December 16, 2013

Creating False Scarcity

CBC News reports from Canada. “Real estate prices in Canada are the most overvalued in the world, according to a new study from Deutsche Bank, which estimates homes in the country are valued 60 per cent too high. Would-be home buyer Alireza Anvari has been looking for a place for years, and is now running out of time as his wife prepares to join him from Kazakhstan. He says he can afford a down payment for a house — but the Toronto market makes him ‘incredibly nervous.’ He has extended his search outside the city to Hamilton. ‘This is the worst time to buy in the history of the last 10 years,’ he said. ‘I can’t wait no longer, I have to buy something.’”

The Montreal Gazette. “Despite fears of overbuilding in Canada’s largest city, 85 per cent more condo units are sitting empty in Montreal than in Toronto, a BMO report says. As of October, there were 1,876 newly built, but unsold condo units in Montreal, said BMO senior economist Sal Guatieri, citing Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. data. That compares with 1,013 recently completed, but unsold units in Canada’s largest real estate market during that same period.”

“And that’s despite Toronto having four times the number of condos under construction as Montreal — with 60,000 units expected to be delivered over the next few years. Of Canada’s four largest real estate markets, Vancouver has the highest number of vacant condos, with 1,934 units completed and unabsorbed. Like Guatieri’s report, the RE/MAX report pointed to Montreal as the weakest market of Canada’s four largest cities, and the only one where buyers are said have the upper hand, especially in the condo sector.”

“‘We anticipate a softening in Quebec’s condominium segment, until the current oversupply is absorbed,’ said Sylvain Dansereau, executive VP, for RE/MAX Quebec.”

The Vancouver Courier. “My piece last week about the city’s efforts to get developers to build so-called affordable market rental housing in Vancouver touched a nerve with readers. But as a staff report pointed out, it’s much cheaper to rent than buy a home. The example staff provided was paying $390,000 for a two-bedroom East Side condo, with $40,000 down, for a monthly mortgage cost of $2,550. Income required: $102,000. To rent a new two-bedroom East Side apartment, with a deposit of $2,200, the monthly cost would be $1,455. Income required: $65,000.”

From News Talk 650. “Wendell Cox, senior fellow with the Frontier Centre For Public Policy, has released a report on the affordability of housing in Regina. His report found that there’s a fundamental issue with the cost of land in Regina. ‘The problem is when you put houses on land that is the price of gold you can’t sell them at a price people can afford,’ he explained. ‘The City needs to be monitoring the price of land. And if land prices are not where they were ten years ago, adjusted for inflation and so on, then they need to loosen up and allow more land to be developed.’”

“Cox said part of the problem is the extent of regulation the city imposes on new development. He says it’s creating false scarcity. ‘We always get concerned when OPEC decides they’re going to cut back on oil production and everybody rushes to the gas station, you know, to get gasoline while it’s still cheaper,’ said Cox. ‘The point is: when there are supply constraints prices go up and that’s the big problem that I’m concerned about Regina in the long run.’”

The Regina Leader Post. “I was working out at the gym the other day, when I overheard a discussion regarding housing affordability in Regina. The two who were working out beside me said something I have not heard before in the 20-plus years that I have lived in Regina and, I think we need to be concerned.”

“The first man said ‘I am taking a job out of the province for less pay, but I think I will be better off because I can get into a home for much less than what I would pay in Regina.’ The second man responded, ‘That is why I am commuting from down east. I can’t afford to bring my family here.’”

“There has been no shortage of consultants and urban planners, with respect to our city, who claim that we are consuming too much land, or that we are insufficiently dense. But what the Frontier Centre clarifies is that, for starters, Regina is actually one of the most densely populated cities in North America at over 1,600 people per square kilometre. In fact, Regina has 35 per cent more people per square kilometre than the average urban area in Canada and nearly 80 per cent more people per square kilometre than the average U.S. urban area.”

“Even Portland, Oregon, which prides itself as one of the early adopters of urban containment strategies, is 20 per cent less densely populated than Regina. When you also consider that Saskatchewan has 250,000 square kilometres of farm land, which is more land than all of the United Kingdom which houses a population over 60 times the population of Saskatchewan, and Regina takes up all of 120 square kilometres - I don’t think we are consuming too much land.”

From MacCleans. “News coverage can help fuel bubbles, says Yale economist Robert Shiller, by creating a sort of feedback loop where, for instance, the media starts talking about how house prices are going up, which encourages more people to get interested in investing in housing, which causes the media to spend even more time talking about rising house prices. From a paper in 2008: ‘I argued that the feedback that creates bubbles has the primary effect of amplifying stories that justify the bubble; I called them ‘new era stories.’ The stories have to have a certain vividness to them if they are to be contagious and to get people excited about making risky investments. Contagion tends to work through word of mouth and through the news media. It may take a direct price-to-price form, as price increases generate further price increases.’”

“In an admittedly unscientific experiment to test the idea that the media can fuel a bubble in the Canadian context, I’ve taken a look at the way the Canadian media has covered the housing market over the years. It shows what seems to be a pretty strong relationship between changes in house prices and changes in the volume of news coverage on house prices.”

“Cindy Soo, an assistant finance professor at the University of Michigan, published a paper earlier this year exploring the role that news coverage played in fuelling the housing bubble in the U.S. She found news sentiment closely tracked the housing market, so much so that a one per cent rise in news coverage on the housing market corresponded to a 0.6 per cent rise in monthly house prices. The relationship couldn’t be attributed to stories about market fundamentals, such as the strength of the local economy or mortgage rates.”

“Interestingly, as in Canada, news stories about the U.S. housing market also peaked two years before house prices did. Going further, Soo found that her news sentiment index closely tracked surveys of recent homebuyers, who also tended to turn more negative on housing about two years before house prices fell. (Surveys of homebuilders similarly tracked house prices, although they tended to lag both news coverage and homebuyer sentiment by a year.)”

So can this help us forecast what will happen to Canadian house prices in the future? Since 2008, coverage of house prices has been falling for most years, although house prices are still rising, albeit at a slower rate. Admittedly, these are extraordinary economic times, coming in the wake of a global financial crisis that has prompted governments both here and abroad to implement incredibly lax monetary policies. But given a growing body of research that suggests the news media can not only inflate a bubble, but forecast when it might peak several years in advance, our comparative silence in recent years may end up speaking volumes.”




RSS feed

33 Comments »

Comment by Jess from upstate SC
2013-12-16 05:48:37

In another strange turn ,Canada”s neat rural farmsteads,the huge old barns and the gabled houses, are being erased at an alarming Rate . The Big Farmers buy up the farms, doze the buildings because of the high building tax rates , and you see miles and miles of uninhabited countryside in what was formerly settled and populated areas ,especially southern Ontario ,from London down through Chatham,Ont.

 
Comment by Overtaxed
2013-12-16 06:03:55

“CBC News reports from Canada. “Real estate prices in Canada are the most overvalued in the world, according to a new study from Deutsche Bank, which estimates homes in the country are valued 60 per cent too high.”

Now here’s something I’ve been shouting from the hills for the past few years, glad someone in the MSM finally has woken up to it.

Canada is absolutely, off the charts, ridiculous. The entire population of Canada would fit into California with plenty of room to spare (Cali actually has a higher population). Yet Canada has a land mass that’s about 60X that of California. 60X!! And, if you’ve ever been to Cali you’d know, it’s not exactly “running out of land” anywhere except right near the coasts. It’s ridiculous, land in most of Canada should be 1000/acre or less.

The crash up north is going to make the one in the US look like a joke. I wouldn’t be shocked to see houses in large areas selling for 20% of their previous sale price. On aggregate, I’d be shocked if the country didn’t see a 50% drop in prices.

I love our northern neighbors, but, I have to ask (hopefully we have some Canadians on here) what the he** are you people thinking? It’s CANADA, not South Beach/Bel Air! I see House Hunters up there all the time with young couples looking to buy their first home in the 500K price range?! Does everyone in Canada make 200K a year? And then, what they are looking at (houses) we wouldn’t pay 250K for here in the states.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2013-12-16 06:25:46

Fixt it

“Real estate prices in Canada the US are the most overvalued in the world”

 
Comment by Mr. Smithers
2013-12-16 07:14:50

“Yet Canada has a land mass that’s about 60X that of California. 60X!!”

And 90% of that land is pretty much uninhabitable. Well unless you don’t mind -30 temps year round.

Toronto is on par with L.A. when it comes to sprawl. Sure, there’s land available to build. But nothing within an hour’s drive of the city. A 50 year old, 3 bedroom house for $1M is not unheard of close to downtown for that reason. Your choice is $1M for that or $500K for the McMansion 60-90 minutes away in the boonies. I have a friend in T.O. who put up his house for sale and did a Facebook listing tie in. $1.3M for a so-so looking house. It sold in a couple of weeks. And that same house would go for $1.3M in the Bay Area easily.

As for Vancouver….it’s been in a bubble just waiting to pop for 30+ years.

Comment by Overtaxed
2013-12-16 07:32:58

“And that same house would go for $1.3M in the Bay Area easily. ”

But Toronto isn’t the Bay Area. It’s not even close; IMHO. It would be like comparing a condo in NYC to a condo in Denver, CO. NYC is expensive because there are lots of jobs there that pay absurd amounts of money, people are dying to live there and it’s a world class city that’s totally out of land in just about every direction for 50-100 miles. Toronto is a 2nd tier city, and it’s not in the tri-state area. :) (Note, I don’t live in NYC or the tri-state, and I’m not sure you could pay me enough to get me to live there, but a lot of other people feel otherwise).

I’m not surprised that Toronto/Vancouver cost more than living in BFE, Canada. However, I am SHOCKED that they cost more (or the same) as living in the Bay Area, LA, NYC, Boston (pick your tier 1 city).

Also, of note, typically when I watch House Hunters up in Canada they aren’t in downtown Toronto, they are in the burbs. Buying houses at 500/sq/ft. Where in the states a similar house would be 100-150/sq/ft.

 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2013-12-16 07:37:28

And 95% of the US land mass goes undeveloped yeet easily developable.

 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-12-16 07:29:17

“land mass that’s about 60X that of California. 60X!!”

Most of the population lives within 50 miles of the border with the US, but yes there is plenty of land. In the area that I frequent, north of Kingston, there is no justification for house prices being twice what they are just a few miles away in the US. They should be less. Income taxes are higher, sales tax is higher and the cost of food and gasoline is higher.

If you take that 50% off to equalize with the US and then factor in a 50% decline here to get affordable… If we hit some speed bumps on the ZIRP-deficit-fake economy highway, it is unimaginably fragile.

Comment by Pete
2013-12-16 13:15:30

“Income taxes are higher, sales tax is higher and the cost of food and gasoline is higher”

The alcohol tax is off the scale. A 12 dollar bottle of vodka here will run you 40 or 50 there. At least this was true ten years ago, I assume it still is.

Comment by Blue Skye
2013-12-16 14:00:28

I believe that is an exaggeration. My usual is 20% higher.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Pete
2013-12-16 23:23:22

More likely my poor memory, but I remember being shocked at both the prices and how the govt-run liquor stores were as clean as an operating room.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Mr. Banker
2013-12-16 06:42:05

“This is the worst time to buy in the history of the last ten years.”

Rats, here’s another guy who is smart enough to not fall in with the herd and commit himself to sending me a few hundred monthly payments over the next thirty years or so.

Oh, Wait! Stay tuned, he has more to say about the matter …

“I can’t wait no longer, I have to buy something.”

Lol. Where’s this P.T. Barnum guy? I want to shake his hand.

Comment by Mr. Banker
2013-12-16 07:08:25

I like to think of this sort of thinking as being engulfed in and dominated by the “yeahbut factor”, the term “yeahbut” being a combination of two words - the word “yeah” and the word “but”. These two words are spoken in such a manner by one who under the spell of the yeahbut factor that they come out sounding as one word would sound, as in “yeahbut”.

If a logical argument is presented to someone who is under the spell of yeahbut then there will first be an agreement with the premis of the argument, as exhibited by the use of the word “yeah”, but immediately (maybe one microsecond later) the argument - as sound as it might be - will be rejected and the rejection will be exhibited by the word “but”.

Usually two people engage in the game of yeahbut - one person presents the argument, the other guy first accepts and then immediately rejects the argument. But in the case of the post featured right above this post BOTH the presenter of the argument and the rejector of the argument ARE THE SAME GUY.

 
Comment by Neuromance
2013-12-16 10:11:31

This man clearly believes housing is the path to riches. Despite the high housing prices, he believes prices will continue to climb unabated.

The housing hustle/HSSL is really unfortunate. There are those who cannot delay gratification at all. They don’t typically get far in life. Then there are those who do try to delay gratification. This fellow is willing to impoverish himself for decades in order to reach the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Unfortunately, the question which he hasn’t asked himself is WHY are housing prices where they are and will there really be that pot of gold.

 
 
Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2013-12-16 07:39:21

‘This is the worst time to buy in the history of the last 10 years,’ he said. ‘I can’t wait no longer, I have to buy something.’

Stupid is as stupid does.

– Forrest Gump

 
Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2013-12-16 07:41:22

“She found news sentiment closely tracked the housing market, so much so that a one per cent rise in news coverage on the housing market corresponded to a 0.6 per cent rise in monthly house prices.”

It seems like the risk of spurious inference over the direction of causality is quite extreme in this context. For instance, how do you know that it is not insane rates of housing price appreciation that is causing an increase in news coverage?

Comment by Blue Skye
2013-12-16 08:10:21

News coverage of weather events tracks pretty well with the storms. Who can say which causes the other.

Comment by Ben Jones
2013-12-16 08:25:00

While this economist is tracking something this blog watches, I go about it in another way. She’s counting and characterizing news articles. I like to observe behavior within the articles, and look for numbers. From above:

‘I was working out at the gym the other day, when I overheard a discussion…The two who were working out beside me said something I have not heard before in the 20-plus years that I have lived in Regina and, I think we need to be concerned.’

‘The first man said ‘I am taking a job out of the province for less pay, but I think I will be better off because I can get into a home for much less than what I would pay in Regina.’ The second man responded, ‘That is why I am commuting from down east. I can’t afford to bring my family here.’

When I went out to California a few years ago, I met many HBBers. Usually, if I had a chance to talk one on one, the conversation would have a similar pattern. The person would recount many memories leading up to one singular moment or discovery when they would say, “and then I knew there was something wrong. I knew it was a bubble.”

IMO, we don’t need Mr Shiller to tell us the Emperor has no clothes. Just look with our own eyes. It requires that one shed years of bias and untruths.

Let’s take these condos. Sure, maybe some people want to buy an apartment with no land. But do they really want another 40,000 of the things priced at many hundreds of thousands?

Or land. Is there really a “shortage” of land? In Saskatoon?

Comment by Blue Skye
2013-12-16 10:46:12

Much of the stuff being built in this bubble is ugly, crappy, impractical, inefficient and will be a blight for decades. Easy money is easily wasted.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/10/09/class_actions_for_falling_glass_panels_from_toronto_condo_buildings_will_go_to_trial.html

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by oxide
2013-12-16 12:35:22

Speaking of ugly and crappy: This article is a year old, but along the same vein.

http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=312ff8bd-a89f-4dd6-9190-9c2d017cbfa7

“Despite concerns from Edmonton’s fire department, city councillors have approved zero lot line homes - houses built so close together an adult can stand between them and touch both walls. The starter homes in new suburbs will be 1.5 metres apart.

Zero lot line homes work by placing the narrow single family homes right up to property lines. That means the eaves and soffits of one house hang over onto the neighbour’s property. The building code also prevents the home from having windows on that wall.”

[of course the developer swore up and down that they would use double drywall for fire resistance etc. yeah right.]

—————

I showed this article to a friend and he said, “If you’re not allowed to have a window on the zero-lot-line side anyway, it’s the same as a row house. Why not just build row houses with better fire protection?” The answer, of course, is that SFH carries more cache than a row house and therefore commands more $$ per square foot.

 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2013-12-16 15:39:06

A row house or non-row, a distinction without a difference in terms of cost.

I know you wish that weren’t true….. but it is.

 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2013-12-17 10:13:18

A row house or non-row, a distinction without a difference in terms of cost.

Sure—but there is a difference in terms of efficiency. With two walls not exposed to the elements, heating & cooling would definitely be cheaper.

 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2013-12-17 18:28:52

I don’t pay for heating and cooling. I build it.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Ben Jones
2013-12-16 08:10:55

‘If I had to sum up the 2013 Toronto real-estate market in as few characters as possible, I’d probably settle on a giant question mark. Even as an agent, I am still mystified by how the heck the market kept booming these past 12 months.’

‘We’re now in the 17th year of a long-term up-cycle, which some economists would point out is about double the length of an average real-estate cycle.’

‘For all their talk of “cooling the market,” finance minister Jim Flaherty and the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation haven’t really been able to curb it, either. Two changes that, I believe, could put a stop to our real-estate madness are higher borrowing rates and the potential boost of home down payments from five to 10 per cent. But whether Mr. Flaherty will take such an aggressive stance remains to be seen.’

‘Looking ahead, 2014 might well be dubbed “the year of the condo”—a record 42,959 units are forecasted for completion in Toronto, more than any year in our city’s history, almost double the number completed in 2013, and much more than what is forecasted for 2015. With this many units readying for sale, and with so many of Toronto’s pre-construction condos being purchased by investors, the question becomes whether the market will be able to absorb the inventory.’

Comment by Overtaxed
2013-12-16 09:10:40

” potential boost of home down payments from five to 10 per cent. ”

You only need 5% down in Canada? Well, if so, that just explained real estate prices up there to me.

Look out below when that beastie starts collapsing.

Comment by Patrick
2013-12-16 10:18:17

5% DP is only for CMHC insured high ratio mortgages and is only given in about 5-10% of all purchases. Unlike F&F wherein 95% are insured. These numbers are off the top of my head, but the direction is correct.

 
 
 
Comment by Ben Jones
2013-12-16 08:13:13

‘Increasing pressure on Canadian banks’ net interest margins and asset yields indicates that competition among lenders is heating up, and growth rates in consumer loan balances show no signs of moderating, according to Fitch.’

‘Margin and spread pressure has been largely evident in the quarterly operating results of five of the six largest Canadian banks this week. This reflects somewhat weaker asset yields and more intense competition for new loan business in the Canadian market. For example, Royal Bank of Canada’s (RBC) net interest margin (NIM) dropped 7 bps from the sequential quarter and 6 bps from the year-ago period, and similarly Bank of Montreal’s (BMO) NIM dropped 8 bps from the sequential quarter and on an annual basis declined 14 bps.’

‘The announcement by RBC CEO Gord Nixon that he will step down next year is the third such move by a Canadian bank CEO in 2013. TD’s CEO Ed Clark has announced that he will retire in November 2014, and Scotia Bank’s CEO recently retired. While these leadership changes are not a ratings issue, their timing is interesting in light of the industry challenges now facing Canadian banking.’

 
Comment by Patrick
2013-12-16 11:03:22

I only buy real estate my family or businesses need. I have not bought any Canadian investment RE since 1991 because of wild prices.

Any commercial RE I own has a business of mine operating from it.

I have considered buying property in unique areas that have decrepit buildings but have not been successful because of high prices.

Opco sales are reasonable but not solid. Profits are tight. We have credit lines but I get scared whenever they have to be used. Great employees are impossible to find and only great ones are capable of enhancing profits. Mortgage free.

This economy is unlike anything I have ever fought my way through.

Canadian RE prices are definitely way over priced.

We do not have income taxes on residential property gains if the owner occupies the property without any limit.

These offshore foreigners may never occupy their property but clearly are claiming the sale of their “investment” as a tax free residential sale. Why hasn’t the Canadian government cracked down on this ?
Their purchases are skewing the market.

I know RE prices in Canada are going to fall sometime in the future, but what do I tell a daughter who wants help today in buying a home for her young family.

Comment by HBB_Rocks
2013-12-16 13:02:06

Tell her she’s a grown-ass woman and she can buy her own house with her own money or give her a gift and she can buy whatever she wants with it and forget about it.

If you plan on giving her an inheritance when you die, then I recommend the gift so you can be around to enjoy your gift to her.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-12-16 14:04:02

Tell her what you think is the truth. We are in a massive housing bubble and buying at today’s prices with a mortgage is a path to financial ruin.

 
 
Comment by Patrick
2013-12-16 14:13:45

Telling the truth about the market is overcome by her mother’s advice. “Housing always goes up.”

Go figure. Not worth the argument.

Doing it as a gift because it is not what you buy your kids but what you do with them. while alive.

 
Comment by Puggs
2013-12-16 17:21:04

12/17/13…The bell tolls for thee Q.E.

Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2013-12-16 20:25:43

Postpone for two weeks and then okay. I have a former company stock I want to sell January 2 (avoiding further realized gains for 2013 tax year)

 
 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2013-12-16 20:28:34

Doug Casey advises junior mining stocks. Sees a ten-fold to fifty-fold gain potential in them

http://www.kitco.com/news/2013-12-16/Doug-Casey-To-Avoid-Bonds-Eyeing-Junior-Resource-Stocks.html

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post