavidL said...

MLS® 293645 at 4009 Carey Road has been on and off the market this spring summer. The price appears to be based on what the owner needs, not what the market is willing to pay. The most recent listing reads:

Foreclosure imminent, your opportunity awaits, get this over improved home before the bank does. The seller spent tens of thousands upgrading for them self, including new tile floors, granite, whole new bathroom, but has run out of money. 2 bedroom suite loads of parking and Ll for 500k this home must be sold while the owner still has the power to accept offers if you hesitate the bank will be in control and they will want market value. Pay just what the seller owes not a penny more.

I expect that we'll be seeing more of these kinds of sales ...

Just Jack said...

As per Patriotz

"Almost all discretionary sales by owner-occupiers are to buy another property, so it makes little difference to the market whether they sell or not."

--------------------

While the number of sales remain the same, if the owner-occupier is "buying up" would that not make a change in the market. You would have the same volume of sales, but prices rising?

And it would not be impossible for the number of sales to drop - and prices rise too!

By non-discretionary sales, do you mean court sales, divorces, estates, etc.?

I agree that real estate crashes are never caused by discretionary selling by owner occupiers, they just don't list their homes for sale or list the property at such a high price, that the property is effectively not on the market.

But I wouldn't go so far as to say that the bust is caused solely by first time home buyers slowing down in their purchases.

In my opinion, the weakness in the market can come from all sectors. Court, divorce, relocation, estate sales, hits all income groups fairly equally. So as the discretionary buyer/sellers pull back from the market the properties under duress take prominence and we have a "duress" market.

So, the lower the volume of sales drops the more shallow and dysfunctional a market can become. A market that can have both price increases with people buying up - and deep discounts for properties forced to sell.

Which leads to uncertainty among buyers and sellers and lack of confidence in the market. And confidence in the marketplace is the only thing keeping prices high.

That's my three pennies worth.

Craig said...

Last two rental viewings we had are houses on the market for sale. Both sellers pulling listings after price reductions, one of which was $100,000.

MC said...

If your places aren't selling for clients and they decide to put them up for rent under the $1250/mo mark, and its above ground...let me know :)

a simple man said...

JJ - posting in the national site (greaterfool.ca) about the Victoria experience. Way to represent.

patriotz said...

"But I wouldn't go so far as to say that the bust is caused solely by first time home buyers slowing down in their purchases."

Nor did I. I said that discretionary sales by investors are also a primary cause. Or of course investors just not buying. Investor demand is far more volatile than owner-occupier demand.

"I note that a big difference between the US and Canadian housing markets are non-recourse vs. recourse loans"

#1 real estate fallacy. Most US states are recourse. Including Florida. Ireland and Spain are recourse too. In Spain you can't even get rid of mortgage debt in bankruptcy.

Sweetrealtor said...

My sellers at 203-3252 Glasgow are coming off the market to rent at $1200/month. You can see still see it on my website at www.sweethomevictoria.com. Let me know if you are interested as they are showing it today and this weekend.

Still_Waiting said...

Victoria real estate sellers feel pressure: anemic sales, plenty of price reductions and new listings still piling on.

Some stuff from the Matrix database.

June 26 to July 3
- 126 Pending Sales
- 281 New Listings
- 210 Price Changes

July 3 to July 9
- 116 Pending Sales
- 336 New Listings
- 253 Price Changes

July 10 to July 17
- 121 Pending Sales
- 339 New Listings
- 253 Price Changes

July 17 to July 24
- 113 Pending Sales
- 312 New Listings
- 235 Price Changes

a simple man said...

welcome back, Still Waiting. Enjoy your stats and commentary a lot.

Still_Waiting said...

a simple man,

You must have me confused with some other poster who is also waiting :>)

a simple man said...

Still_Waiting - sorry, I am easily confused.

Just Janice said...

Looks like the Canadian economy shrunk in May and I don't think it picked up in June or July either.

Given the uncertainty around the US - with a rating downgrade appearing likely, it appears likely that the Canadian dollar will further appreciate. For most businesses (aside from those who need to import) - this is not a good thing. It might keep a lid on real gas prices, but most exporters (including tourism and commodity producers) will see demand for their goods and services fall.

At a provincial level it looks like some estimates of GDP growth might be overly optimistic going forward (I can't see 4.8% per year going forward in the next two years).

Mr. Carney might like to raise rates - but in an economic environment like this he'll be damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

In terms of what it means to Victoria and our housing market - confidence seems to be waning, incomes aren't expanding, and expectations about house price appreciation are vanishing. There'll be low rates, but it won't really matter...

Still_Waiting said...

Long weekend is here and that means not much will be happening with real estate until next week.

For those interested in the last 24 hours there have been 18 pending sales, 49 new listings and 34 price changes. Trend continues with sales tapering off and around 2 price changes and close to 3 new listings for every sale.

Prices in many areas are dropping and you are getting more house for the dollar than you were a year ago. You just aren't seeing it in median and average price stats. However, I expect the average price to drop in July because there were only 13 sales over a million so far this month and many of those took a big haircut.

Sales should be around 495 this month compared to 527 in July 2010 and 618 last month. With sales down and prices falling the gang at VREB will find it tough to spin next week. TC may even tell the real story for a change.

a simple man said...

Tough times - I assume, with no real basis of knowing, that the top 25% of realtors make 90% of the sales. That leaves the last 10% of the sales for the bottom 75% of the realtors. If there are 1200 realtors in Victoria, then this past month 900 of them had to share 50 sales.

So many lured in by the promise of fast money. I know a lot of realtors who work in the service industry downtown. Now I know why.

Alexandrahere said...

Look at that massive home at 964 Carolwood. Everyone's dream sold for $694K and assessed at $771K. Sure makes me happy that I sold my home in Esquimalt for $700K early 2008. So far this week within my criteria, I have 19 homes sold and 10 of those went for under BC assessment. You want to believe things are changing.

EagerBuyer(Not) said...

Alexandrahere,

That house on Carolwood started out at 750K and dropped to 699K before a buyer came forward. Still not bad for a 1971 box in Broadmead.

TC-Parrot said...

TC published this article on Wednesday. Maybe Olives or Once Harmony will repost on KIV.

Debt, rate hikes cause for concern

The very thing that lifted the economy from the depths of the recession - Canadians' passion for owning a home - could also be its undoing, warns the chief economist for RBC Global Asset Management.

Central to Eric Lascelles' concern is that the availability of cheap credit has driven household debt levels to record highs and soon-tobe-rising interest rates will bear a "palpable" impact on individuals as well as the broader economy.

"There is a popular misconception that the Bank of Canada cannot afford to raise interest rates because this would prove too damaging for mortgage holders. The opposite is in fact true.

Once the Bank of Canada raises its key lending rate from the current "astonishingly cheap" one per cent, rising costs of servicing mortgage and other debts will sap consumer spending. Housing prices will fall as lower-tier buyers are forced out of the market by diminished affordability.

"The risk is clearly greatest of all for those who have just purchased a home," Lascelles said.

DavidL said...

Hmmmm ... that indoor pool at 964 Carolwood was kinda cool. Quite the price reduction!

DavidL said...

I have about 3 years 10 months left in my variable rate mortgage - currently 2.4%. With increased payments, etc. I expect to be paid off in just 3 years.

So - what are your thoughts about switching to a fixed rate mortgage (@ 3.69%) or staying with my (soon to be increasing) variable rate?

Could variable rates increase by 3% in three years? A few months ago, I would have thought not - but with the pending downgrade of US debt, I'm beginning to wonder ...

Just Janice said...

David - there's always a price to certainty...do what allows you to sleep at night. My gut is that the variable is likely to remain the cheaper option over the next three years (not to say there won't be times when the fixed will be cheaper than what the variable is)...

I found a really interesting site that has done a fabulous job of analyzing the Canadian housing situation. www.theeconomicanalyst.com ....

Anton said...

I tend to agree with Just Janice in favor of the variable rate. For the variable to be the better choice, the average rate over the nearly four years just needs to be lower than 3.69%. If the variable rate increased at a constant rate (hypothetical), it would have to be higher than 4.96% at the end of the term for the fixed to be better. It is quite possible that your variable rate will be higher than this in four years, but the bank doesn’t think so hence the 3.69% fixed rate. Banks are risk averse. If you are willing to take on some risk there are savings to be had. You usually have an ongoing option to switch to a fixed rate (e.g. if inflation becomes a problem and rates move much higher). Either way you will be facing the new rates at the end of the term if the mortgage isn’t paid off. I have always had variable rates and have saved a bundle. You have to be able to handle a bigger mortgage payment than you have though so wouldn’t be suitable for someone who’s cash flow is tapped out already.

Alexandrahere said...

DavidL: I would stick with the variable rate as well. I'd bet on the variable not getting much higher than 3.69% (the current fixed rate) within 3 yrs.

Marko said...

Heading into the weekend the SFH average is 581k.....sales volume will be close to last years...difficult to predict at this point if it will be over or fewer than 527.

DavidL said...

Thanks everyone for confirming my preference to stay with a variable rate. The risk is no problem ... higher payments just mean less money for extra payments to be get rid of the mortgage faster.

A $500K mortgage with a fixed-rate 6% interest rate amortized over 25 years costs $959,709 after the interest is added. The same mortage with a variable-rate 4.5% (average) interest rate amortized over 25 years costs $830,208 - about $120K less.

Just Jack said...

It was reported today that select lenders, faced with rising inventories of foreclosures, have started implementing tear-down programs for their existing home inventories. Rather than letting empty homes flood the market, causing further downward pressure for existing home sales, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan and Bank of America are destroying some of the homes they may have recently foreclosed upon. In San Diego, nearly 27,000 homes are foreclosed upon each year.

A major consideration is the projected tax write-off for each transaction. If the home was not foreclosed upon for the purpose of tearing it down, tax write-offs can be accessed at up to full market value.

source: San Diego Examiner

????

EagerBuyer(Not) said...

Marko said "Heading into the weekend the SFH average is 581k"

Last month the SFH average was 629K so this is a big drop. I don't imagine there will be many over $1M sales this weekend to push this number up.

Marko - On Monday you said there were 380 sales so far this month. This was a change of 110 from the week before. Hard to imagine we will go over 500. Do you have the sales stats as of today??

a simple man said...

haven't heard from Waiting in a long while - you still out there, Waiting?

That house on the corner of Caddy Bay and Estevan that sold a few months back is now for rent, in case anyone is looking. I can't see it being more than $1500 a month.

AandJ said...

Amazing what some people will ask $1500 a month for...
http://victoria.en.craigslist.ca/apa/2520574470.html

Animal Spirit said...

My better half called the fellow advertising Caddy Bay / Estevan for rent. They are asking $1400 - says it is in reasonable shape inside, but he is trying to subdivide the lot and then build facing Cadboro Bay Road. Since it is in Oak Bay, how long would that take to get approval? He thought a year.

For a renter, it is a short term play - best for university students.

a simple man said...

Thanks for the info, animal spirit. A year rental is a pain in the butt, to be sure. Subdivide? I didn't think the lot was that big. And why would you purposely build facing Caddy Bay of you had the choice?

Tomorrow's numbers should be interesting. Very low sales, very high inventory and a near $50K drop in the average price from last month. Yes, they will spin it and yes, there are problems with using average data, but you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

omc said...

I would say I agree with you simple man. A few more observations; Oak Bay seems to have stalled on price not going up or down. There appears to be a price ceiling that has been reached long ago in the south, but suckers have been pushing less desirable areas towards this ceiling. I don't think this is long term sustainable. Those who bought in estevan, landsdowne and henderson in the last few years are at great risk. It appears that over exuberance on the shack structures is over in all areas, with the value dropping for the painted up 40s shack.

Caddy bay, which is a million times nicer than lesser areas of oak bay, has already dropped significantly and appears to still be dropping.

a simple man said...

omc - I agree with you about the price ceiling. South Oak Bay hit it long before North Oak Bay and North Oak Bay has caught up. I think North Oak Bay will have quite a few casualties when it corrects as a lot of people overbought around here and stretched to do so. I an still watching the Sandowne flip with much interest - new stucco just went on. Wonder how much they will ask since they really overbought that one - I won't be surprised if they ask close to a million. Of note, both flips in/near Estevan are still sitting (Dunlevy and St. Anne).

The price ceiling that I can see is around $675K. Over this and the pool of buyers thins substantially.

Marko said...

Might not get the stats today given it is a holiday.....

Alexandrahere said...

Good Monday Morning. Here are my stats for July 25-31.

SFH: Min 2 beds & 2 baths, priced between $375K & $775K in the core municipalities of Victoria, Oak Bay, Esquimalt, Saanich East & Saanich West.

New: 30
Sold: 28
P/C: 33
OM: 16

Avg selling price: $545K
Med selling price: $560K

43% of the homes that sold went for below BC assessment. 54% of the houses sold had disclosed 2ndary suites.

In the 12 months, and within this exact criteria, last week had the HIGHEST sales volume at 28 sales. The highest was Feb 28 - Mar 6 with 35 sales and the week of May 16 -22 tied with last week. Last week also had the LOWEST avg sale price since the beginning of 2011.

Condos & Townhomes: Min 2 beds & 2 baths priced between $250K & $585K in most areas of Victoria (not downtown)& Saanich East, all areas of Esquimalt & Oak Bay and Gorge, Tillicum and Interurban areas of Saanich West.

New: 21
Sold 14 condos & 2 townhomes

Avg selling price: $349K
Med selling price: $330K

The two townhomes sold for $398K & $476K.

3 of the 14 condo's & both of the townhomes went for below BC assessed value.

Blogger said...

Get daily ideas and methods for earning THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS per day FROM HOME totally FREE.
SUBSCRIBE NOW