HawthorneVillager.com

Hawthorne Village (Milton) Discussion Board
It is currently Sat Jun 13, 2026 12:22 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1889 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 ... 126  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Dabills wrote:
nice DTC, i can't really speak to bradford or whererver that place is. i am sure you will be really happy. considering where you are i would say $1600-$1800 would be a reasonable rent charge for your place. if you will be bold enough to send me where you are i will even pull a few examples of houses there and what they rent for.


I am all for home ownership, i am sure i will buy again one day when i feel its right. if i was you i would do exactly what you did if living that far away from the city was something i was interested in. your example is totally fine, the house you described in the GTA is 500K plus. Will i bet your house is worth 291,000 or less 5 years than now? i doubt it but you never know.


Yeah, GTA is out of my comfort zone price wise.

It's not easy to find too many nice and new rental units (lot's of 1970s-1980s houses) but I don't like those. I'm paranoid of building materials, mold, rot, etc. I like new (less than 5 years old). I also find majority of the more reasonable priced rentals are actually split into two units with separate tenants in the basement. That doesn't fly with me.

Here is a comparable rental:

http://www.lindaknight.net/Listing/View ... c=35753437

Regardless, for pocket change more than what you are paying in rent, I am paying for mortgage and property taxes except in the next 5 years, $45k or so will go towards equity while if I was renting, $0k would go towards equity. The rental above would cost more than I am paying now.

For me it was a no-brainer.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Last edited by dtc on Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:38 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Kamato wrote:
Since when could you get to North York from Bradford in 30 minutes....He/She lives closer to the city than Milton!


It's actually 31min to 400 & 401 (42km)

Milton (Scott Blvd) would have been an additional 10km each way and the traffic on the 401W after the 427 is INSANE.

My old house in North West Brampton was also further (and the 410 is worse than the 401 out that way!)

Commute has gone from 1h-1.2h a day down to 30-35 min or so -- most of the time spent at the bottom for 400/401.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 7:39 am 
Really doesnt surprise me that people arent interested in 1950s housing in west oakville, that need to be reno'd....


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 7:52 am 
I dont think its that significant at the end of the day. It simply changes the dynamic of things

people are being cautious and taking on less risk, and also trying to minimize the risk they're already carrying. Part of that means less people are taking on big renos... if you can get a house for the same price with most of what you want anyway in a new build many people will go that route. As time goes on older houses are really going to bottom out.

People often reno old houses because of character and charm, and we're coming into an age of boring old houses that are stale, against new builds.

Its already happening in many please older houses are getting bought cheap and demo'd for their trees/lots.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Interesting.. housing starts are going strong:

http://business.financialpost.com/2011/ ... cond-half/

Quote:
Home builders swung into action this spring, with June capping the best three-month showing since last fall, figures showed on Monday.

While Canada’s strong June housing starts data caught many by surprise, it was the even-stronger revisions to prior April and May figures that surprised economists.

The data suggest the rough patch the Canadian economy ran into in the second quarter may not be as bad as initially thought, and the results also bode well for second-half growth.

“The whole package of the three months combined was quite a bit higher than expected,” Robert Kavcic, economist with BMO Capital Markets, said Monday.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
And another with more detail:

http://business.financialpost.com/2011/ ... p-in-june/

Quote:
June housing starts of 197,400 up 1.7% from May
June starts strongest since July 2010
May and April housing starts revised to 194,100 from 183,600 and 178,700 respectively
Consensus June forecasts were pegged at 185,000
Overall growth in Q2 of 6.7% q/q is first gain in three quarters
Single-family starts surged 11.1% m/m
Multi-unit construction contracted 3.1%
Rural starts down 2.1%
Ontario gained the most, up 24.1% m/m
British Columbia declined the most, down 27.6% m/m
This is what economists are making of the numbers:

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Dabills wrote:
yeah interesting, i dont really know that means? anybody know?

when it comes to home starts i really dont know what it proves or doesnt prove. here is a link to US house starts historically. obviously it is down a ton since 2008, where are we in this cycle?

http://www.forecasts.org/data/data/HOUST.htm


It means that builders are predicting prices are still going to stay for the short term anyways.

All the other areas, like Austrailia, US, etc. are all at record lows. We are near pre-recession highs.

What it means in the grand scheme of things, I don't know. Short term economists say it will boost the economy and GDP.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Dabills wrote:
yeah, so if we learn from experience the builders can be wrong. lol.

Hence the ghost estates all across europe and the USA. Are our builders smarter and less greedy? doubt it. people will always pile in at the end.

short term? it takes years to finish these projects.


What happened in the US was the builders has endless supply from all the fraudulent lending practices that were putting McDonald's employees into half-milion dollar homes.

And yes, it will take a long time to finish (well the high-rises etc) but the single family homes will have a good 1-2 year run before they are finished which will provide jobs, income, material purchases etc. so it's a very good thing for the economy.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Dabills wrote:
definitely, it provides jobs. does housing starts mean much in terms of housing being over/under valued? i dont think so.

i think its almost irrelevant.


My thought is that builders would not risk being left standing with a ton of inventory of house prices drop drastically.

This is a sign of builder confidence in the market. I'd also say it may also be a sign we are near peak prices and it's a last run to make some good profit.

Look at what the builders did when the US housing crisis hit -- many halted production totally and in such created a bit of a supply issue when the market surprisingly and unexpectingly bounced back. This is when we saw prices skyrocket through 2010.

A large push for more new builds is actually good for prices -- it will help to bring them back down a bit by adding more supply to meet the demand.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Dabills wrote:
maybe, i wouldnt say the building industry has any more insight to consumer ability to take on credit. i would say they are just going mostly on what has worked for the last few years. And they could do just fine again.

when did houses sky rocket in 2010 in the states? i know the Obama Tax incentives made it bounce up a little, thats dead now though.


I was talking about Canada. In Canada, when the US got hit, our builders panicked (with right cause) and the starts dropped large. I believe house prices in Canada saw a hit of around 10-20% in various areas. What happened next is that interest rates went low, many people found their jobs/salaries still intact and thus they decided "nows the time to buy".

Throw in some HST, rising interest rate fears and combine it with a low inventory of homes available (since the builders had halted new developments) and we had a real estate frenzy. The best in a hundred years.

This didn't happen in the US. They had a building surplus -- a SUPER inflated large surplus that will probably take 10 years to sell through. This surplus was because demand was so high thanks to the shady lending practices going on in the US. When it turned out the "high demand" consisted of jobless no income types they had the problem whereby who can possibly buy all those vacant homes.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 2:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Yep, who knows what will happen next.

Residents in Vancouver make on average less income than those in Toronto yet real estate is almost 40% higher. I don't think they get more credit in Vancouver than we do in Toronto so if you look at that model, the GTA could have a lot higher to go still. The peak may still be a few hundred thousand dollars higher.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Dabills wrote:
well there is a reason Vancouver has a negative savings rate, they probably arent much richer in actuality despite their RE bubble.


Looks like Toronto has over-taken Vancouver as most expensive city thanks to rent going up, up, up.

http://www.thestar.com/business/article ... anada?bn=1

Quote:
Toronto is now Canada’s most expensive major city, ahead of Vancouver, Montreal, Calgary, and Ottawa, according to a worldwide cost of living study released Tuesday by consulting firm Mercer.

A surge in the cost of rental accommodations put Toronto ahead of Vancouver this year.


Hmm, maybe rent is going to start catching up with prices, instead of the other way around.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Last edited by dtc on Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
Ol Skool wrote:
dtc wrote:
Yep, who knows what will happen next.

Residents in Vancouver make on average less income than those in Toronto yet real estate is almost 40% higher. I don't think they get more credit in Vancouver than we do in Toronto so if you look at that model, the GTA could have a lot higher to go still. The peak may still be a few hundred thousand dollars higher.


Actually they do get more credit than Toronto because many of them can and have turned that 40% and more into a HELOC and get themselves into even more debt. It becomes a surrogate to their weak incomes.


Right. So...then... the same thing *could* still happen in Toronto. So we may see $1,000,000 average home prices still in Toronto -- since Toronto should have the same "access to credit" that is keeping Vancouver afloat.

Sounds like a good time to buy, we still need to double prices before we hit the breaking point where Vancouver stands (if this is it).

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2011 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:10 pm
Posts: 813
My point is not that I believe it's good. Or great. It's terrible. But my point is if it can happen in Vancouver, it can happen in Toronto. Right or wrong.

A few years ago a relative sold a VERY large house in Richmond Hill and moved out West to retire. They bought the new house cash for $550,000 - it was 25 years old, needed repairs.

People said...

"You are CRAZY, this market has peaked!"

"It's gonna be worth way less, the rent/price ratio is way out of whack!"

"People in Vancouver make way less than people in Toronto.. these prices don't make sense"

"Why would you sell a huge large near new home and buy this old house?"

"You are nuts."

....

Today the house is worth $1.1 million. Their house in Richmond Hill will probably for for around $750k

So the reality is, we could still have a long way to go.

Nobody in this thread has yet to point out why Toronto *MUST* be different than Vancouver. Why we can't see a $1,000,000 average price peak.

It was already argued it wasn't because of foreign investment.

_________________

Looking for something to do today?
Day Trips Canada - http://www.day-trips.ca


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2011 11:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:21 am
Posts: 4035
Dabills wrote:
it doesnt have to be different, sure lets get it to vancouver levels. its irrelevant. the return back will be just more painful. thats my point i guess.


Im still waiting for bread to cost 10 cents like during my parents time...lol

As long as people are buying homes, it will never go down, because someone is standing in line right behind them to buy it at that price.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1889 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 ... 126  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.035s | 14 Queries | GZIP : Off ]