Vancouver's Real Estate Market

[Acura604]

Originally Posted by Slifer

Damn, how much is that house Acura604 if you don't mind me asking?

listed for $1,399,000

got it for $1,292,500

[Slifer]

Where is it located?

[Eff-1]

Don't forget GST!

[Acura604]

Originally Posted by Eff-1

Don't forget GST!

got it included into the price.

also.. negotiated realtors commissions..

my realtor gave me back $5k, and the sellers realtor gave me back $2500.

[quasi]

Originally Posted by Acura604

got it included into the price.

also.. negotiated realtors commissions..

my realtor gave me back $5k, and the sellers realtor gave me back $2500.

Damm, I should have got you to negotiate for me I paid just slightly under ask and nobody kicking me anything back.

[xxxrsxxx]

.

[CRS]

Originally Posted by Slifer

Where is it located?

Surrey

[gawesome]

Including GST into the price of a brand new home is my new fav tactic when it comes to writing offers for new builds. Considering an average price of a brand new single detached home is around 2 mil in east van and the fact that you have bargaining power over the listing price, you might as well throw in GST so you don't have to budget GST into the closing costs. Just get the builder to pay for it if they really want to close the deal since brand new homes aren't flying off the shelf these days.

In the grand scheme of the builder's construction business (if they're building a lot of homes in the lower mainland), I think it should be peanuts on their end to absorb the GST considering the average cost of construction for a residential home is around 600k now?

[Ludepower]

Does anyone know where 4444 went? He was constantly warning us of a crash and to move out of vancouver to "better" cities.

Originally Posted by 4444

All those trying to make money in real estate, buying with 5% down are the ones that will lose when prices go down, you are looking for your dream home and have time on your hands. even if prices do slowly continue to rise, so what, you can buy in a year at 1 or 2% more in value... given you're not scrambling to get your down payment together, that shouldn't matter to you.

My friend did exactly what 4444 said you shouldnt do in 2014. His dt condo has doubled up with a measly 5% downpayment since then.

This dude was ruthless and active during the beginning days of this thread. I'm not going to lie I actually believed him for awhile but now wish I've gotten into the real estate ladder sooner.

[hud 91gt]

He would still be preaching. I’d say we’re still at risk of a worldwide crash if anything. If you noticed the pricing, things were starting to fall until interest rates dropped hard. The market is stabilizing.... but we’re at record low interest rates again. If we only had a crystal ball ☹️

[Great68]

I think there was another real estate thread a few years before this one (2009-2010?), you'll probably find comments by me in there saying "It's gotta crash, and that's when I'll buy".

I'm glad I didn't listen to myself, or I'd still be waiting. And now Hindsight's 20/20, I look back and wish I got in with the Zero down 40 year amortizations back in '08, when houses were a lot cheaper.
I thought anyone doing that was taking crazy risk. I just started my new job/career out of school with no substantial savings really in the bank yet just couldn't fathom taking that on. If only I had a time machine.

[GGnoRE]

Just because things turned out this way, it doesn't mean that 4444's risk management was wrong. Equity markets roughly doubled since 2014 (SP500 in CAD return) so as long as you were invested in something, you probably wouldn't be in terrible spot right now either. Granted, buying a home gives retail investors tremendous amount of financial leverage that you otherwise wouldn't have access too. And if i remember correctly, 4444 had a lot of real estate exposure himself too; he just didn't agree with people overstretching themselves to become a homeowner or to buy multiple investment properties.

[Hondaracer]

The thing is, that thinking is for savvy investors, people with enough money to effectively diversify.

A lot of people now are in a similar position our parents, and in some cases, their parents got into, where your home, the place you bought to sleep in at night, turned out to be the best investment you ever made.

[underscore]

It's a risk either way. If things drop then those who bought in as early as they could get screwed and those who wait benefit. If things don't drop then those who bought in as early as they could benefit and those who waited are screwed.

[GGnoRE]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

The thing is, that thinking is for savvy investors, people with enough money to effectively diversify.

A lot of people now are in a similar position our parents, and in some cases, their parents got into, where your home, the place you bought to sleep in at night, turned out to be the best investment you ever made.

I don't disagree with you what you wrote and its already been mentioned multiple times about other psychological benefits to being a homeowner that explains some of the disproportionate risk appetite in real estate. But if you recall at the hottest peak of the market, there were definitely some excessive risk-taking, often times for pure greed, and while it would've paid off in the end this time, on a risk-adjusted basis, its debatable whether that's a strategy that you would want to repeat multiple times. In the end, buying a property that you can comfortably afford without trying to time the market is probably the sweet spot.

[Ludepower]

Originally Posted by GGnoRE

Just because things turned out this way, it doesn't mean that 4444's risk management was wrong. Equity markets roughly doubled since 2014 (SP500 in CAD return) so as long as you were invested in something, you probably wouldn't be in terrible spot right now either. Granted, buying a home gives retail investors tremendous amount of financial leverage that you otherwise wouldn't have access too. And if i remember correctly, 4444 had a lot of real estate exposure himself too; he just didn't agree with people overstretching themselves to become a homeowner or to buy multiple investment properties.

4444 had a Garth Turner like attitude by constantly spamming fear for first time buyers like myself.

The 5%... 30k downpayment my friend purchase on a 375k DT condo is worth 800k. That's 400k (1000%) hes up. Better than any returns on stock investment.

This wasnt the mindset when buying his first home. Just wanted to start building his roots and paying someone else's mortgage.

[westopher]

It’s not a return though unless you sell it and leave the market, or have a second one. It’s money saved if you were to wait and purchase and gives you a massive line of credit if you need it, but it’s not like it’s of any value if you don’t get creative with it.

[GGnoRE]

Originally Posted by Ludepower

4444 had a Garth Turner like attitude by constantly spamming fear for first time buyers like myself.

The 5%... 30k downpayment my friend purchase on a 375k DT condo is worth 800k. That's 400k (1000%) hes up. Better than any returns on stock investment.

This wasnt the mindset when buying his first home. Just wanted to start building his roots and paying someone else's mortgage.

I hear you Lude. If 375K purchase price on 5% downpayment was reasonably within your friend's financial means, then your friend did the right thing at that time by pulling the trigger instead of trying to time the market by waiting for a 'crash'. But if your financial solvency is predicated on your real estate assets continuing to appreciate, which usually only applies to marginal speculators and not first-timers like your friend, then it is still a big gamble and a single outcome path doesn't really demonstrate that it was a prudent investment decision.

[highfive]

It's hindsight. Hell, the market could've tank and your friend lose his entire equity in it too.

Just because it hasn't happened or happened yet, doesn't mean anyone is specifically wrong. The poster before is right, it's only yours when you sell it and have the money in the bank.

[Ludepower]

It is money in the bank though. Even the bank says so by letting you take out a big HELOC from your gains.

He can sell his DT condo in a heartbeat and rent and invest the 400k into the stock market. He can leverage his place and upgrade into a bigger home or stay put and HELOC a second rental property. Or move out of BC and buy a home cash money and be mortgage free.

All these options are available to him, our parents and many others who bought early.

What you guys call papers gains are problems I would love to have.

[Hondaracer]

It’s equity. And a roof over your head. This is going back to the basics of this thread but it’s a tangible asset. I still know of people who think the stock market is a fools game etc. Investments aren’t secure.

I think if you owned prior to 2017 or so you will be fine going forward. It’s likely your asset will never be worth less than it was when you purchased. Just looking at basic supply and demand and how sparcley populated the greater Vancouver area is compared to most cities I think it’s a pretty safe bet to think values will only go up and people will always want to live here not withstanding “the big one” and even then maybe when Richmond is gone Vancouver will be worth even more?

Everything in hindsight

[westopher]

Originally Posted by Ludepower

It is money in the bank though. Even the bank says so by letting you take out a big HELOC from your gains.

He can sell his DT condo in a heartbeat and rent and invest the 400k into the stock market. He can leverage his place and upgrade into a bigger home or stay put and HELOC a second rental property. Or move out of BC and buy a home cash money and be mortgage free.

All these options are available to him, our parents and many others who bought early.

What you guys call papers gains are problems I would love to have.

I’m not disagreeing with most of what you said, but the upgrade part is the worst of it.
Ok so he sells his 400k purchase for 700k and has 300k in the bank. Now he has a 300k down payment to upgrade to a 1m place that would have been 600k when he bought his 400k place effectively costing him 150k more than if he were to have purchased that originally. My numbers are an approximation based on a 50k original down payment but you get the idea. It’s a negative proposition for those upgrading. The big winners are those who are downgrading.
As I said, in most instances those who were first time home buyers that got into the entry level market, the increase in value is a negative other than using it as leverage to invest elsewhere.
As usual, the younger generation that wants to live in a city with job prospects to actually afford this, gets fucked by the increases while the older generation profits. There has to be a breaking point as the generation behind us has no chance.

[lowside67]

Originally Posted by westopher

\As usual, the younger generation that wants to live in a city with job prospects to actually afford this, gets fucked by the increases while the older generation profits. There has to be a breaking point as the generation behind us has no chance.

The only saving grace is that on average, the older generation has accumulated so much wealth that even by virtue of owning an average house, they are likely to leave something to their kids.

This does no favours to those who that's not true, and it's particularly tough in Western culture where it is not often that wealth is passed down until death. (ie if my parents pass away in their 80s and I am already 60, then the money is pretty incremental at that point whereas if I got less money when I was 40, that would make a bigger difference).

-Mark

[Ludepower]

Originally Posted by westopher

I’m not disagreeing with most of what you said, but the upgrade part is the worst of it.
Ok so he sells his 400k purchase for 700k and has 300k in the bank. Now he has a 300k down payment to upgrade to a 1m place that would have been 600k when he bought his 400k place effectively costing him 150k more than if he were to have purchased that originally. My numbers are an approximation based on a 50k original down payment but you get the idea. It’s a negative proposition for those upgrading. The big winners are those who are downgrading.
As I said, in most instances those who were first time home buyers that got into the entry level market, the increase in value is a negative other than using it as leverage to invest elsewhere.
As usual, the younger generation that wants to live in a city with job prospects to actually afford this, gets fucked by the increases while the older generation profits. There has to be a breaking point as the generation behind us has no chance.

Fair point how your still stuck in the rat race if you need a bigger place.

I still fail to see the alternatives. He was only able to afford a 1 bedroom with 30k down and that quickly appreciated to 400k.

That 400k is his new downpayment towards a townhouse. How else would he have been able to climb the property ladder. The equity hes built doesnt disappear. Assuming real estate doesnt crash (highly unlikely in a desirable city like vancouver) he can sell and cash out anytime he wants.

The renter in the same timeline now has a massive hill to climb with runaway real estate prices if he/she were to finally enter the market.

[westopher]

I’m not suggesting alternatives. I think purchasing was a great move for him, and myself alike at that time.
I’m just saying that to think of it as an investment is a bit of a cloudy view. It’s a place to live, and should be treated as such as until you have two of them, that’s really what it should be viewed as.
400k with a 700k mortgage is a shittier proposition than 50k with a 600k mortgage when you want to talk about money in to your bank account and money out.
Again, I’m not saying it’s the wrong move, I’m not saying there’s a better alternative. I’m saying the value increase in real estate is still financially damaging people that believe it’s helping them.
I’m saying the same thing over and over again I know, just trying to clarify my opinions on the matter.