News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5K     0 

Who are you talking aboutUD?

Carras in the previous article, or Taal and Clayton in this last article?

Can you elaborate. I noticed the widely quoted 100000 new immigrants which has been argued to death here.

I get that it is specualtion as to what will happen with prices but Taal I believe is basing it on affordability indices and interest rates. Whether you agree with the conclusion or not is another issue but I think it is a bit unfair at least in his case to say he is pulling the number from where the sun does not shine.
 
The fact that prices are flat YoY is actually scary. I say that as a bear. It means that 8 months of explosive price growth was lost in 5.

About population growth: One other thing that is rarely considered is internal migration. We bring in 100,000 net new immigrants a year. In fact the real number is substantially higher. Ontario's had negative interprovincial migration rates for quite some time (2009 was the first time in a decade it gained people, though a fraction of the total lost), offset by immigration. Can 120,000 immigrants (who don't arrive wealthy) really scrimp and save and buy houses enough to offset the 20,000 or so upper-middle class types that move to Calgary every year?

Demographics are a time bomb waiting to go off. They overlook the role of the baby-boom echo; a larger-than usual cohort of kids that are acting somewhat in unison. Nowadays they're in their mid-20s - I'm 27 and right smack in the middle of it - and this represents just about the peak of their condo buying years. The 416 condo boom has been driven primarily by decreasing household size and this is not sustainable particularly as birthrates fall in tandem. One household becomes two or three households.

But then something else happens:
a) The baby boomer's parents pass away, leaving an extra house.
b) the kids get married and move in with their spouse, leaving an extra condo.
These issues have been simmering for a while but it really hasn't hit the fan yet as there is still enough demand bubbling up from below to disguise the issues. In another decade or so the boomers themselves will begin dying in larger numbers while only being replaced by young people at a 40% ratio or so (most of whom could easily be lodged in a condo vacated by now cohabitating echo-ers)

Further
c) The boomers might downsize to a condo. This does not require new units as each set of parents essentially moves into their kid's old condo at the same time the kids are probably upsizing to a house. This still leaves an extra unit/house.
d) Those kids, living 2 to a house, might leave Toronto and be replaced by an immigrant family of 6 - the population grows without needing a new house.
e) In the long term, the echo generation may or may not have children of their own. It seems likely they won't.
f) There is no guarantee we will always take in this many immigrants - either due to local politics or improving conditions in source countries, or both. As we know, with both birthrates and interprovincial migration being net losers, Toronto basically withers without immigration.

What I guess I'm saying is that there will be a peak number of households, beyond which demand for new housing will fall off substantially. Some new units will be needed for population growth. This happens to fall at a time when we're already at a cyclical peak in the market, and an unusually high one thanks to peculiar economic conditions, and a very unusual demographic pattern that worked out well for many years but won't always. In the long term, I feel we'll return to the long term average of ~3.5x income. Median price of around 260,000 in the GTA.
 
Last edited:
Great post Lafard.

I would pose one other thought to it however. I too am a firm believer that looking at demographics is essential. David Foote in his "boom bust and echo" made alot of arguments along the same rationale as you have put forth.

However, one has to consider that patterns do change. For example: it is postulated we will all sell our homes when the kids move out and the big home in the suburb will become obsolete.

In fact, I am in that situation of kids moving/moved out (2 are finishing University) and yet we have no intention of giving up our '" family home". Perhaps we are mover priviledged but on my street here I can tell you that 1/2 the street is in this position and so far only one family has elected to "downsize". The rest are staying put at least so far. My father stayed in the family home without moving until his late 80's.

I cite this as just one example where assumptions may not pan out and trends may change.

I also take exception to a median price of $260K in the GTA. I am not disputing the 3.5x income and do believe things have gotton ahead of themselves and expect a slow descent. However, there will be all sorts of attempts (as we already now see) to prevent marked asset deflation in housing since it is such a cornerstone of the economy. Just look at the effect of a major devaluation of housing in the US.

I am not saying it could not happen here, but I would think that having witnessed the debacle (ongoing) in the US, governments will do everything in their power going forward to ensure that this kind of erosion in wealth/purchasing power does not occur.

Your arguments about immigration and housing I largely concur with. One note: If one looks at more established economies (older economies such as Europe), extended families may also take flight with boomers taking care of their elderly parents in their homes when the kids leave or even the boomers getting sandwiched taking care of kids and their parents. I agree this may leave more supply of condos but my point is that as we age and the boomers cannot afford to retire it is highly conceivable that the extended family as exists in new immigrants for financial reasons and in older societies for reasons that generations live together may in fact occur in Canada. Remains to be seen.

My point again is that there are always factors that occur which even the most rational of arguments such as you make are omitted in the thesis and result in unexpected results. That said, it is not a reason to not attempt to provide a rational cohesive argument which you have eloquently put forward.
 
From Remaxcondosplus: They put out a very useful monhly report. I follow this and have found it useful for years now.Latest report:

October/November Market Report 2010
Posted on October 15, 2010 by admin
SALES COMMENTARY:

September sales on TREB were 6300 units – up slightly from August but down 23% from September a year ago. It appears that sales have reached a plateau at just over 6,000 units per month. Usually October sales are higher than September. This year, preliminary October numbers are tracking for a 5% increase, which confirms that market activity bottomed out in August. We would describe this as a ‘normal’ fall market.

Looking at the downtown condo market, sales were off by just 15% from September of last year, suggesting that the condo market is outperforming the overall market. While sales are steady, it is the oversupply of condo listings which has held prices down. While interest rates for fixed rate mortgages are being lowered, this will have little impact on the market. Looking forward, we do not see any significant drop in prices. Some buildings have experienced price corrections of as much as 10% and others have had no drop in prices from the peak of the market in April. (Ignore reported year over year average price changes which are irrelevant and which are technically meaningless). Overall, the condo market is down 5%. In terms of new condo developments, we believe that prices will not go much higher than $600 per sf. The problem is not with costs but with rental rates that are too low! In Chicago, for example, two bedroom units rent for $3000 versus $2100 in Toronto. You can buy condo units in Chicago at $350 per sf – down from $500 at the peak. While we have always maintained that condos don’t move across borders, investors do! The new condo market is now dominated by investors. Need we say more?

This month we looked at sales on the Etobicoke waterfront which has the lowest waterfront prices – yes lower than Port Credit and Oakville. The building we selected was Grenadier Landing, more than 8 years old with very reasonable condo fees – about 55 cents per sf per month which includes all utilities except cable. The three units we tracked all had lake views. The first unit was a one bedroom plus den with parking, locker, and large balcony. It sold in May of this year for $315,000 and in September of ’09 for $310,000. The second unit, also a one bedroom plus den with parking, locker and balcony sold in February of this year for $310,000 and a year earlier (at the bottom of the last price correction) for $272,000. Going from trough to price peak produced an annual increase of 14%. The third unit, slightly smaller, was a one bedroom with parking, locker, and balcony but classified as a Penthouse. It sold for $305,000 also in February of this year. These sales confirm an average price of $450 per sf (including parking) and that prices are basically unchanged in the last twelve months.

RENTAL COMMENTARY:

As expected, the number of rental units leased downtown was lower in September: 26 studios, 273 one bedroom units, 144 two bedroom units, and 6 three bedroom units. This is a 15% drop from August due to seasonality. At the same time, rental prices increased slightly. Studios moved to $1300; whereas one bedroom units ranged from $1400 without parking to $1650 with a den and parking. Two bedroom units ranged from $2000 to $2250 for a den and parking. Six three bedroom units were leased at an average of $4000 per month. The most telling sign that the rental market is tightening is the ‘days on market’ to lease. For studios, it was 11 days; for one and two bedroom units it was 15. In fact units without parking rent 5 days faster!

Note the following: He believes Prices will not go down much but cannot increase beyond the $600/sq. ft. price level. I believe his point about investors must be taken very seriously. If prices will not increase, therefore expect no price appreciation, and investors can get better yield in Chicago, the international investor will consider this in his decision. Back to fundamentals

Regarding the rentals: the rental tightening is good for investors as evidenced by shorter time on the market and slight increase in price. However, we are expecting alot more product to hit now as condos are finished and that I believe will put pressure on rents.

I guess I have to defer to Condo George and accept that things are not deteriorating as fast as I feared, at least not so far but based on the lack of price increase in this report I don't know how there are any but very few select projects that would make economic sense at these levels. I have long maintained that at $400/sq. ft makes sense and at $500 condo investing is marginal at best (even questionable). I just don't get $600/sq. ft. as an investor.
 
Last edited:
This month (Oct. 2010) has five Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays, all in one month; that’s 5 weekends; it happens once every 823 years. Lets see how that wind will play out for October numbers.
 
I assume you are referring to the fact that with 1 less weekend, the numbers would have been that much worse.

I still think the telling sign is that despite the statements that listings are down and holding prices from falling, this I believe is a perverse statement. New listings from the TREB website were 12000. Sales 6000. So inspite of the fact that listings are down, unless I am misinterpreting, we are still adding 6000 more listings than sales this month alone. I.E. More listings coming to the market which should if anything add price pressure in the approaching near term.
 
guava.ca

I prefer to look at the basic stats. Check out the chart on http://guava.ca/indicators.html entitled 'Toronto Median Price'.

Median price paints the clearest picture of the market in my opinion and I believe most educated observers would agree. Here we find that the Toronto Median Price for September registered the smallest increase from August in dollar and percentage terms in 7 years! Stated differently, September 2010 was the worst performing September for prices in SEVEN YEARS!

Agents and industry 'experts' can manipulate and gerrymander figures better than anyone (blame the HST/GST/LTT/TTC/LSD!) but the fact remains that the Toronto housing market is clearly headed for a big correction as more and more investor (I use that term loosely) driven buildings break ground or open their sales centres and cranes litter the skyline like dandelions.

I believe that Maestro sums it up best in another thread:

The current crop of towers still represents an extraordinary amount of speculation in the worldwide real estate market. It's likely once Toronto as the safe haven implodes that we will see a return of more modest heights from which this city was built. It takes a lot of hype to pull off a 400 unit highrise.

Toronto as the safe haven is the best description of our market that I've heard.
 
Last edited:
This month (Oct. 2010) has five Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays, all in one month; that’s 5 weekends; it happens once every 823 years. Lets see how that wind will play out for October numbers.

Uh ... are you sure about that? I don't mean to nitpick, but it happened in October 2004. In fact, on average, it happens one month a year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2004
 
I am an immigrant so probably can represent a group of them to compare the Chicago market vs. Toronto's - a couple of points below:

1. It is not easy at all immigrate to U.S. comparing to countries like Canada. If I would consider immigrate to foreign country today, Canada, Australia, New Zealand would be the top three since not only I will consider investment and profit yields but also if the country would suit me to live for future. I do not know New Zealand's housing market but if you take a look at Australia's, the housing market experienced almost the same topics here...bubbles, crash, price surge...again surged in 2010. So despite of the similar patten caused by global economic trend ie 2009 downward, it is clear countries with active list of taking certain volume of immigrants, the housing demand determines the market staying high.

2. Time has already proven the U.S. economic structure is much risky than Canada's. As a non-expert and foreign investor, will you take the risk by dumping your $s in Chicago's market, even though it is $350 per sq. feet and $500 per sq. feet in Toronto? And just for illustration purpose for instance, will you invest Citibank after it dropped to $2 per share taking the risk and hoping the greater return or will you invest BMO, RBC...any bank shares in Canada and get a steady return maybe over a longer term? I am pretty sure a lot of people would stand on a more conservative side.

As same as investing in stock market, as though a large group of people analyzing various stats. graphs. macro, micro economic. industry, performance of the business and much much more, sometimes taking a view beyond your buried head, maybe an accurate forecast of what majority people really think about the market and what they will do will make a real difference.

By having said the above I am not against the scientific analysis and what people believe here - most likely a balanced to bear market ahead. I just want to remind, people's minds play a big factor in the market. Inventory is at a history high, demand is still here, Buyers vs. Sellers who have the stronger minds will probably eventually win.
 
With 5yr fixed rate as low as 3.19% and variable at Prime - 0.9%, expect sales activity to start picking up again.
 
I just hope all those people buying with those interest rates are allowing for increases in the future. I think we have probably borrowed most of the available future demand already so if those buying are doing so based on affordability at these rates, I hope they are going to forward think a bit more. I just do not believe that prices will increase even with these interest rates and that in fact there may be a double whammy effect down the road as interest rates rise, houses become less affordable and drop possilby in value as they become more expensive to carry.
 
from Sunday's G&M ... some really scary numbers that need to be re-emphasized
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...dary-to-pause-or-not-to-pause/article1760941/

Mark Carney's rate-hike quandary: To pause or not to pause
Jeremy Torobin
Ottawa— From Monday's Globe and Mail
Published Sunday, Oct. 17, 2010 6:57PM EDT
Last updated Sunday, Oct. 17, 2010 9:13PM EDT


Mark Carney must feel like a parent trying to instill wise spending habits in a carefree kid heading off to university: all he can do is give his best advice and hope it sinks in.

That’s a rough approximation of the tricky position the Bank of Canada governor finds himself in as he prepares to release his latest interest-rate decision on Tuesday.

The central banker is widely expected to suspend his tightening campaign after three straight increases, holding the benchmark overnight rate at a still-very low 1 per cent. On Wednesday, he’ll follow that up by producing a revised outlook for the Canadian economy, spelling out his analysis of why he (in all likelihood) believes there are too many unknowns right now to make a move.

The new figures, some of which will be in his Tuesday statement on rates, will include Mr. Carney’s latest thinking on when the recession-era slack in the economy will finally be gone. If the governor says that excess capacity is going to linger into 2012, that would confirm what financial markets are already predicting: that the cost of borrowing could stay put for several months.

But a prolonged period without rate hikes also creates a problem: it could lure households that shouldn’t borrow more into going deeper into debt.

Mr. Carney last month sharpened his warnings against using supercheap credit to pile up debt that won’t be affordable as rates return to more normal levels, using a speech and press conference in Windsor, Ont., to highlight that debt in Canada is at a record 146 per cent of disposable income and households, on average, have spent more than they’re worth for the past nine years.

He also lamented that an already slower economy could stay weak as some borrowers pull back. That would make it that much harder to raise rates, even as policy makers fret that as long as rates are low, the most overstretched Canadians may not get that they should scale back too.

"He’s making a valiant effort at conveying a very complex message,’’ said Chris Ragan, a McGill University professor who is leading the C.D. Howe Institute's research on monetary policy. ``He’s right to be giving both sides of the story: There are people out there for whom interest-rate increases will be a problem because they’ve got too much debt; at the same time there are others who are being excessively prudent, shall we say, and what they’d like is for them to go out and borrow more to keep the economy going.’’

Mr. Ragan, in fact, was in the hike camp late last week when C.D. Howe’s Monetary Policy Council voted 5-4 in favour of recommending a fourth straight increase, arguing there is still too much stimulus in the economy, regardless of the sharp slowdown of the past few months and the sputtering recovery in Canada’s main export market.

But most analysts say a pause, and possibly a long one, is in the cards.

After all, the economy shrank in July for the first time in almost a year and had a net job loss in September, and the most recent inflation readings came in well back of the central bank’s 2-per-cent target.

Perhaps the biggest driver of a pause is the mounting evidence that the U.S. Federal Reserve will act to boost the flagging U.S. economy, taking steps that would keep the American dollar down and send investors who want higher yields to currencies like the loonie.

A stronger Canadian currency brings advantages, like helping companies buy state-of-the-art foreign machinery that will boost their productivity. Still, should the loonie gain too much against the greenback too quickly, it could pour more cold water on the economy, especially the manufacturing sector. Already, Mr. Carney has said his new growth outlook for the second half of 2010 will be lower than his July forecast.

Overseas investors are attracted to the loonie in part because Canadian rates are higher than in the U.S., where the Fed’s main rate is still close to zero. As Mr. Carney said last month, there are limits to how much the two rates can diverge. So until the Fed’s ``quantitative easing’’ plans and their effects become clearer, the prospect of them constitutes another big question mark in what Mr. Carney has repeatedly called an unusually uncertain environment.

``When you don’t know, you don’t take chances,’’ said Benjamin Tal, deputy chief economist at CIBC World Markets. ``Given the uncertainty, they could give us a very good hint that they’re not going to move for a while.’’

However, should the central bank give such a signal, `Mark Carney: Financial Adviser’ will likely make another appearance this week too, reinforcing that as soon as conditions warrant, he will start hiking interest rates again.
 
from Sunday's G&M ... some really scary numbers that need to be re-emphasized
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...dary-to-pause-or-not-to-pause/article1760941/

Mr. Carney last month sharpened his warnings against using supercheap credit to pile up debt that won’t be affordable as rates return to more normal levels, using a speech and press conference in Windsor, Ont., to highlight that debt in Canada is at a record 146 per cent of disposable income and households, on average, have spent more than they’re worth for the past nine years.

CDR: You are clearly a sophisticated individual financially as are most I believe on this forum on this topic. My concern is the less sophisticated,borderline financially literate individuals who unfortunately make up I believe a significant portion of the population. I think that after witnessing a brief real estate correction from 2008 to 2009 and quick recovery, and not the rapid descent that some have been predicting (I appreciate some have pointed out they feel that the rate of drop already is extreme and underappreciated), that these individuals will take this as a green light that this is the "new reality". As the article points out, supercheap credit can't last forever.
 
Interested:

While X2's comments are anecdotal and sincere they belie basic investment principals. I respect his position that immigrants are rather indiscriminately buying condo units in Toronto as a safe haven with no regard for return but sound minds would agree that there must be a point where a reasonable return on capital is expected. To put it in equity markets analogy, there are 100 bids at $350-$400 psf for condo units (roughly equates to a 5%-6% yield) but only 2 or 3 bids at $550. All it takes is those $550 bidders to skip town (which the Asians have done in Vancouver multiple times and everybody did in Toronto in 1989) and the price settles back to its natural level. It will happen of course the question is what will precipitate it. The situation is loosely analogous to Las Vegas or Miami in 2005 when I recall seeing big stars lending their names to condo projects in the desert that they would of course never set foot in. The difference of course is that in Toronto developers typically sell 70% of their units prior to construction whereas the number was significantly smaller in the US. However, when a massive chunk of those sale are to foreign investor syndicates with little to no ties to the local market then what really is anchoring them to the purchase aside from a deposit? Yes Condo George, I know the Maple Leafs are 4-0 this year and that obviously increases demand to live above a hockey stadium, :D

To Realtor Ric:

A friend of mine bought a home around 2003 with a then 5 year fixed mortgage rate of about 3.30%. I recall it vividly. Since then housing prices have probably increased 40%-50%. Inflation cannot explain the rise nor can lower interest rates obviously. Although he never rented his home I can assure you that rents have barely budged in that time. How you would characterize the jump in prices sir?
 
Last edited:
CN Tower,
I agree with your posting. I agree there will be a natural level for prices. However, I do not believe it will be back to 2000 level as is the case in Chicago.
As you correctly point out and I have referred to in the past, I do not believe that $350 is replacement cost in Chicago and I am quite sure it is not in downtown Toronto. Besides, unless we are in a similar meltdown of the real estate market in Toronto as occured in many parts of the US (Remember as you point out: 15 to 25% downpayments here and no walkaway mortgages vs. minimal downpayments and buildings built on spec vs. the 70% presales here before construction) the price adjustment should not fall below replacement cost and a reasonable developer profit.

Even if the developer profit is squeezed out, that will be temporary until the new supply disappears and then prices will again reflect that or no one will build. I appreciate temporary could well be 2 to 3 years. But then prices would rise again unless there is no end user demand.

As well, Jamie Johnson who writes the Remax posting that I put up a few days ago commented that the current condo market is virtually 100% investor driven and investors presumably at some point will act with the rationality you put forth in your post.

Finally, your point about foreign money is bang on. I appreciate X2's point and think it is a valid one. However, I still believe that a Chinese or other investor looking at Canada must be asking the simple question now as follows: I can't make money renting out at $600/sq. ft (nor at $500 in my view either and borderline questionable at $400 to $450/sq.ft.) why would I invest in Toronto if prices no longer can escalate and are in fact dropping. It makes a stable investment inherently unstable unless there is C$ currency appreciation (remember Yuan tied to the USD) to offset the price decrease in R/E.
So, I agree with your conclusion that X2's point is sincere however not sustainable going forward unless there is a change in some of these parameters.
 

Back
Top