2697 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Exactly. Victoria had higher housing prices, lower wages, fewer employment opportunities, and a higher cost of living for as long as some people can remember.

We tend to forget that Victoria has always had some of the most expensive real estate in the country and this is not just a recent phenomenon. In the most recent run-up in values the old folks were telling us they had seen this before, a few times even. Newcomers were convinced we were in a bubble and wouldn't accept the reality that we'd skyrocket then plateau for an extended period but that's exactly what happened just as the old folks said it would. Why? Because there's demand for our real estate in good times and in bad and there's always money to go around in a region that has more wealth than what's created locally.

[VicHockeyFan]

Why? Because there's demand for our real estate in good times and in bad and there's always money to go around in a region that has more wealth than what's created locally.

 

Yup, that's it right there.  People with money move here when they retire.  Why wouldn't they?  Make your money in Calgary or Toronto, move here when you are done.

[MarkoJ]

In March, 24 properties sold over $1,000,000 and 14 were purchased by out of town buyers.  Don't know if this affects the market to a great degree of significance but  there is money coming in. 

[Mike K.]

Well one thing is for sure, at least $14 million came into the market that wasn't there a month ago. And whether you see it as such or not, those 14 buyers have "invested" that money into this region. without them, prices here would be lower, tax coffers would be smaller and local businesses wouldn't be selling as many luxury or expensive goods.

In March I wonder how much total foreign or out-of-town investment went into the Halifax economy? Or Winnipeg's, London's, Quebec City's, etc? As for Victoria, at least $14 million in investment for a region that has no industry and is geographically challenged ain't bad. And of course there were likely many millions more invested by buyers from out of town who purchased homes below the one million dollar mark.

[http]

Well one thing is for sure, at least $14 million came into the market that wasn't there a month ago. And whether you see it as such or not, those 14 buyers have "invested" that money into this region. without them, prices here would be lower, tax coffers would be smaller and local businesses wouldn't be selling as many luxury or expensive goods.

 

I'm not following you on this.  Where do the previous owners of those 14 properties go to?  Do ALL of them remain in Victoria region?

[Mike K.]

For all we know those 14 sellers bought even more expensive real-estate locally. We just don't know. But what we do know is 14 people from outside of the city bought 14 properties valued at $1,000,000+ last month and by doing so gave this region a big show of confidence.

 

Marko, do we have figures for the remainder of sales in March that show how many property purchases were by out of town buyers?

[MarkoJ]

For all we know those 14 sellers bought even more expensive real-estate locally. We just don't know. But what we do know is 14 people from outside of the city bought 14 properties valued at $1,000,000+ last month and by doing so gave this region a big show of confidence.

 

Marko, do we have figures for the remainder of sales in March that show how many property purchases were by out of town buyers?

 

Yikes, would have to go through all 575 sales manually to get accurate numbers for a variety of reasons.

 

Calgary was 22, Edmonton 7, Vancouver 22, etc., just to name a few buyer cities represented in March.

[Mike K.]

Gotcha. I thought perhaps there was a readily available metric.

[MarkoJ]

Gotcha. I thought perhaps there was a readily available metric.

 

There is an input called "Buyer City," and in theory if I searched Victoria and subtracted that from the amount of total sales it would give us the number of out of town buyers.  Problem is on occasion it isn't filled in or buyer city will be Sooke or Saanichton.  

[VicHockeyFan]

Yikes, would have to go through all 575 sales manually 

 

Ya, so?   What are we paying you for, anyway?  

[Mike K.]

There is an input called "Buyer City," and in theory if I searched Victoria and subtracted that from the amount of total sales it would give us the number of out of town buyers. Problem is on occasion it isn't filled in or buyer city will be Sooke or Saanichton.

Ah gotcha.

[14 West]

There is a big difference between buying a house with a mortgage and wealth. Unless those were cash buyers they didn't bring wealth to the region, they simply took on debt, which actually detracts from spending at local establishments, not enhances it. Furthermore, what makes you think Victoria is so special? There are plenty of million dollar homes all over the Island, Metro Vancouver and the interior. I would guess the same proportion of those were bought by people who did not already live there. Capital, and mortgage debt ebbs and flows across the province and country quite easily, as Victoria was made yesterday I don't think this is anything new. I'm sure that for every person that moves here one get's fed up and moves away never to return. 

Finally, I don't think it is accurate to attribute much of anything to a few million dollar sales when the majority of homes are either condos or middle class shacks that have nothing to do with whether rich people (or people who like to take on a lot of debt) decide to buy here. Take a look at housing prices in Seattle, Portland, San Fran or the LA to San Diego corridor - Plenty of rich folk there, WAY more wealth than here, yet average homes range from half to similar. As evidenced in the housing crash down there, what really matters is what is occurring around the median values, and I would suspect you would find as the demographic ages, a lot of the younger types are either renting and not buying, or moving away in search of greener pastures. Rich people can weather storms, and exist in their own little world to some degree.

[Mike K.]

Yes, there are many homes worth a lot of money in this province. But why would non-locals buying in Victoria not be considered special? It's special in any jurisdiction in the world. Should Victoria shun or disregard non-local buyers? The VREB's survey result suggest 40% of sales are to non-locals. That's 400 homes being sold to non-locals for every 1,000 sales. That's huge and brings a lot of wealth to this region.

 

Our population is growing by 3,000 to 4,000 annually. If we lost one person for every person who moved here our population growth would be stagnant.

 

And you're right, many youth do leave here in search of greener pastures. Many youth can't make it here, that's for sure. And you're also right that wealthy people can weather economic storms relatively well. We're lucky that many of them are choosing to move here and buy our real-estate.

[MarkoJ]

Monday, April 7, 2014 8:00am

 

MTD April
2014 2013
Net Unconditional Sales: 108 615
New Listings: 338 1,408
Active Listings: 4,087 4,585

Please Note
Left Column: stats so far this month
Right Column: stats for the entire month from last year

[MarkoJ]

Monday, April 14, 2014 8:00am

MTD April
2014 2013
Net Unconditional Sales: 278 615
New Listings: 695 1,408
Active Listings: 4,170 4,585

Please Note
Left Column: stats so far this month
Right Column: stats for the entire month from last year

[MarkoJ]

Tuesday, April 22, 2014 8:50am

MTD April
2014 2013
Net Unconditional Sales: 436 615
New Listings: 1,073 1,408
Active Listings: 4,289 4,585

Please Note
Left Column: stats so far this month
Right Column: stats for the entire month from last year

[James Bay walker]

Our population is growing by 3,000 to 4,000 annually. If we lost one person for every person who moved here our population growth would be stagnant.

 

I think growth with the present calibre of government we're enjoying at all three (four?) levels leads to the classic 'frog in a pan of water warming on the stovetop' syndrome (slow but steady overcrowding leading to disharmony, disease and death).

 

'Stagnating' as you term it is sustainable (so is a community oriented perspective with the long view in mind), as we ought not need to 'grow' to thrive, (else something's very, very wrong with our society imo).

 

jbw

[Mike K.]

We're growing by less than 1% per annum which makes us one of the slowest growing cities in the developed world. Disease, disharmony and death are about the last things we should be concerning ourselves with on the south Island.

[Nparker]

We also have an older population per capita and a high cost of living that relatively few younger people can afford. Just what does this mean for the region 25 or 50 years from now?

[dasmo]

It's not that dramatic...

"In 2011, the percentage of the population aged 65 and over in Victoria was 18.4%, compared with a national percentage of 14.8%. The percentage of the working age population (15 to 64) was 68.5% and the percentage of children aged 0 to 14 was 13.1%. In comparison, the national percentages were 68.5% for the population aged 15 to 64 and 16.7% for the population aged 0 to 14."