Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 480

Thread: House Prices - due to tumble?

  1. #101
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    342

    Default

    Edmonton and Calgary, specifically Edmonton still have very good affordability measures http://www.rbc.com/newsroom/pdf/HA-0827-2013.pdf

    Housing prices have some room to go up, and will go up. Prices will rise a lot more in Calgary though, Edmonton's will go up but in a more gradual way.

  2. #102
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Alberta Avenue, Boyle Street, McCauley, San Tan Valley
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Vacancy rates are razor thin - it's just an all round healthy market.

  3. #103
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,181

    Default

    Blatchford will be well served by LRT, but there are much nicer inner city neighborhoods in much better locations, served by transit with good housing stock
    Parkdale

  4. #104
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    ^^ I wouldn't exactly call that healthy. It's great if you have been been investing in real estate, neutral if you are a homeowner with no other real estate investments and terrible if you are renting. At least here in Alberta the prices are more locally supported by the hot labor market and resulting population influx and less driven by speculation like Toronto or Vancouver.

    ^ It remains to be seen how nice Blatchford will end up being, but the plans look pretty good. I'm not sure if you could get a "much better location" either - in addition to having LRT it is no further from downtown than Parkdale or Inglewood, and it is right on Yellowhead if you want to drive somewhere.

  5. #105
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,181

    Default

    ^Much farther away from the river valley, surrounded by light & medium insdustrial & heavy commercial, adjacent to a rail line.. I'd contest that Inglewood and Parkdale are much nicer locations.

    We'll see how the development goes I suppose, but I see no reason to clamour to it at this point
    Parkdale

  6. #106
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    4,588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Downtown View Post
    Lots of affordable stock in the inner city in neighborhoods that are on the upswing.

    There's detached housing ranging from $150,000 tear downs - $250,000 solid houses that are usable, but have outdated finishes - all the way up to $500,000 infills. Whatever happened to buying and add value over time? It feels like an endangered species.
    Oh man, my area in Strathcona has knock downs at $350,000 and infills at $850,000+.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  7. #107
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Alberta Avenue, Boyle Street, McCauley, San Tan Valley
    Posts
    755

    Default

    ^^^
    Exactly.

    Should first time homebuyers feel entitled to be in a desireable area like Strathcona simply because they like it, but cannot afford it - then categorically claim that the whole market is "unaffordable" when that's not precisely true?

    Some people simply believe they are too good for some areas, even though that is what they are budgeted for. There's a difference between "unaffordability" and being just plain picky without the equity to back that up. I'll call that voluntary unaffordability.

    One of my single family homes in the inner city I purchased in fall of 2012 costs me $888/month (mortgage + taxes). It was renovated and move in ready - 10 minute walk to 2 LRT stations, 20 minute walk to the Downtown Core, had an illegal exsisting suite which could cover the mortgage. Hardly the poster child of unaffordability.

    Anyway I am way off topic (again) - sorry.

  8. #108
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Alberta Avenue, Boyle Street, McCauley, San Tan Valley
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    ^^ I wouldn't exactly call that healthy. It's great if you have been been investing in real estate, neutral if you are a homeowner with no other real estate investments and terrible if you are renting.
    Agreed and I will admit I am looking at it from an investor's POV, sorry. However it does serve to contribute to the thread about the pricing in the city not tumbling within the near future, that's for sure.

  9. #109
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Downtown View Post
    ^^^
    Exactly.

    Should first time homebuyers feel entitled to be in a desireable area like Strathcona simply because they like it, but cannot afford it - then categorically claim that the whole market is "unaffordable" when that's not precisely true?

    Some people simply believe they are too good for some areas, even though that is what they are budgeted for. There's a difference between "unaffordability" and being just plain picky without the equity to back that up. I'll call that voluntary unaffordability.

    One of my single family homes in the inner city I purchased in fall of 2012 costs me $888/month (mortgage + taxes). It was renovated and move in ready - 10 minute walk to 2 LRT stations, 20 minute walk to the Downtown Core, had an illegal exsisting suite which could cover the mortgage. Hardly the poster child of unaffordability.

    Anyway I am way off topic (again) - sorry.
    Hardly the poster child for desirability either. Location, location, location my little wannabe property developer friend.

    First rule of real estate acquisition: Buy the worse property in the best area, not the best property in the worse.
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, itís not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

  10. #110
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Alberta Avenue, Boyle Street, McCauley, San Tan Valley
    Posts
    755

    Default

    My points were much less about desirability than they were about perceptions of afforability, my little wannabe Vancouverite.

  11. #111

    Default

    To Johnny! A tire kicker! An income that can buy a $400000+ house. And on two years of family income? Prices will not tumble even with negative nellies like this in the market!

  12. #112

    Default

    Edmonton has less than 4% unemployment(basically lowest localized market within the entire g8. On top of that we are posting 1% vacancy!! The banks are once again loose with their money and are quite ready to loan money again, especially compared to 5-3 years ago.

  13. #113
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    42,533

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Downtown View Post
    I guess until the price ranges and the products are released, it's all speculation, but I know you are privy to many things, Ian

    I'm very excited about Blatchford and I want to buy a townhouse as an investment, perhaps to even live in. I am budgeting $375,000-$400,000.
    Not privy to anything here, just an educated guess. I'd guess we see product in the 350-500k for townhouses.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  14. #114

    Default

    Blatchford is not going to be much different I build out compared to greisbach. Full build out is going to take 25years is my guess. Lrt servicing to this new development is behind the west line and also the southeast line. Adding 30 000 residents without proper planning to our road system, namely our yellowhead; we will see another mess just like 23ave, The demand for housing will not subside anytime soon(unless we see another nep or global recession, which brings me back to blatchford being a slower infill development that will keep house prices high for years to come

  15. #115
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    772

    Default BMO Predicts Alberta House prices to Surge

    The Bank is seeing provincial GDP growth well above the national average, and yet the metrics of affordability are still superior to other major markets. Employment and affordability is a great combination.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle17493280/

  16. #116
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Red Deer
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    ^I've periodically looked at the realtor.ca site to check out some inexpensive property. Last March, I bought a mobile home (1976 model - 14' by 70') for $18,000 in Red Deer (it was valued for between $23-24,000). There were a few others under $25,000 in RD and the surrounding areas. Plus there were a fair amount of places under $50,000 in Edmonton.

    Today, I checked it and there's very little, even under $75,000 from Edmonton to Calgary. In Edmonton, there's listed 10 mobile homes and 3 apartments starting at $45,700. In Winterburn, there's 4 mobile homes starting at $39,900 (there's a additional handyman special at $11,000 but I'm not counting it). In Spruce Grove, there's 6 mobile homes starting at $47,500. There's 1 mobile home in Morinville for $59,000.

    Last year, there were several places under $40,000 and now, nothing.

  17. #117

    Default

    The fundamentals of Alberta, with cost of borrowing; the bottom of the market is eroding quickly it has no choice.

    I bought in McCauley in 2010. Appreciation has been stagnant for me but how many 1700sq ft 2 story homes can be found for $200000? Given the extreme rough area I'm located in I'd be hard pressed to get $225. Any city in Alberta cannot justify theses rock bottom prices for long in my opinion.

    I believe Edmonton has some of the cheapest housing in Canada when a person factors in average wage/ income. 3.6 years of gross wage to buy an average home versus 4.9 years for Canada's average

    I'm waiting still for 2007 levels( I know it will never get frenzied like 06/07). I bought a home and at that point there was less then 100 single family homes in all of Edmonton under $325000

  18. #118
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,181

    Default

    ^ Lack of affordability in other central areas is what's driving the frenzy of activity in the Alberta Ave area at this time. People who only have $250-$300k to spend are realizing that their options are either a house in Mill Woods or the entry level areas outside the Henday, or a neighborhood like Alberta Ave or Inglewood.

    I can't see this trend reversing any time soon. When I bought by house in Parkdale in '04, a brand new (but plain) spec house was build next door and sold for $150k. It's now worth around $350. Which is still a pretty good deal for a newer house minutes to downtown with easy access to the Yellowhead, 75th and close to all ammenities (Walkscore 73).

    10 years ago I dealt with issues like you see in south McCauley. Now, not really at all.. the area has become desireable and lots of people are moving here. I just rented the Parkdale house to two professionals with a dog and they love it. So you need to give it time.. South McC. has some work to do.. but it will get there eventually. four years is nothing.. think long term and you'll see the rewards of being a pioneer in your neighborhood
    Parkdale

  19. #119

    Default

    ^ thanks for being positive I have a lot of faith and pride in Edmonton.

    On a side note inglewood has become pricey! No one wants a 700-900sq ft bungalow so tons of them are being demolished and making way for brand new duplexes. Not my fav but the neighbourhood is working as it should

  20. #120

    Default

    This thread is interesting, if I had listened to KCs OP and worried about a house price tumble, I wouldn't have put 35k down on a condo in 2010. Since then, its value has increased 100k, thanks to the magic of financial leverage, a return of almost 300 percent on my investment.

    I think with demographics and economy indications the way they are (I saw a stat that over 80 percent of canadas job growth was in Alberta recently), its important to be in on the housing market before you get priced out without of any hope of joining it. You just end up paying off other peoples mortgages then through steadily increasing rental rates.

  21. #121

    Default

    My partner and I make combined 200-300k a year. We work downtown and want something close to the core once we leave condo life. The only potential place I can see working for us getting a townhouse when Blatchford is built, hopefully for around 375-400k. Our priority is close to lrt, walking everywhere, tiny commute and within biking distance to river valley. Seeing people get 20 year mortgages on expensive properties blows my mind. I'd prefer not to be paying off a home forever and retire early. I'd like to pay cash for my house. Not interested in a renovation job or 700k infill.
    Last edited by Johnny199r; 16-03-2014 at 02:21 PM.

  22. #122

    Default

    ^ what about buying an old home that's solid. Rent it out in the meantime and renovate before moving in? I see u clearly pointing out not renovating. But this may be a nice option. I live in south McCauley, in 20 years when it's time for retirement this will be an extremely desirable area. If my house was in cslgary and even 20 blocks further from dt it would be worth a cool $800 000


    I paid 178000. I'm dumping in a solid $100000 Reno but the finishes exceed million $ homes. Granted I'm a red seal carpenter with 17 years experience and most is being done by myself.

  23. #123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    This thread is interesting, if I had listened to KCs OP and worried about a house price tumble, I wouldn't have put 35k down on a condo in 2010. Since then, its value has increased 100k, thanks to the magic of financial leverage, a return of almost 300 percent on my investment.

    I think with demographics and economy indications the way they are (I saw a stat that over 80 percent of canadas job growth was in Alberta recently), its important to be in on the housing market before you get priced out without of any hope of joining it. You just end up paying off other peoples mortgages then through steadily increasing rental rates.
    Excellent move! I ended up with my house in the 1990s because of a fear of getting priced out of the market as interest rates fell. A fear of the "Here come the 70s" inflation. Instead house prices didn't rise they fell.

    These past few years I just sat tight thinking I was already over exposed to real estate here even though the government and central bankers were, and are, trying their hardest to get everyone to borrow to the hilt. Leverage is a fantastic tool when you hit it right. (I just have never been able to feel comfortable with borrowing for anything especially on the advice aka monetary policy, of government and bankers. ) In hindsight, I should have borrowed to the hilt and put everything into the stock market too but again - didn't. In fact, I've been pulling money out of the stock market too missing some of this past year's incredible returns.

    There's so many things I was worried about that I thought would have caused one trend or the other to have slowed or reversed: The number of people still coming here is amazing. Oil prices have held up despite all the massive new shale oil discoveries. (Peak oil proving true?). China powering along building empty cities and demand still driving Canada's commodities. Massive government debt build ups around the world being seen as fine and dandy and not affecting interest rates. Stock markets and margin growth still running strong...

  24. #124
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,181

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swillv8 View Post
    ^ what about buying an old home that's solid. Rent it out in the meantime and renovate before moving in? I see u clearly pointing out not renovating. But this may be a nice option. I live in south McCauley, in 20 years when it's time for retirement this will be an extremely desirable area. If my house was in cslgary and even 20 blocks further from dt it would be worth a cool $800 000


    I paid 178000. I'm dumping in a solid $100000 Reno but the finishes exceed million $ homes. Granted I'm a red seal carpenter with 17 years experience and most is being done by myself.
    I'd look at a property like this that fits the $400k budget

    http://beta.realtor.ca/propertyDetai...rtyId=14078222

    Checks all the boxes...close to transit/LRT, steps to river valley, close to DT, all renos done and in a much MUCH better location than Blatchford.. maybe not as new & fancy but probably a better buy given the location. Cruising around realtor.ca, I can find lots of centrally located, relatively affordable properties.
    Parkdale

  25. #125

    Default

    To each their own, I feel it's overpriced for my liking, but nice for Edmonton lol if that makes sense. (I'm the type to way undervalue until I see the sold sign, including my own properties) I've seen a couple steals in westmount lately that blow this property outta the wAter.

    I'm 6 months from completion on my renos right now. My main floor is going to be spectacular, I stole a hacked up bad layout main floor bdrm and now is a 11foot 6x 11'6" dining room complete with bumped out window bay/ window seat and custom plaster ceiling, floor to ceiling wainscotting, custom 9" baseboard, and lastly going to have refinished original fir flooring with nice openings to the kitchen( load bearing wall that had mechanical feeding the upstairs which turned into a major job to reroute) and also a 17'x 11'6" living room

  26. #126
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Alberta Avenue, Boyle Street, McCauley, San Tan Valley
    Posts
    755

    Default

    I still advocate for the wide choice and temporary affordability of this city's inner city. It will be one of those things that people wish they would have gotten on the band wagon...after it happens. Also, properties are easier to cash flow if that's your thing.

    Here's my case:

    My North McCauley (Little Italy) house was purchased in fall of 2012 for $192,000.

    $90,000 in renovations from May 2013 to January 2014 (legal suite, new furnaces, new hot water tanks, triple pane windows, sewer line, water lines, structural work...) increased it to $325,000.

    My mortgage is $888/month including property taxes and I got a LOC to cover my renovation costs with a payment of $250/month.

    The two suites generate $2,600/month and my renters are covering their own utilities.

    $2,600 - $1,138 = $1,462/month in my pocket.

    If you don't let stigma get to you and you see the potential in the areas surrounding the super projects, there's some ripe properties that will help set you right up for many years. Whatever your opinion of the inner city's prognosis, numbers don't lie and the cash is just as green.

  27. #127
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,181

    Default

    ^ We're looking at another rental property soon. We're interested in what's available in the Forrest Heights neighborhood, but really I'd be just as happy with a solid rental in Alberta Ave, Parkdale or North McCauley as well.

    My Parkdale house is paying for itself and putting some cash in my pocket, enough to cover 1/2 the mortgage on our new house.. so we're essentially living mortgage free right now.
    Parkdale

  28. #128

    Default

    One thing I want to warn potential investors of is that the city and province are cracking down heavily on landlords to ensure everything is done properly (permits, inspections, etc.) and suites adhere to code. Be prepared to pay to bring your rental up to their standards.

    Slum landlords are thankfully being weeded out of these cheap inner-city neighborhoods.

  29. #129
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,181

    Default

    ^ Yup. That's one of the reasons I opted against renting out the basement in the Parkdale house.. at this time it requires too much to make it legal, and I don't want to deal with the potential hassles. So the house is rented as a full house, which the renters love (not having someone below them)

    Plenty of slum lords have already been moved out of the area. I wonder if they're cleaning up other areas with lots of illegal suites and slum lord, like the Strathcona neighborhood ?
    Parkdale

  30. #130
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    138

    Default

    The impression I am getting from reading this is, thanks to the boom, this new 'desirable' area will be full of investor homes/rentals. Is anybody actually residing here?

    Friends and I are looking to get into the market for houses to live in (not an investment) and, for us 'average' single income earners who do not want to take on renters (which defeats the purpose of getting out of apartment life IMO), these areas are affordable ... if major upgrades are not required, of course. There are a lot of dumps for sale there, a lot of $$ will be required for upgrades. It would be nice to live in an area where owners actually reside in their homes, people who will take pride in the neighbourhood as it will hopefully be a longterm residence.

    BTW, nothing against renters ... we are all renters today, have been for years (we are 40-49 years old) ... but we also know that, as a homeowner, there is usually more pride and care put into living in a place and into the neighbourhood.

    I'm not a fan of any boom, the culture of flipping houses ... and I hate to say it but I can feel the heat again, the panic of 'now or never' is in the air. Was not a pretty scene in '06-'07 .

  31. #131
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,181

    Default

    ^ I am not sure about other areas, but in & around my house in Parkdale, the ratio is about 70% owners, 30% renters.

    Not a bad ratio. I agree, if it gets too skewed in can affect other proeprties. In the condo building in which we just sold our unit, about 60% of the units were rentals. Which definitely affected the compex negatively.

    All you have to do is take a drive/ walk/ bike through Alberta Ave and other similar areas. You'll get a very good idea about which blocks show that pride of ownership.
    Parkdale

  32. #132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Norender View Post
    The impression I am getting from reading this is, thanks to the boom, this new 'desirable' area will be full of investor homes/rentals. Is anybody actually residing here?
    I have lived near Norwood School (in two separate houses) since 2003, and my family gladly plans on staying where we are.

    For what it's worth, most of our neighbors own their homes and have lived there since the 90s. A few other neighbors have bought their homes more recently, and are doing upgrades because they plan to live in the home longer term or to flip it.

    And I can say, with the utmost confidence, that this neighborhood has the best neighbors I have ever had of anywhere I have lived in Edmonton (of Mill Woods, Bonnie Doon, Capilano, Old Strathcona, and Westmount), and I have had no more "problems" such as vandalism, theft, etc. living where I do now, than I have anywhere else. They are less judgemental, more helpful with small favours, and look out for each other to make the neighborhood safer.

    Being in the inner city, it gets a bit "exciting" sometimes, but it's a very convenient area, it's affordable, and it has been exciting to watch it improve so much with each passing year.

  33. #133
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Great info, thanks very much!

  34. #134
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    42,533

    Default

    AB grew by 134,xxx in the last Q1 to Q1... get ready for housing prices to rise if anything.

    http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26...ataTable&csid=
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  35. #135
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    772

    Default

    The banks are predicting the surge, the numbers are calling for it also. I feel
    That much of the national media is so fixated on Toronto or vancouver , we don't
    See this one coming.

    Just from non scientific observation ( fly over). I don't think we have the same built
    Inventory position as last year , labour will be tighter as will materials be higher
    Due to increased US demand.

  36. #136

    Default

    This should help...

    Canadian dollar hovers near lowest since 2009 - BNN News
    http://www.bnn.ca/News/2014/3/19/Can...ince-2009.aspx

  37. #137

    Default

    I bought a house last summer, in a new sub-division.
    For me it's not as much as an investment (though nice to have equity), as much as a home I'm happy to live in, it will be my home for 10 years or longer.
    I built new because I found the resale homes that I looked at (and weren't many that fell into my requirement) were way more than building new or were sold within a month or less. I didn't want to get into a bidding war.
    Homes in the 1300-1500sq feet range and (at that time) priced in the $350-364 were very hard to come by (and no older than 6 year old). The 1 year I spent my eye out in the area I wanted, I only saw 4 houses that came up. One actually was sold in less than 2 weeks!
    Edmonton ~ It may not be perfect, but it's home~

  38. #138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gizmo View Post
    I bought a house last summer, in a new sub-division.
    For me it's not as much as an investment (though nice to have equity), as much as a home I'm happy to live in, it will be my home for 10 years or longer.
    I built new because I found the resale homes that I looked at (and weren't many that fell into my requirement) were way more than building new or were sold within a month or less. I didn't want to get into a bidding war.
    Homes in the 1300-1500sq feet range and (at that time) priced in the $350-364 were very hard to come by (and no older than 6 year old). The 1 year I spent my eye out in the area I wanted, I only saw 4 houses that came up. One actually was sold in less than 2 weeks!
    I feel the same way as you but I absolutely refuse to have more than a 5-10 minute lrt ride to downtown where both me and my spouse work. My only hope is for a townhouse in blatchford. My family will absolutely never have more than one vehicle.

  39. #139
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    It looks like we'll have a few years of tight rentals and rising home prices. I'm thinking of building a garage suite, at current prices I can rent it for 5 years to pay it off, and then I'll have a nice studio/guest suite or semi-independent suite for when the kids are hitting college age in 10 years.

  40. #140
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,552

    Default

    ^You have to tick a lot of boxes to be able to build a legal garage suite. I looked into the option after a bunch of happy talk about increasing density coming out of council a couple years ago. Good luck.

  41. #141

    Default

    ^ it looks like the process may have been streamlined. If so, Happy Days.

    City of Edmonton :: Garage Suites
    http://www.edmonton.ca/for_residents...ge-suites.aspx

    "The permit process has been combined so that the applicant can apply for one permit that will include all of the permits required for the new basic construction of the garage suite."

  42. #142

  43. #143

    Default

    If record high prices correlate to prices tumble ing this is it.

    In all reality 7 years to get back to 07 levels is consistant to booms snd busts in real estate. I predict steady growth in Alberta on condition oil stays healthy. I could see 7-10% for 2014 and then moderation possible a plateau A hair above inflation

  44. #144

    Default

    The article mentions that the banks continue to lend so this ostensibly means that the market is still doing fine, yet this ignores bank lending history that spans late 80s third world lending losses, the late 1990s high tech lending losses, etc. and in this instance the discussion also the moral hazard CMHC insurance creates which is in some ways similar to the moral hazard that the US's securitization trend created.

    The taxpayers of course always get to pick up the pieces through a process that privatizes the gains and socializes the losses.


    Are we in a housing bubble? Expert admits ‘we don’t know’ - National | Globalnews.ca

    http://globalnews.ca/news/1248298/ar...-we-dont-know/



    .
    Last edited by KC; 03-04-2014 at 11:02 AM.

  45. #145
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Alberta Avenue, Boyle Street, McCauley, San Tan Valley
    Posts
    755

    Default

    I wouldn't want to be a first time or recent home buyer in Toronto or Vancouver. Most people know a lot of these articles are focused on those 2 cities and if "alarm bells" are raised in either of those cities, that must mean all of Canada.

  46. #146

    Default

    It's funny when u look at affordability from those two cities versus Edmonton! Higher paying jobs, definitely no shortage of jobs and very affordable!

  47. #147
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,103

    Default

    kC aren't the taxpayers reaping the profit off those CMHC insured mortgages, as far as the premium they charge anyway?

    I think that it is definitely a sellers market in my area. Some people bought a late 1950's house last August for just under $300k. The did the flip work,listed it for $403k last fall and it didn't move. This spring they relisted at $409k and it sold for $406k. The house next door to it had a for sale sign put up yesterday and a sold sign this morning. It's on Realtor.ca at $339,900.

  48. #148

    Default

    http://www.630ched.com/2014/04/04/fi...getting-older/

    I imagine these "older" buyers were sitting on the sidelines in the last boom or even maybe from in migration? Looks like prices are going up

  49. #149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    kC aren't the taxpayers reaping the profit off those CMHC insured mortgages, as far as the premium they charge anyway?

    I think that it is definitely a sellers market in my area. Some people bought a late 1950's house last August for just under $300k. The did the flip work,listed it for $403k last fall and it didn't move. This spring they relisted at $409k and it sold for $406k. The house next door to it had a for sale sign put up yesterday and a sold sign this morning. It's on Realtor.ca at $339,900.
    First i doubt it's profit orientated and only cost recovery, then I doubt it's risk adjusted returns have a long enough of a horizon and instead look at current delinquency rates since they don't know if the rate will increase or not in the future and past crises are long forgotten or treated as data anomalies. i.e. Insurance rates usually rise after a major "unexpected" loss, not before it and insurance company shareholders take the immediate hit.
    Last edited by KC; 06-04-2014 at 09:23 AM.

  50. #150
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    kC aren't the taxpayers reaping the profit off those CMHC insured mortgages, as far as the premium they charge anyway?

    I think that it is definitely a sellers market in my area. Some people bought a late 1950's house last August for just under $300k. The did the flip work,listed it for $403k last fall and it didn't move. This spring they relisted at $409k and it sold for $406k. The house next door to it had a for sale sign put up yesterday and a sold sign this morning. It's on Realtor.ca at $339,900.
    Given that there is only 2.2 months of inventory on MLS it is sellers market.

  51. #151

    Default

    Is there a consistent or normal level of inventory?

  52. #152

    Default

    Realtors sometimes will relist properties so it doesn't show that this turd has been sitting on the market for 6 months

  53. #153

    Default IMF sounds global housing alarm

    Financial Times, June 11, 2014
    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/91bf8...#axzz34MKLFjod

    And Canada (overall, although we all know things vary by region) is one of the red hot items. In absolute term, prices are growing moderately, but in comparison to rent and income...,oh boy...






  54. #154

  55. #155

    Default

    I've essentially stopped worrying.

    If house prices do eventually tank or flat line for years, no one out there can say they weren't warned. For all I know, big time inflation may hit and house prices will quadruple in a few years. The point is, no one should have entered the housing market in the last 7 or 8 years and suddenly be caught off guard, loose their house and be able to demand relief from taxpayers or anyone else. The same goes for the banks and other lenders. I think enough time has passed since the USA's 2006-07 housing peak that all involved here should be extremely well prepared for anything. Additionally, since many mortgages are backstopped by federal insurance, I think the government should well be able to play extreme hardball on having to bail out any underwater situations.

    There's just no way that anyone should not now be well prepared for any outcome and hence there should be little impact on the rest of us. I think even the youngest couples buying a home these days couldn't claim any kind of blissful ignorance from the risk of prices falling, of interest rates spiking or some other potential financial calamity.



    Stephen Poloz sees high home prices as economic risk - Business - CBC News
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/step...risk-1.2673273


    A similar situation exists in the equity and bond markets. Whether or not they are truly about to crash is beside the point. If they do, show no pity whatsoever. There's not a single investor or pension plan or widow out there that doesn't now know that there are huge downside market risks. Again, if the market crashes, there's no way in H _ _ _ that any taxpayer money should be expended to bail out risk taking investors. Again, the market may quadruple in the next few years - but it may not - and that is the lesson everyone should know by now.

    Hussman Funds - Weekly Market Comment: We Learn From History That We Do Not Learn From History - June 9, 2014
    http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc140609.htm
    Last edited by KC; 12-06-2014 at 04:19 PM.

  56. #156
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,586

    Default

    In year 2000, I had an income of $50K, and was pre-approved for a maximum home value of $150K (3x income).

    My income has essentially doubled, but the same $150K house is now around $450K.

    Difference is that the $50K that I made in 2000 took me a lot further than making double today.
    The world is full of kings and queens, who blind your eyes then steal your dreams.
    It's heaven and hell!

  57. #157
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill View Post
    In year 2000, I had an income of $50K, and was pre-approved for a maximum home value of $150K (3x income).

    My income has essentially doubled, but the same $150K house is now around $450K.

    Difference is that the $50K that I made in 2000 took me a lot further than making double today.
    there is another difference that probably needs accounting for...

    you were probably approved for a mortgage large enough to buy a 150k house so the real question would be whether you would be able to qualify for a mortgage for that 450 k house.

    based on the difference in interest rates between 2000 and today, the answer to that would probably yes. conventional one year mortgage rates dropped from 7.7% at the end of 2000 to 3.14% at the end of 2013:

    courtesy of bank of canada at http://www.bankofcanada.ca/wp-conten...cal_page52.pdf

    and similar reductions took place pretty much across the mortgage spectrum.

    it could be argued that some of that reduction is reflected in that current 450k house price but even if so that's still a wash. your doubled income may not go further today than it did in 2000 but the percentage of that income required to acquire that house is probably pretty close if not less.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  58. #158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill View Post
    In year 2000, I had an income of $50K, and was pre-approved for a maximum home value of $150K (3x income).

    My income has essentially doubled, but the same $150K house is now around $450K.

    Difference is that the $50K that I made in 2000 took me a lot further than making double today.
    there is another difference that probably needs accounting for...

    you were probably approved for a mortgage large enough to buy a 150k house so the real question would be whether you would be able to qualify for a mortgage for that 450 k house.

    based on the difference in interest rates between 2000 and today, the answer to that would probably yes. conventional one year mortgage rates dropped from 7.7% at the end of 2000 to 3.14% at the end of 2013:

    courtesy of bank of canada at http://www.bankofcanada.ca/wp-conten...cal_page52.pdf

    and similar reductions took place pretty much across the mortgage spectrum.

    it could be argued that some of that reduction is reflected in that current 450k house price but even if so that's still a wash. your doubled income may not go further today than it did in 2000 but the percentage of that income required to acquire that house is probably pretty close if not less.
    The question then is, were you taking on more risk in 2000 or today? If house prices rise or fall, who cares as long as you can service (pay) your debt you're at no risk of losing the asset. If prices fall and you are underwater on your mortgage, again, who cares, it's a place to live and over 20, 30, 40 years prices are more likely to be higher than lower than now due to inflation, population growth etc.

    However, in five years where will interest rates be? If they return to 2000 levels, what will your payments be and will you be able to then service that debt. If the world economy slows or stagnates, interest rates may stay low for another one or two resets. So the question will be about the economy and jobs. Peak oil would help Albertan's to sustain their income levels but if peak oil doesn't exist and the world slows, what will happen to oil prices? And here, what happens to oil prices pretty much determines what happens to house prices. (Maybe more dramatically so with each recession because we're dividing the fixed resource pot among ever more and more people.)

    Note: Lets look at two prior crashes. In the US, people bought homes with teaser rates and when they reset to market rates, they couldn't make the mtge pmts. in a slowing economy they lost their homes. Concurrently, investors were loading up on homes, owning 10 or 20 because of the rising demand. (No one mentions them but they were likely the real cause behind the US property crash, and not the poor black people that got suckered into buying one home each - and then turned into the fall guys in the crash. Investors were the ones to watch.) In Alberta in the 70s, essentially the same thing happened as central banks raised rates to fight inflation. For us Albertan's the US housing boom had a painfully obvious outcome.

  59. #159

    Default

    http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/b...tml?rel=846719

    Gotta love the mis information from media and sloppy journalism!

    I could be wrong and apologize in advance, but I believe canada average income/ purchase power is 4.9 times only a mere $100000 of the mark according this article!!

    Fact is Alberta is one ofvthe cheapest markets in canada versus wages!!

  60. #160
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    8,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swillv8 View Post
    I could be wrong and apologize in advance, but I believe canada average income/ purchase power is 4.9 times only a mere $100000 of the mark according this article!!

    Fact is Alberta is one ofvthe cheapest markets in canada versus wages!!
    I've tried reading that first quoted sentence about 5 times, and still can't make sense of it. In regards to the second sentence, yes, Alberta has significantly higher wages than most of Canada, but our housing prices in the major cities are also much higher than most of the country outside of Vancouver and Toronto. Which explains why Calgary for example is more affordable than Van/TO, but less than the average of the rest of the country. All the numbers in that article make perfectly good sense to me.

  61. #161

    Default

    I've read from many articles that the average Canadian purchase power is 4.9 times average wage. ( so if I make $100000 house is $490g; sooooo Alberta, or Calgary for that matter is 3.7/ $370000) hope this helps.

    This article is completly wrong!

    I reAlize van and to skew things massively but let not forget than Edmonton/ Calgary is well under 4 times annual income, greAt prices in my opinion'

  62. #162

    Default

    ^ Well, I can see why you are annoyed (the article is clearly sub par on professional journalism regarding details). But really, not that big a deal.

    Here are some data points:
    Average House Price, July 2014 (Source:http://creastats.crea.ca/area/index.htm)

    Province: $395,552
    Edmonton: $359,320
    Calgary: $460,790

    Then, latest data we have on the income side is from 2012 (Source: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quoti...40723c-eng.htm)

    Median household income:

    Province: $94,460
    Edmonton: $96,030
    Calgary: $98,300

    which gives house-price-to-income ratio of:
    Province: 4.19
    Edmonton: 3.74
    Calgary: 4.69

    Now, the article focuses on "first time buyers" (did they use income stats on first time buyers only?) and is not clear whether it uses median or average income. Also which dates for each variable used not clear.

  63. #163
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    8,806

    Default

    Nevermind, mis-read.

  64. #164

    Default

    Thanks for crunching the numbers

    I do get annoyed, basically one of the most prosperous cities for your average family( we are a VERY blue collar city). And the mis information is outstanding, coupled with edmontons constant treatment as a red headed stepchild( no offence intended lol) and I'd love to see my real estate at least go up with inflation, and Edmonton to get treated as a serious player in canada, maybe even North America, had to rant I apologize

  65. #165

    Default

    You are welcome!

  66. #166

    Default

    A couple interesting articles discussing vacant investor owner properties in Vancouver.

    COPE mayoral candidate proposes tax on vacant homes - BC | Globalnews.ca
    http://globalnews.ca/news/1573912/co...-vacant-homes/

    Vancouver’s vacancies point to investors, not residents - The Globe and Mail
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle10044403/

  67. #167

    Default

    This short interview is american and talks about american pricing but he says a couple interesting things. i.e. all the cranes he's seeing. ...and mentions Texas and falling oil prices.

    Also his comments about inflation are worth listening to.



    Nov. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Landry’s Chairman Tilman Fertitta explains why he sees a crash of the U.S. real estate market coming that’s similar to the fall experienced in 1986. He speaks on “Market Makers.”

    http://www.bloomberg.com/video/tilma...Gyv1G9Ryw.html

  68. #168

    Default

    So is the article a great example of "driving by the rear-view mirror" or will falling oil prices potentially mean nothing at all in terms of Alberta's housing prices? (Just another 2008/09 pause?)


    Calgary's Real Estate Market Buoyant Amid Plunging Oil Prices
    The Huffington Post Alberta | By Zi-Ann Lum, 11/26/2014

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/11...n_6227662.html



    And an article from last May:

    Alberta housing market set to surge: BMO Add to ...
    TARA PERKINS - REAL ESTATE REPORTER ,The Globe and Mail, Published Friday, Mar. 14 2014

    excerpt:

    Alberta’s housing market, led by Calgary, is poised for a boom, Bank of Montreal economist Robert Kavcic says in a report to be released Friday afternoon.

    The province’s housing market is quickly heating up again, fuelled by a stronger economy. Barring a sudden drop in oil markets, home prices and construction in Alberta will continue to climb in the year ahead, he says.
    ...
    "And he concludes that, “for policy makers, this is clearly a case of superior economic and demographic fundamentals at work, not a bubble rearing its head.” ..."


    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle17493280/



    ~
    Last edited by KC; 01-12-2014 at 12:17 PM.

  69. #169

    Default

    As if we needed some more bad news....

    Globe and Mail, Dec. 10, 2014

    Canada's housing market overvalued by as much as 30%: Bank of Canada
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle22021768/

  70. #170

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DefinatelyMaybe View Post
    As if we needed some more bad news....

    Globe and Mail, Dec. 10, 2014

    Canada's housing market overvalued by as much as 30%: Bank of Canada
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle22021768/
    Bad news? If you're young and plan to buy a house or condo in the future, or your kids do, a lower price might be desirable. (Though I've been beaten down by arguments to the other side.) Still, pay less and you have a chance to save money on the side and diversify your savings rather than having every nickel in a single housing basket tied - to the economy.

    Anyway, don't believe prices will actually drop. Forecasts are forecasts - just be prepared for a drop and don't assume house prices only go one way and set yourself up for financial ruin if they actually do drop.

  71. #171
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    8,806

    Default

    The actual report said 10-30%, not just 30% by itself. There's a range. And it depends on the specific market, some are more overpriced than others. Maybe there'll be some declines in Toronto or Vancouver, but in the prairies? I really doubt it.

  72. #172
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    8,806

    Default

    Heh, went back and saw these quotes from myself and Paul over a year ago. Keep cheerleading for impending doom, media!

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Anyone else get the feeling that most major Canadian media outlets are downright cheerleading for a housing downturn or outright collapse?
    Given the how they opened the year, it'd be pretty embarrassing for them if it didn't crash.


  73. #173

    Default

    I have recently started to think people are losing their sense of what matters and what not. There is so much "info" is out there, that it is really easy to find your personal echo chamber and feel safe about the changes in the world.

    This is not a "forecast". This is a BoC analysis; Not a random magazine vying for purchase or click, nor by a property speculator and so on. These are the people who "set" the policies that affects how home buyers make decisions. And their message to the average-KC and Marcel-six-pack is clear. They think a bubble has formed and they are worried about it. Thus, it goes without saying, they will tighten the screws another notch, or two, to fizzle the bubble to avoid a messy burst. The consequence is clear too. Average home buyer will have a harder time financing its property purchase, thus a lower demand will soften the prices.
    Last edited by FamilyMan; 11-12-2014 at 09:51 AM.

  74. #174
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    8,806

    Default

    None of which I'm in denial about. However most of the media in Canada has been busy forecasting a US-in-2008/9 style bust for going on 3 years now, and even with this BoC report, that still does not appear to be likely. Not all bubbles absolutely have to burst disastrously. It could well be that with interest rates starting to rise next year and continued economic growth in the US helping push Canada along that the bubble will deflate in an orderly fashion over the following few years. A stagnation in pricing over 3-5 years while incomes continue to rise could easily get things back to historical averages.

    And again, two markets are largely driving the bubble talk: Vancouver and Toronto. For the most part the housing markets elsewhere in the country aren't in bubble territory at all.

  75. #175
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,610

    Default

    Edmonton housing prices and sales on their way up

    BY CATHERINE GRIWKOWSKY, EDMONTON SUN
    WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2014

    When it comes to Edmonton housing prices and sales -- look up, way up.

    The average house price is expected to jump from $374,000 in 2014 to $389,000 in 2015, according to the RE/MAX 2015 Housing Market Outlook Report.

    The report states new residents have increased demand by 10 per cent.

    Luxury home sales have been increasing in the past three years, while 65 per cent of homes on the markets are priced below $400,000.

    As house prices rise, and new rules are introduced for first-time home buyers, more young people are looking towards condominiums.

    "As affordability becomes an issue in urban centres, first-time buyers are looking towards condominiums both for lifestyle and for value," said Elton Ash, regional executive vice president, RE/MAX of Western Canada.

    "Feeling the pressure from tightened CMHC lending criteria, many in this demographic delayed purchasing property in order to continue to save for their down-payment. The new mortgage rules will likely have less of an effect in the coming year as buyers adapt to the new regulations and make the necessary changes to meet the criteria."

    Housing prices in Edmonton have steadily increased since 2011, when the average house price was $325,395. That number rose to $334,318 in 2012 and $351,000 in 2013.

    [email protected]
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/12/1...n-their-way-up


    Interesting numbers, this thread was started in 2010 and warned of a collapse yet the average house price in Edmonton has gone up:

    2011 - $325,395
    2012 - $334,318 (+8,923 in 1 year)
    2013 - $351,000 (+$25,605 in 2 years)
    2014 - $374,000 (+$48,605 in 3 years)
    2015 - $389,000 (forecast, +$63,605 in 4 years)
    Last edited by Hilman; 11-12-2014 at 10:35 AM.

  76. #176

    Default

    I was one of the suckers that bought may 29th 2007. This was literally THE PEAK! I bought a place in old westmount( great location). House was valued at $368000 needed major renovations( I bought in the frenzy tough negotiations @ $330000) as this place was a stock 1927 vintage. I personally had my value CRASH all the way down to $250 000( which in 2009/2010 I WOULD not be able to sell. I dealt with Rbc turning their back on me creating a living hell on my ability to borrow, ect. I even had Darren sharko( mortgage specialist) reccommending I default ( as I could just walk into a cheaper house with ease because I had savings,

    Long story short with lots of time researching, best numbers I could find were out of calgary. A 20% crash DID happen. Btw it took 7 years to get to 2007 price levels AND there is no frenzy in edmonton this year( but there is in calgary THIS YEAR. Interesting we are a year behind calgary with real estate also according to my research.

    The truth in alberta is we trump the rest of Canada with median household incomes over $20000. Affordability of housing is at 3.8 years of income vs 4.9 for Canada, Vancouver 7.7? Where's the bubble for albertans?
    Last edited by Swillv8; 11-12-2014 at 10:36 AM.

  77. #177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyMan View Post
    I have recently started to think people are losing their sense of what matters and what not. There is so much "info" is out there, that it is really easy to find your personal echo chamber and feel safe about the changes in the world.

    This is not a "forecast". This is a BoC analysis; Not a random magazine vying for purchase or click, nor by a property speculator and so on. These are the people who "set" the policies that affects how home buyers make decisions. And their message to the average-KC and Marcel-six-pack is clear. They think a bubble has formed and they are worried about it. Thus, it goes without saying, they will tighten the screws another notch, or two, to fizzle the bubble to avoid a messy burst. The consequence is clear too. Average home buyer will have a harder time financing its property purchase, thus a lower demand will soften the prices.
    And in my mind, that is generally a good thing, and if it turns out to be wrongly timed, such caution should not be faulted. They are showing some fiduciary responsibility towards society. The wealthy can ride out most unexpected turmoil but the young and the poor can suddenly become very vulnerable and many can loose everything they have attained in very short order - setting them back years or decades and harming their children's future prospects at the same time. Moreover, some of the generalizations that are so subtlety presented in media lead the young and vulnerable to make life altering decisions at exactly the wrong time. (The leverage high, liquidate low crisis we saw with the US housing situation last decade.) These people count on society and media to provide them with rationally thought out information highlighting the risks (positive and negative) to people in their situation.

  78. #178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hilman View Post
    Edmonton housing prices and sales on their way up

    BY CATHERINE GRIWKOWSKY, EDMONTON SUN
    WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2014

    When it comes to Edmonton housing prices and sales -- look up, way up.

    The average house price is expected to jump from $374,000 in 2014 to $389,000 in 2015, according to the RE/MAX 2015 Housing Market Outlook Report.

    The report states new residents have increased demand by 10 per cent.

    Luxury home sales have been increasing in the past three years, while 65 per cent of homes on the markets are priced below $400,000.

    As house prices rise, and new rules are introduced for first-time home buyers, more young people are looking towards condominiums.

    "As affordability becomes an issue in urban centres, first-time buyers are looking towards condominiums both for lifestyle and for value," said Elton Ash, regional executive vice president, RE/MAX of Western Canada.

    "Feeling the pressure from tightened CMHC lending criteria, many in this demographic delayed purchasing property in order to continue to save for their down-payment. The new mortgage rules will likely have less of an effect in the coming year as buyers adapt to the new regulations and make the necessary changes to meet the criteria."

    Housing prices in Edmonton have steadily increased since 2011, when the average house price was $325,395. That number rose to $334,318 in 2012 and $351,000 in 2013.

    [email protected]
    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/12/1...n-their-way-up


    Interesting numbers, this thread was started in 2010 and warned of a collapse yet the average house price in Edmonton has gone up:

    2011 - $325,395
    2012 - $334,318 (+8,923 in 1 year)
    2013 - $351,000 (+$25,605 in 2 years)
    2014 - $374,000 (+$48,605 in 3 years)
    2015 - $389,000 (forecast, +$63,605 in 4 years)

    The whole point is that we can not tell when things will turn against us (or for us, for that matter). However, making a house purchase is a long term commitment. Some people may have no problem turning on a dime and selling out of the market, but most people that buy homes tend to want to keep them. So forecasts shouldn't dissuade someone from buying a home, but everyone should be aware of the risks (sometimes intelligently highlighted in forecasts and analyses) so that they don't expose themselves to too much risk - which obviously may or may not ever come to fruition). People need to be challenged on the idea that the current trend will continue. It needs to be pointed out that the trend may change direction and so they may need to prepare for that change in direction. Few people can do so in a month or two. Most people need years to ready themselves and their families for recessions - or growth cycles.

    People that act conservatively and mindful of the risks often are able to ride out tough times but we all know that the vested interests often encourage people to max out their spending and their credit - it makes life seem wonderful - until tide turns. Those promoters then are no where to be found and definitely don't come to the aid of anyone they've encouraged to make foolish moves.
    Last edited by KC; 11-12-2014 at 11:02 AM.

  79. #179

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swillv8 View Post
    I was one of the suckers that bought may 29th 2007. This was literally THE PEAK! I bought a place in old westmount( great location). House was valued at $368000 needed major renovations( I bought in the frenzy tough negotiations @ $330000) as this place was a stock 1927 vintage. I personally had my value CRASH all the way down to $250 000( which in 2009/2010 I WOULD not be able to sell. I dealt with Rbc turning their back on me creating a living hell on my ability to borrow, ect. I even had Darren sharko( mortgage specialist) reccommending I default ( as I could just walk into a cheaper house with ease because I had savings,

    Long story short with lots of time researching, best numbers I could find were out of calgary. A 20% crash DID happen. Btw it took 7 years to get to 2007 price levels AND there is no frenzy in edmonton this year( but there is in calgary THIS YEAR. Interesting we are a year behind calgary with real estate also according to my research.

    The truth in alberta is we trump the rest of Canada with median household incomes over $20000. Affordability of housing is at 3.8 years of income vs 4.9 for Canada, Vancouver 7.7? Where's the bubble for albertans?

    In a cycle no one can really tell where they are at in that cycle. People have to make decisions in order to carry on with their lives. The nice thing about housing in a growing low populated country like Canada is that over time, odds are you will care less and less about what you paid. Inflation and other price gains will make the temporary overpriced market look like a good deal. That is, if you can buy and hold.

  80. #180
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,591

    Default

    Another thing I think we need to identify is that not all home prices are made the same. As demographics, energy costs, and consumer choice shifts with culture, some areas can be better insulated from collapses (or even capitalize on them). If you look in the long term, I think you'll see mature neighbourhoods in all Canadian cities (especially Alberta which lags behind in this) weather the storm and have huge increases in value, as more dense housing options become both more popular of a choice and a more economical choice. So housing bubbles can pop, but they aren't going to pop in the same way everywhere - even within each city. A huge correction in the market could even greatly benefit those of us like minded people who want to see cities become more dense.

  81. #181

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyMan View Post
    I have recently started to think people are losing their sense of what matters and what not. There is so much "info" is out there, that it is really easy to find your personal echo chamber and feel safe about the changes in the world.

    This is not a "forecast". This is a BoC analysis; Not a random magazine vying for purchase or click, nor by a property speculator and so on. These are the people who "set" the policies that affects how home buyers make decisions. And their message to the average-KC and Marcel-six-pack is clear. They think a bubble has formed and they are worried about it. Thus, it goes without saying, they will tighten the screws another notch, or two, to fizzle the bubble to avoid a messy burst. The consequence is clear too. Average home buyer will have a harder time financing its property purchase, thus a lower demand will soften the prices.
    And in my mind, that is generally a good thing, and if it turns out to be wrongly timed, such caution should not be faulted. They are showing some fiduciary responsibility towards society. The wealthy can ride out most unexpected turmoil but the young and the poor can suddenly become very vulnerable and many can loose everything they have attained in very short order - setting them back years or decades and harming their children's future prospects at the same time. Moreover, some of the generalizations that are so subtlety presented in media lead the young and vulnerable to make life altering decisions at exactly the wrong time. (The leverage high, liquidate low crisis we saw with the US housing situation last decade.) These people count on society and media to provide them with rationally thought out information highlighting the risks (positive and negative) to people in their situation.
    One of those rare occasions I can agree with you 100%

    My personal take, and here I am entering the realm of speculation, is that BoC is trying to reduce indebtedness after a long period of ultra-low interest rates, to avoid catastrophic ripple effects "when" they hike rates.

    In the past couple years they lowered loan-to-value limits on new loans, shortened amortization periods, made stricter debt-service qualification rules while the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) stopped insuring mortgages on second homes as well as homes costing more than $1 million. Despite these efforts, the cheap loans won the day. Reading their analysis, it jumps out at me how they got worried by distribution of debt in the society:



    Source


    If I get the time, I will also post a quick analysis on house prices, when the data for November will be released,, tomorrow.
    Last edited by FamilyMan; 11-12-2014 at 02:09 PM.

  82. #182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyMan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyMan View Post
    I have recently started to think people are losing their sense of what matters and what not. There is so much "info" is out there, that it is really easy to find your personal echo chamber and feel safe about the changes in the world.

    This is not a "forecast". This is a BoC analysis; Not a random magazine vying for purchase or click, nor by a property speculator and so on. These are the people who "set" the policies that affects how home buyers make decisions. And their message to the average-KC and Marcel-six-pack is clear. They think a bubble has formed and they are worried about it. Thus, it goes without saying, they will tighten the screws another notch, or two, to fizzle the bubble to avoid a messy burst. The consequence is clear too. Average home buyer will have a harder time financing its property purchase, thus a lower demand will soften the prices.
    And in my mind, that is generally a good thing, and if it turns out to be wrongly timed, such caution should not be faulted. They are showing some fiduciary responsibility towards society. The wealthy can ride out most unexpected turmoil but the young and the poor can suddenly become very vulnerable and many can loose everything they have attained in very short order - setting them back years or decades and harming their children's future prospects at the same time. Moreover, some of the generalizations that are so subtlety presented in media lead the young and vulnerable to make life altering decisions at exactly the wrong time. (The leverage high, liquidate low crisis we saw with the US housing situation last decade.) These people count on society and media to provide them with rationally thought out information highlighting the risks (positive and negative) to people in their situation.
    One of those rare occasions I can agree with you 100%

    My personal take, and here I am entering the realm of speculation, is that BoC is trying to reduce indebtedness after a long period of ultra-low interest rates, to avoid catastrophic ripple effects "when" they hike rates.

    In the past couple years they lowered loan-to-value limits on new loans, shortened amortization periods, made stricter debt-service qualification rules while the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) stopped insuring mortgages on second homes as well as homes costing more than $1 million. Despite these efforts, the cheap loans won the day. Reading their analysis, it jumps out at me how they got worried by distribution of debt in the society:



    Source


    If I get the time, I will also post a quick analysis on house prices, when the data for November will be released,, tomorrow.
    Thanks. Its a common theme of mine - often by playing a devil's advocate. A learning exercise for me too since I'm as wrong as often as I'm right.

    My issue is with dogma and the tendency of people to talk in platitudes and use averages and other aggregates to describe how the world works - thinking thinking that everyone's situation is average, when I suspect that almost no one's situation is "average". The stories everyone has are from their own experiences and seldom do people try to put themselves in the position of others whose experience was likely very different.

    For instance, people look at market indexes (equities, bonds, housing, currencies, whatever) and think that they will perform similarly on their non-indexed portfolios. No thought to survivorship bias, index selection / composition methodology, etc. No thought to the historic extreme price swings buried in the multi year averages or minimized over time by nominal/inflated money and not real in any current sense. People are basically sold a proverbial "bill of goods".

  83. #183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    People that act conservatively and mindful of the risks often are able to ride out tough times but we all know that the vested interests often encourage people to max out their spending and their credit - it makes life seem wonderful - until tide turns. Those promoters then are no where to be found and definitely don't come to the aid of anyone they've encouraged to make foolish moves.
    We have all heard stories of people borrowing to the tilit to buy the latest chrome package for their pick up truck or similar. But even if you are responsible with your money, life events can easily flip someone from good credit to bad credit. An example that impacts so many people is divorce, where all of a sudden one person who may have been supporting one household now has to support two. Just to survive day to day they are forced deeply into debt, given how onerous the divorce rules in Canada often are.

  84. #184

    Default House Prices in Edmonton (and Canada) in context

    As promised, here are the results of some spreadsheet fun this morning:

    First, a note on the data. I am using Teranet house price index. The reason is three fold. The data is available back to early 1999. It is available for 11 major cities across Canada, as well as a composite for Canada. Finally, I prefer their methodology, which is "repeat sales" to what real estate boards report. In repeat sales, you calculate the gain of the same property price between two sales. On the other hand, real estate boards take a snap shot of the market, reporting the "average" sales price of houses sold over a particular month. If for whatever reason a segment of market, say multimillion dollar houses, have a higher than normal activity, the averages will be skewed, but not the repeat sales. This is what happened in Edmonton over the past couple of months:

    Edmonton Real Estate Board, reported Dec. 2: "The all-residential average sales price of $381,371 was up 4.3% from last month and up 9.9% from last November. [...] Million dollar plus homes still remain a very strong segment this month with over 1% of the market share. These higher priced homes are accounting for a significant portion of the average price increase." Teranet Index, suggests a still-strong 5.6% gains in Edmonton, which I think makes more sense.

    Here is a chart of what would have happened if one invested $100 in real estate markets of major Canadian cities:



    Interestingly, Edmonton and Calgary are much more sensitive to down turns than other major cities like Vancouver and Toronto, as seen above. The prices rise earlier and faster in Alberta, but falls sooner and harder as well.

    Here is a better way too see how your investment worked. Returns here are "annualized" so they can be compared over different time horizons.



    As can be seen above while Canadian average returns are relatively stable between 4%-6% per year over the last 15-years, Edmonton varies from 2%-7% per year and Calgary is even more volatile, ranging 3%-9% per year depending on when one buys and sells.

    Hope this info is helpful to C2E community for their decision making.
    Last edited by FamilyMan; 12-12-2014 at 11:04 AM.

  85. #185
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,136

    Default

    ^

    i would concur that this is a valuable analysis. however, just like the mls numbers, it needs to be noted that it is still based on "all cash" transactions.

    the leveraged returns on that $100 initial investment if only $10 was equity and the balance borrowed would be quite a bit higher provided it was borrowed at any rate less than the overall return.

    on the other hand, that same leverage could potentially wipe out all of your invested equity if you needed to sell at an inopportune time.

    also worth noting is that real estate has expensive transaction costs not typically incurred in other forms of investment (a 6% single year return isn't that attractive when your transaction costs might approach 6%); real estate has potentially expensive holding costs (taxes and repairs and maintenance); and real estate returns on a principal residence are tax free (which may not be the case with alternative investment vehicles).
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  86. #186

    Default

    Good news everyone!!!

    Edmonton housing boom to continue into 2015 despite oil skid

    "Housing market no longer tied to oil and gas industry, realtors say"

    CBC, Dec 11, 2014

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...skid-1.2870032

  87. #187

    Default

    Edmonton the only one of 11 cities to gain on house prices index in November - See more at: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin....0vSMBkXS.dpuf
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." ĖMark Twain

  88. #188
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    8,389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Good news everyone!!!

    Edmonton housing boom to continue into 2015 despite oil skid

    "Housing market no longer tied to oil and gas industry, realtors say"

    CBC, Dec 11, 2014

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...skid-1.2870032
    Realtors should probably stick to selling homes and stay out of economic forecasting..
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  89. #189

    Default

    They had an economist on Ched this morning. He stated the reasons there has not been a glut of older housing stock were as follows:
    • the models were predicated on past experience of people moving out of their homes at 55 or 65; the average boomers are living longer, with both spouses surviving, so they're staying in their already paid for homes until the age of 75 or greater; they usually won't move into communal housing until one spouse passes away
    • Economists previously modeled the baby boom echo as a "bust", wth a reduced population, but this has been proven incorrect; the baby boom echo and subsequent generations were almost as large as the boom generation; between the size of the subsequent generations and immigration, demand for new housing has remained steady.
    • without smaller generations, and without the boomers giving up their homes, the expected glut of older housing has not materialized, and that is why the prices have not crashed further then they have


    The explanation sounded reasonable to me.

  90. #190
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,280

    Default

    There are no baby boomers who are yet 75 years or older, despite the attempt of the economist on CHED to prematurely age us. He may have been referring to our parents for whom it is a largely accurate statement.

    So far as the Edmonton housing market no longer being tied to the oil and gas industry, now there is a howler. Though I can't recall the last time a realtor predicted lower housing prices.

  91. #191
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    8,389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    There are no baby boomers who are yet 75 years or older, despite the attempt of the economist on CHED to prematurely age us. He may have been referring to our parents for whom it is a largely accurate statement.

    So far as the Edmonton housing market no longer being tied to the oil and gas industry, now there is a howler. Though I can't recall the last time a realtor predicted lower housing prices.
    AS per usual your comments are a common sense breath of fresh air.

    Yep. Real estate agents as a recall never mention, suggest, or predict a decline in value. That would be like a car salesperson denoting a "lemon".

    Chalk it up as things you'll never hear. Which makes it interesting why news sources would even bother to quote anybody with vested interest that is career tied to real estate sales.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  92. #192

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    There are no baby boomers who are yet 75 years or older, despite the attempt of the economist on CHED to prematurely age us. He may have been referring to our parents for whom it is a largely accurate statement.

    So far as the Edmonton housing market no longer being tied to the oil and gas industry, now there is a howler. Though I can't recall the last time a realtor predicted lower housing prices.
    Premature? In reading the comments it sounds like aging boomers are now in the previous move out age range (over 55 yrs, but not over 75), but aren't moving out yet and are staying put until an expected 75, so I guess that means fewer houses are freeing up for sale. How that computes in a city that has long had a young population and for the last 15 yrs or so has seen a lot of immigration (largely young people) I can't say.

    However, I've long argued that aging boomers would have little impact on things beyond their own needs like health care and health care costs (and attitudes and influences on all fronts as they retire from leadership positions). There would be no great financial crisis from aging boomers pulling out of the market nor, it would it seem, from keeping, or selling their homes.
    Last edited by KC; 13-12-2014 at 08:18 AM.

  93. #193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    There are no baby boomers who are yet 75 years or older, despite the attempt of the economist on CHED to prematurely age us. He may have been referring to our parents for whom it is a largely accurate statement.

    So far as the Edmonton housing market no longer being tied to the oil and gas industry, now there is a howler. Though I can't recall the last time a realtor predicted lower housing prices.
    AS per usual your comments are a common sense breath of fresh air.

    Yep. Real estate agents as a recall never mention, suggest, or predict a decline in value. That would be like a car salesperson denoting a "lemon".

    Chalk it up as things you'll never hear. Which makes it interesting why news sources would even bother to quote anybody with vested interest that is career tied to real estate sales.
    Exactly. Yet the media constantly uses them as a sounding board. One of reasons I've started housing threads and tried to argue that rising house prices don't benefit everyone.

  94. #194

    Default

    just something to watch...

    Subprime lending market in Canada skyrockets to record as banks tighten reins
    Republish Reprint
    Garry Marr and Barbara Shecter | December 15, 2014
    http://business.financialpost.com/20...tighten-reins/


    Household debt hits record as ‘biggest risk’ to Canada’s economy tops 162% of disposable income
    Greg Quinn, Bloomberg News | December 15, 2014

    “It will take years for the debt ratio to fall to levels where the Bank of Canada is more comfortable,” Benjamin Reitzes, a senior economist at BMO Capital Markets in Toronto, wrote in a research note before today’s report."
    ...
    "The central bank’s report also said there are new signs of risk in financing for automobiles, and that there is a growing group of people who are highly indebted with obligations exceeding 250 per cent of their incomes."

    http://business.financialpost.com/20...osable-income/
    Last edited by KC; 15-12-2014 at 01:16 PM.

  95. #195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    There are no baby boomers who are yet 75 years or older, despite the attempt of the economist on CHED to prematurely age us. He may have been referring to our parents for whom it is a largely accurate statement.

    So far as the Edmonton housing market no longer being tied to the oil and gas industry, now there is a howler. Though I can't recall the last time a realtor predicted lower housing prices.
    Premature? In reading the comments it sounds like aging boomers are now in the previous move out age range (over 55 yrs, but not over 75), but aren't moving out yet and are staying put until an expected 75, so I guess that means fewer houses are freeing up for sale. How that computes in a city that has long had a young population and for the last 15 yrs or so has seen a lot of immigration (largely young people) I can't say.

    However, I've long argued that aging boomers would have little impact on things beyond their own needs like health care and health care costs (and attitudes and influences on all fronts as they retire from leadership positions). There would be no great financial crisis from aging boomers pulling out of the market nor, it would it seem, from keeping, or selling their homes.
    Thanks KC, you got what I thought the economist was trying to say. Previously economists had argued that retiring boomers moving away from homes combined with a lesser echo population would lead to a surplus of older housing. The reality is, the boomers are not going into seniors homes as early as their parents, they are still living in their homes, and the larger then expected size of subsequent generations plus immigration means housing demand has remained consistent, and will remain consistent when the boomers decide to go to a seniors home, starting a decade from now. Given the health of many boomers, some may stay well into their eighties or longer in their homes, so there won't be a glut of housing.

    Also, as KC noted, many home owners have leveraged themselves to the hilt with a homeowners line of credit, also known as a second mortgage, as it used to be more accurately and less pleasantly known. Many boomers will have a 2nd mortgage that may exceed the current value of the house (as many took out the 2nd mortage at the height of real estate prices), and won't be able sell unless they're forced to by health.

    When housing prices drop, it will be from an economic downturn, not from a surplus of boomer housing.

  96. #196
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    5,445

    Default

    The cost of going into a seniors lodge is skyrocketing and the amount of care is dwindling. Just seeing some of the horror stories on the news has me thinking of staying in my home when Im older and maybe finding someone to come around to check on me and help me or having a caregiver of some kind.( if I get that old) so I can see why people are staying in their homes.

  97. #197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    The cost of going into a seniors lodge is skyrocketing and the amount of care is dwindling. Just seeing some of the horror stories on the news has me thinking of staying in my home when Im older and maybe finding someone to come around to check on me and help me or having a caregiver of some kind.( if I get that old) so I can see why people are staying in their homes.

    Agreed. I found out how much my significant other's grandmother was previously paying for rent for a condo in a facility. Let's just say it was significantly more than the monthly amount we were paying on our mortgage on our larger and nicer home.

    Thankfully, they now own a condo in the same facility. But not without stupidly high maintenance and building association fees.

    Take good care of your health to help enjoy your old age without someone spoonfeeding you in your final years. It's the caregiving that costs an arm and a leg and will sap your retirement savings dry.

  98. #198

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blainehamilton View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    The cost of going into a seniors lodge is skyrocketing and the amount of care is dwindling. Just seeing some of the horror stories on the news has me thinking of staying in my home when Im older and maybe finding someone to come around to check on me and help me or having a caregiver of some kind.( if I get that old) so I can see why people are staying in their homes.

    Agreed. I found out how much my significant other's grandmother was previously paying for rent for a condo in a facility. Let's just say it was significantly more than the monthly amount we were paying on our mortgage on our larger and nicer home.

    Thankfully, they now own a condo in the same facility. But not without stupidly high maintenance and building association fees.

    Take good care of your health to help enjoy your old age without someone spoonfeeding you in your final years. It's the caregiving that costs an arm and a leg and will sap your retirement savings dry.
    Live long and expect complications. We had to hire a full time aid to keep my mother and father in the same facility. Anyone in power that says 'the family' is all important to the is just spewing BS. You'd cry if you knew how often elderly couples are separated in their final months/years.

  99. #199
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Crawford Plains, Millwoods since 1985
    Posts
    2,612

    Default

    Interesting opinion piece on CBC.

    We must face the fact that houses could be the next oil: Don Pittis

    Recent reassuring comments about the Canadian housing market remind me of similar blandishments when oil prices began to fall.

    I wouldn't want to overemphasize the parallels between houses and petroleum. Indeed, there are many differences in the two markets, which I will expand upon in a moment.

    But first the similarity. It is that, just as with oil, so many of the people we expect to know what is happening refuse to admit that house prices can go through big declines as well as big increases.

    This is the most disturbing lesson from the recent fall in oil prices, that the professionals — the people who have all the historical data on production and demand — seemed as surprised as the rest of us when oil plummeted by half. The second most disturbing lesson is that after the decline had happened, economists at the big international banks acted as though it was an inevitability, sagely predicting further declines.

    Where were they this summer when oil was trading at $100 US?

    That is why, just as I did with oil, I want to talk through how a sharp decline in house prices could happen once rising U.S. interest rates begin to push mortgage rates higher. The longer we let house prices continue to escalate, the more dangerous it becomes.

    Both federal Finance Minister Joe Oliver and the governor of the Bank of Canada, Stephen Poloz, have acknowledged potential dangers. Poloz worried publicly last week that house prices could be overvalued. But when questioned in New York he said a 30-per-cent overvaluation was not a bubble.

    "We don’t think of this as a bubble in any way," he said.

    Most journalists covering the property market call any fall in house price expectations an "easing" or a "soft landing." But when interest rates start to rise and prices begin to fall it could be more than that.

    There have been voices willing to take a possible fall in prices seriously.

    Hilliard MacBeth, an experienced investment manager who has seen it happen before, says house prices could fall just as far as oil. A more moderate voice is Ian McGugan, who observes that Poloz's willingness to depart from the "see-no-evil, market-knows-best boilerplate" shows he may be more worried than he lets on.

    McGugan mentions something I have called the "sticky downward" effect — that is when owner psychology or unwillingness to sell at homes lower prices, delays price declines.

    This is one example of how housing is different from oil. While oil trades on big, well-informed central trading desks by large corporations, housing is a market made of individual, many of whom have only bought and sold a house once in their life.

    Partly because of that, housing is an illiquid market. Unlike stocks or oil, you can't just sell a house at today's price and get out. You have to go through the long process of finding another individual who wants to buy your exact house at a price at which you are willing to sell.

    In previous housing downturns that has meant a stock of overpriced houses builds up because buyers are unwilling to pay the price sellers expect.

    At that point, prices in the market are set by people who have to sell immediately and will take the price offered. Sudden divorces. A new job across the country. A death in family. People who can't afford to keep up their payments. Overpriced properties waiting for their price actually fall in value while the seller waits.

    I have heard people say falling home prices are good because they let young people get into the market. That is true in the long run, but at the moment when house prices actually turn and begin to fall, the buyer's psychology also changes. Who wants to save up a five or 10 per cent down payment and know it could be gone in a matter of months?

    I remember visiting friends when we came back to Canada who said their house they were living in had just regained its value from when they had bought it 13 years before. In that way houses are better than oil. Oil can, theoretically, be replaced or become outmoded. But no matter what its dollar value, a house will always be worth a house. It is a place to live.

    On Wednesday we may have another hint from U.S. central banker Janet Yellen as to whether they are thinking of raising interest rates sooner or later. However long they wait, the lowest interest rates in history cannot last forever.

    People in the real estate business may be unwilling to face that fact. But it is best for us all if we realize the potential effect on the housing market now, rather than being unprepared for worse consequences in the future.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/we-m...ttis-1.2873740

  100. #200

    Default

    ^ the more you pay for oil (as in gas for you car, etc) the less income you have for other things, like RRSP contributions. The more you pay for housing, the less you have for other things, like RRSP contributions.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •