A closer look at the Saskatoon real estate statistics for April 2009
The Saskatoon Region Association of Realtors recently reported April results for the entire residential category of Saskatoon real estate, which includes single-family homes, condominiums, semi-detached properties, duplexes, mobile homes and vacant lots. Unit sales totaled 353 properties across all of these property types, and an average sale price of $275,455. Let’s have a look at how houses (single-family detached homes) and condominiums did in comparison to the entire residential category.
The total inventory of Saskatoon homes for sale (houses and condos) dipped ever so slightly over the month of April falling to 1,322 units from 1,328 at the end of March.
Total active listings of detached houses fell by 20 units over the previous month to finish at 847, significantly higher than the 470 single-family homes available at the close of April 2008, but still, a rather reasonable supply for this time of year. Unit sales in the same category grew to 235, up from 193 last month, and about ten percent lower than April 2008 when 261 detached houses traded hands.
The inventory of Saskatoon condos increased again, rising to 475 from 461 the month before, and reached levels nearly twice as high as the same month last year when 241 properties were showing an active status on the Saskatoon MLS. However, unit sales took a fairly sharp increase rising from 66 units last month to 110 in April, the highest number of condo sales recorded for any month since July 2008.
Increased unit sales brought the absorption rate (months of inventory) down for both houses and condos. There is currently a 3.6-month supply of detached houses (down from 4.5 last month and at their lowest level since July 2008) and a 4.3-month supply of condos (down from 7 months in March and at their lowest level since May 2008).
The average selling price of a detached house increased fairly significantly from $286,634 last month, to $312,565, falling short of last April’s average of $329,101. The median selling price gained $20,000 on a month-over-month basis rising to $295,000, down $15,500 from last April when it reached $310,500. The three-month average selling price rose by just $3,000 to $296,933, about $25,000 lower than last April’s figure of $321,124.
The average price per square foot for single-homes also came up in April gaining ten dollars on the previous month to settle at $248, roughly ten percent lower than it was last year at this time.
Condo prices also rose over the previous month, though not as substantially as single-family homes. The average selling price for the month was $219,733, about $4,500 higher than it was in March, but down from a whopping $259,467 for the same month last year. The median price gained $5,550 over last month rising to $215,500, but down nearly $30,000 from April of 2008. The three-month average was stable, month-over-month at $219,927, just $8,500 lower than last April’s number of $228,470.
The average cost per square foot for a Saskatoon condo slid just one-dollar to $213, off nearly eighteen percent on a year-over-year basis from its near peak of $261. That said, price per square foot for condos is certainly looking more stable in recent months and the steep losses experienced through the last three quarters of 2008 seem to have stopped.
Remember, averages and cost per square foot numbers can provide some useful insights into pricing trends but they’re not as useful when engaging in an actual transaction. If you’re buying or selling you should be seeking current information on active listings and recent sales, which are most comparable to your property in terms of location, size, features and amenities.
See a Google map displaying the boundaries of Saskatoon real estate “areas” here
Data collection and calculation for our statistical reports
I’m always happy to answer your Saskatoon real estate questions. All of my contact info is here. Please feel free to call or email.
Follow our daily updates on Twitter @Norm_Fisher.
Norm Fisher
Royal LePage Saskatoon Real Estate
There's 49 Comments So Far
May 6th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
Congratulations to the lucky area 4 condo owner who managed the first condo sale in the area in eight months!
May 6th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
1 sale in 8 months?
Do they get a prize?
May 6th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
“Unit sales in the same category (detached houses) grew to 235, up from 193 last month, and about ten percent lower than April 2008 when 261 detached houses traded hands.”
Wow. Considering the current economic climate, I think that’s stunning. Those historically (ridiculously?) low interest rates have certainly been effective at getting people off the fence. What they’re jumping into when rates rise is something I dearly hope buyers are considering.
Thanks again for your breakdown of the April stats, Norm. Always an illuminating read!
George,
The prize is the sale, no?
May 7th, 2009 at 12:55 am
Norm,
Would you ever consider being a guide in a private sale (for a fee of course), or would that be a conflict of interest with your brokerage?
May 7th, 2009 at 5:26 am
Crikey, with only 39 sales this month (so far), I wonder if buyers aren’t giving serious consideration to what interest rates will be in a few years. What’s interesting is that 59.7% of sales in April fell in the $200k-$350k mark, so that definitely seems to be the price point for most.
Norm, do you know how many months of inventory we’re looking at for $550k+ and over listings based on the 5 sales in April?
May 7th, 2009 at 7:09 am
George,
“Do they get a prize?”
A sale price 11 points higher than they invested fourteen months earlier. Minus costs to buy and sell, an estimated break even. Many others speculators wish they were so lucky.
Crikey,
Thinking ahead, one can’t help but consider the great American resetting mortgages. You definitely don’t want to be pushing the boundaries of affordability at these low rates. Thankfully, we can count on real estate agents and lenders to give people good advice in this area.
Northstar,
We don’t have a package for that, but we should have. Would certainly be willing to discuss it.
Jason,
Yes. A two-year supply, but you’re talking about a total of 118 homes, a fairly small segment of the market.
May 7th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Jason,
Someone put in some overtime at the SRAR office last evening inputting sales that brought the monthly number to 46 (39 for the week). Not great, but with two full days of business yet, it could still shape up to be a typical week.
Sales took a pretty hard tumble from April to May, and then from May to June last year. It will be pretty interesting to see where they head this year after a fairly strong April. Is it possible that we could be reporting some year-over-year gains in unit sales?
http://www.normfisher.ca/images/teamblog/salesbymonth0409.jpg
May 7th, 2009 at 9:44 am
No no no, Norm… you can’t compare sales to the 2007 or 2008 numbers . Haven’t you read all their reports? Those were *aberrations*. If you want to see what a REAL May looks like, you have to go back to 2005/2006! That is, after all, that’s how every other RE number in Saskatoon has been reported since January.
I mean, we all know that it’s disingenious (bordering on deceitful and dishonest) to pick and choose a shifting comparison period solely for the purposes of making the current numbers look good. As such, I’m confident that regardless of of what our sales numbers are in May, SRAR will continue to compare them against 05/06 (when there were > 400 sales) rather than 2008 (when there were ~360). After all, SRAR is all about the data integrity and clear market view, right guys? Right?
Guys?
May 7th, 2009 at 9:49 am
“You guys must be very bussy. because you never called me to see any house. And houses are selling up and down specially in the prices you are looking for. Thier is Myth in the market that house prices might will go more down. That seems not happening.
On the other hand houses started selling and this is a good time to buy, 2 reasons you can save money by getting mortgage at the lowest intrest ever. House prices will start going up if they will sell at the same they are selling right now.
Please let me know what you guys are thinking.”
this is what a real estate agent said to me. he is a friend of a friend, so we(wifey and me) thought we would let him know we are looking. he keeps sending us “buy now” messages. i like the fact that he sends us some listings that we cant find for ourselves. however, i dont like the fact that he seems a little pushy considering i have never met him, or even asked him to be our agent.
what say you guys?
May 7th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Trader,
drop him. If you are serious about buying a house, get an agent who has your best interests in mind, not his.
There are many good real estate agents out there, some bad. Ask around, there may even be someone here who can help you out. Heard he is not too bad:)
May 7th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Bookrat,
Lol. Oh ya.
It’s a tough time to be a bear all of the sudden.
Crisis of confidence ends
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/fp/Crisis+confidence+ends/1571299/story.html
May 7th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Norm, “someone” was highly motivated, I gather…?
Maybe, but a “typical” month start (the first 7-10 days) has generated unit sales in the 100+ range for the last 4 months, so using that frame of reference I’d say we’re down 33-50% this month compared to last. With the exception of April and May last year, the rest of 2008 followed a similar pattern. I don’t have the YTD unit sales for 2008 or 2009, but just looking at the graph I’d say we’ll need a stronger Summer than last year to come close to evening it out.
Bookrat, good points. I guess the answer is because if SRAR were to use 2005-2006 (as opposed to 2007-2008) average housing prices things might tend to look… well, overpriced (which they are). If prices are off 10% this year compared to last, it’s a “buying opportunity” (except for those folks now underwater 10%+, of course). If prices are up slightly one month over the other, then you run the risk of being “priced out of the market”. And let’s not forget: 1,400+ MLS listings is still an improvement over last year’s 1,800+, because even though it’s an *aberration* it’s still handy to diffuse the notion that we might have a bloated level of inventory by making it sound “normal”. Strangely, the historical average of about half that number doesn’t seem to enter the equation…
May 7th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Norm, all we’re seeing is another wave of euphoria that’s economically unsustainable. Instead of leveraging whatever assets we could we’re now leveraging our future ability to repay by gambling on low interest rates. Bears remember that “the last pig at the trough gets slaughtered!”
May 7th, 2009 at 11:12 am
Jason,
I’m only regretful that I was one of the first pigs to run away. Everything I had purchased is way, way up. Oh well.
May 7th, 2009 at 11:26 am
Oh, so there’s nothing fundementally wrong with the economy… it was all a “crisis of confidence”. What a relief! Onward and upward, then.
Norm, don’t be too regretful. This magical unicorn rally is more than a little long in the tooth. On the other hand, I have been saying that to myself for several weeks now…
May 7th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Crikey,
I’m sure that’s true, but just the same, it would have been far better to sell at 10,000 than at 8,200.
Investin’ is hard work.
May 7th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Norm, if it’s any consolation, you did point me in the direction of ishares index funds at exactly the right time in early march, which i promptly loaded up on. quite a return in the past several weeks. you should almost get a commission:)
As far as realtor’s telling people now is a good time to buy, I’d have to say that if I was planning on living my life in Saskatoon long term, had a nice house in mind, and could afford the payments on a ten year fixed mortgage, it would seem hard to go wrong. Wait a year or two? Save 10 percent off purchase price? But quite possibly pay a few hundred bucks more each month on your mortgage then. If you buy long term now and lock in rates, you may lose some of your downpayment in the short run, but that’s something you plan to tie up long term anyway. Monthly costs are what you’ll be dealing with over the next several years. Saving a few thousand a year in payments balances that out fairly soon, and in 10 years, any 10 percent dip next year will be long recovered. In short, if you plan to buy long term, the low monthly payments over several years seems more of a boon to me than a short term risk to my downpayment. If you think you may move from the city in a year or two, that’s a different story. But long term, I would agree it’s a great time to buy.
May 7th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
“Norm, “someone” was highly motivated, I gather…?
Maybe, but a “typical” month start (the first 7-10 days) has generated unit sales in the 100+ range for the last 4 months, so using that frame of reference I’d say we’re down 33-50% this month compared to last.”
Lol. Jason, you spin numbers as much as any real estage association to find the approaching plunge you’ve been selling for months. First of all, those 100+ numbers you talk about are usually two full weekly reports, each averaging 47 – 60 a week. We haven’t even finished one full week in May yet. And it depends where weekends fall too. In any case, if you want to use two week comparisons from earlier months, you better do the same here. In any case, probably best to wait a week or two, rather than a day or two (when sales aren’t even necessarily inputed in a timely fashion if they are busy) before spotting your next sign of a downturn.
May 7th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Jason, I’ll have to side with you. I graphed out the stock market MACD indicator for Saskatoon prices, and to no surprise to me the indicator is not good. If Saskatoon was a stock, I wouldn’t be buying it! The graph is available on my blog at http://relistings.drakeventure.com/relistings
May 7th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Mark,
“Norm, if it’s any consolation, you did point me in the direction of ishares index funds at exactly the right time in early march, which i promptly loaded up on.”
Oh yes. This makes everything worthwhile.
Glad to hear it worked for you. I think running away with a profit was the right strategy but unfortunately my timing wasn’t worth a damn. I did understand that was going to happen sooner or later.
May 7th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Steven, just for kicks, try adding March and April to your price trend graph and get back to us. Prices are trending back up right now, it seems, at least in the short term.
Secondly, you don’t usually borrow 80 percent to buy a stock, and if you were buying a stock and holding it for several years with that much leverage, would you wait another year or two for that borrowed money to cost you a fair bit more in the long term. In any case, how much lower do you think Saskatoon prices are going and how fast? They are rising month to month right now.
May 7th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Mark, please. At least I don’t have a hidden agenda; SRAR does. One might also say the same for someone with a vested interest in a half dozen spec houses… Banks, developers, tradespeople and even realtors all make great money when prices are artificially maintained at these levels, so I’d say there’s a fairly well-oiled machine at work here.
Mine is but one mere opinion, and I’d seriously doubt if it were the sole deciding factor for anyone. Maybe, however, just having an opposing viewpoint gives people more confidence to be more selective and thorough with their housing prospects, secure lower interest rates and ultimately negotiate a better deal.
Steven, thanks for the graph – definitely another interesting aspect to consider.
May 7th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Mark, I’d say your first statement is correct within certain price points; I don’t think homes above $500k are necessarily trending upwards at the moment.
May 7th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Jason,
“At least I don’t have a hidden agenda; SRAR does.”
SRAR’s agenda is posted front and center on their website.
First and foremost “To represent the real estate interests of its members”
I suspect you and I could agree (more or less) on how that might be done but that’s another story.
I would think that anyone hearing the news from the Saskatoon Region Association of Realtors could understand that it might be a tad bit biased.
If you’re looking for warnings from SRAR that it may not be a good time to buy, I think you might be expecting a little too much from an organization that survives strictly on dues it collects from real estate agents.
bookrat,
Forgive me for being on a SRAR defensive here but you guys are really heaping it on. I’ve just been through the last half dozen SRAR releases and in each one they clearly compare this year’s figures to last. They do point out that 2007 and 2008 are the stand out years, but they do make a year-over-year comparison for each number in each release.
May 7th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Norm, don’t forget: “To provide a positive public image, reinforcing the professionalism of the industry for our members”. If anyone holds a positive view of SRAR, by all means – please speak up. In my eyes you demonstrate a lot more professionalism by remaining somewhat impartial and simply providing the information for interpretation. But that wouldn’t necessarily garner any headlines…
SRAR media releases… May 2009: “Unit sales figures were ahead of 2005 and 2006.” April 2009: “Sales numbers are on par with 2005 and 2006.” March 2009: “Year to date unit sale numbers are ahead of 2005 and 2006 sale figures.” January 2009: “Unit sales are on par with 2007 and ahead of 2005 and 2006.” December 2008: “The 2008 year to date unit sales number is up 2% measured against 2006 when 3,276 residential units sold. When 2008 sales numbers are compared to 2005, unit sales are up 15% when year to date number stood at 2,861 units sold.”
I think the point was that certain comments have fairly selective comparisons, and the results tend to be skewed to support a particular viewpoint.
May 7th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Jason, I’m not sure why you keep harping on this SRAR issue of comparison to 2006 numbers. 2007 and 2008 were wildly anomolous years. Anyone who knows anything about statistics knows that making comparisons to anomolous data is meaningless (they still do it, but what’s the point) other than to highlight how anomolous those years were…..
Outside of 2007 and 2008, the Saskatoon housing market has been historically extremely stable and they are completely justified in using 2005/2006 as a means of comparison.
You said “I think the point was that certain comments have fairly selective comparisons, and the results tend to be skewed to support a particular viewpoint.”
You are completely backwards here, they make the comparisons for the exact reason of not “skewing” the numbers. Sorry, but I don’t see a hidden agenda. Now, if they have actually changed the data to make it look how they want, then that’s a different story…. And no, I have no affiliation with SRAR whatsoever…
May 7th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Jason,
“SRAR media releases…”
Frankly, I think these are points worth making. Do you think it’s actually balanced and fair to present unit sales over the past year as being in the tank? You’d be hard pressed to come up with a better example of “spin” if you wanted to present that view.
http://www.normfisher.ca/images/teamblog/salesbymonth0409.jpg
In my opinion, the more facts we can can bring to the discussion, the better. You guys might like it if nobody brought up the fact that sales really aren’t that bad but how is that fair or impartial?
May 7th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Norm,
Even though sales are lower than last year, they might be more impressive because of all the economic turmoil throughout the world. I won’t lie, last fall I thought it could have been real estate armageddon here this spring. Credit and confidence, the two things needed for any market is alive and well here.
I will say that SRAR does put a bit of spin on media releases but I don’t blame them at all. One just has to walk in their shoes.
May 7th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Norm, if we’re going to be “balanced and fair”, then in the same sentence that we point out how sales are up over 2005-2006 we should also indicate that they’re down from 2007-2008 without using the words “aberration” or “anomaly” to describe it. Because in reality, the real estate community saw 2007-2008 as anything but. It’s also worth pointing out that the level of affordability has steadily decreased since 2005 as well, and that houses are still fetching multiples higher than anything historically. Historically low interest rates merely obscure the actual true cost of home ownership for many.
A market comparison of 1,748 listings in September 2008 with the current inventory of 1,499 is intended to sound good, but where are the comparisons with inventory in May 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008? How about just 2005-2006 then? One bad month of sales and excitable sellers will easily rectify that…
And I’m not sure lumping all sales in the $450-$750k range to give the impression that there is still a lot of demand for high-end homes is accurate either when, in reality, only 5 houses over $550k changed hands. 8% of the market, a 2-year supply yet it accounted for just 1.4% of sales.
May 7th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
George, in your view, what do you think is different here with respect to ‘credit and confidence’? Economically, are things that radically different here or is it possible that we’re still relatively optimistic having arrived late to the housing bubble? You’ve been a proponent of expecting a period of deflation; do you still see this as being the case for the foreseeable future?
May 7th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
George,
“I will say that SRAR does put a bit of spin on media releases”
I wouldn’t suggest otherwise, and I’ve said as much myself on several occasions. My points were that they don’t have a “secret agenda,” that their bias should be clear and expected, and that occasionally, the pot does call the kettle black.
May 7th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Regardless of who spins, pro or con, all economic prosperity in Saskatchewan is based on exported resources and commodities. Larger export volumes at higher prices leads to more jobs with higher wages, which leads to more homes sold at higher prices, however I thought it was interesting that when oil was at $150 a barrel house prices were falling in Calgary. I think this was a sign that with all the prosperity that Alberta could muster and with the oil sector firing on all 8 cylinders house prices had stretched beyond affordability on a supply demand basis. I don’t think short term spin can yield long term results regardless of who tries to influence others to buy or not buy a house. In the end it’s all based on how many people are willing and able to borrow, and how many people the banks are willing to finance. Of course in the USA there was plenty of participants on both sides, however in the end things did’nt work out that great.
May 7th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
The cycle of market emotions.
OPTIMISM
EXCITEMENT
THRILL (WOW. I FEEL GREAT ABOUT THIS INVESTMENT) EUPHORIA (POINT OF MAXIMUM RISK)
ANXIETY
DENIAL (TEMPORARY SETBACK. I’M A LONG TERM INVESTOR)
FEAR
DESPERATION
PANIC
CAPITULATION (MAYBE THIS MARKET JUST IS’NT FOR ME)
DESPONDENCY
DEPRESSION (POINT OF MAXIMUM FINANCIAL OPPORTUNITY)
HOPE
RELIEF
OPTIMISM
If we are at the denial stage we have quite a way to go and so do prices. “IF”
As for condos, do you think were at the fear stage.
May 7th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
The general trend for condo prices still looks like it is going downwards.
http://www.normfisher.ca/images/teamblog/condo_0409.jpg
This is expected, in fact, it should be going down faster. There are many similar condos on the market right now. Many have been there for quite some time. But for reason unknown, none of these condos seem willing to decrease their prices to undercut the competition! For a place with so many low quality condos, the prices here are just plain unreasonable!
May 7th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
In defense of SRAR, their website has a better statistics section than the others I have looked at. If you know of a city real estate assoc with a better statistics webpage, I would appreciate knowing which one. I’m not saying there isn’t one, just that I poked around looking at a few other cities and SRAR’s looks pretty good to me.
May 7th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Jason,
until we have a monetary system that is not based on credit anyplace that does well like Sask,will get the credit they want. Any other time in which this province was a 0 or 1% growth, there would not be much confidence. But comparing ourselves to rest of the world, things are not too bad here. That is why there is confidence here.
I won’t disagree that we were late to the housing bubble, but prices have come down and rates are at all time lows. Whether the rates put people into the mother of all ARM’s remains to be seen. ( I don’t think so)
May 7th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
I’m by no means saying that Saskatoon isn’t going to see some more downside in the future. In fact, when I re joined the blog a couple of months ago, I warned of a temporary bull rally to take place in to the summer, to be followed by another downward spiral (gloabl statement, not just Saskatoon).
That being said, there’s some real negativity towards Saskatoon here lately. I wouldn’t be so confident on Saskatoon’s real estate collapse or “overvalue”. I came here because I saw the massive opportunity at a time when most didn’t. There’s always safe harbours during times of financial crisis and I think Saskatchewan is one of them. We’ll probably see some effects from the next bear move starting this summer but I wouldn’t be anywhere else right now.
“Investin’ is hard work.”
You could always let someone else do it for you
May 8th, 2009 at 12:38 am
Another bull run?!?! Or is it more like a buffalo jump? :’)
BoC has done a great job of keeping the house market afloat this long, Saskatoon RE remains overvalued and unaffordable. (although prices are down YOY thank goodness) Great for me who will be tying in for 5 years @ 3.59%… not good for those lacking foresight as to what they can afford come “the reckoning”. That being said I do believe SK’s economy will fare the best over the next couple years.
Side note: There were sure a LOT of RE listings for May 4th, 5th, and 6th on Point2 – wowzah! Trend or anomaly? Hmmm.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:25 am
“bookrat, Forgive me for being on a SRAR defensive here but you guys are really heaping it on.”
You guys? I made *one* deliberately satirical comment.
Dana said: “2007 and 2008 were wildly anomolous years. Anyone who knows anything about statistics knows that making comparisons to anomolous data is meaningless … other than to highlight how anomolous those years were”
I agree with this statement. I appreciate that you did the due diligence, Norm, and checked out the facts of SRAR’s release. I agree that they have actually been mentioning 2007-2008… but the point is that they KEEP mentioning that these years were aberrations, can’t be trusted, aren’t reliable indicators, etc. The difference is that they were NOT saying those things WHILE THEY WERE HAPPENING … as Jason said, they were acting like this was the ‘new normal’ in Saskatoon, and this was simply to be expected.
The spin comes in other ways too — e.g. saying that inventory is ‘down substantially’ from the peak, which doesn’t really tell the story that there have only been three months in the last six years where inventory was higher.
I understand that SRAR has a job to do. I have said in the past that I would not want to be the person who has to write these reports, because I could not do so in such a way that pleased their proofreaders AND fit with my own ethics. I also agree that the very things that have held Saskatchewan back in the past (resource-based and agrarian economy vs. manufacturing and services) are now helping bouy us up while those latter areas collapse in North America.
My point is this, and only this: I believe that the market is still too expensive, that low interest rates are masking this and driving short-term debt acquisition by people who will not be able to afford the carrying costs when rates (inevitably) climb, and that this will cause ANOTHER reset and wave of economic troubles — both locally and nationally. I understand that SRAR is only ‘doing what it does’ when it encourages people to buy bigger and better houses, but from the above perspective I don’t consider it to be healthy for the population as a whole, so in general I rail against it wherever I can.
In general, I don’t like ’spin’, or people who advance their own agenda with no concern for the long term health of the other guy. I prefer facts, compassion, and win-win situations… which is why I like your site, Norm. The information is here, and people can make up their own mind. Thank you.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:45 am
bookrat,
You make a good point about past sins, but I’m not sure that SRAR’s failure to point out, at the time, that 2007 and early 2008 were unsustainable would justify them excluding that those years were well above the norm now.
Thought this was interesting from the April 2007 release.
The question everybody is asking is “will we see even higher prices in the months ahead”? The answer is maybe. Demand dictates price and at this point in the market we have huge demand from a number of sectors. We have local buyers and investors, a high number of expats moving back to Saskatoon and area plus major demand from Alberta and British Columbia buyers, investors and speculators.
Our concern is for the first time buyers and anyone requiring affordable housing. There is immense pressure on this sector of the market place as it is in other cities that have experienced similar booms. Is this market sustainable? Only time will tell. Sustainability will be greatly influenced and created by stable permanent residents in our city and province.
By the next month, this was what concluded the release.
The question is always asked, is this market sustainable? The answer is yes, we have been long overdue for a price increase and after significant increases, we still have a substantially lower average sales price than the national average, which is over $300,000.00.
Lol.
In my opinion, they could omit the little editorial that concludes each release and just focus on the facts, but of course, the media always wants to know “why?”
I understand that there is no malicious intent but there’s a heck of a lot of “spin” that comes out of the bear camp as well and I think that Jason was rightly called on that above (sorry Jason). He may be one guy, but he’s told us that he sold the family home at the peak hoping to buy back in after a crash. He not only has an interest in a market crash but it seems that his plan is counting on it.
May 8th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Mark,
March and April are in the graph. The blog software has a layer that covers up right side of the top post.
I posted a commodity wheat graph today showing the relationship between Saskaboom and wheat, so it got pushed down and March and April are now visible.
Graphs at http://relistings.drakeventure.com/relistings/
May 8th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
I think I am speaking for everyone when I say:
–Bear camp is depressing–
Besides, no one likes a bear
If I was camping I would rather run into a squirrel or even a moose. But bears…they just end up scaring everyone.
Lets not forget that consumer confidence is a very real quantitative economic indicator. And right now what Saskatchewan has over other provinces (Jason) is just that. Consumer confidence. It also has 50$ a barrel oil (still nice profits) and full ready to spend provincial coffers. It also has a government that paid a significant portion of the debt back in the past 2 years and a federal government that is willing to match investment dollars. Luckily we have lots of money to spend for them to match.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
**Correction: Almost $60/barrel oil
May 8th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
L.oki,
“But bears…they just end up scaring everyone.”
I take it you’ve never been face to face with a bull then?
May 8th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
You can domesticate a bull. Bear camp is depressing.
May 8th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
L.oki,
“Bear camp is depressing.”
It’s not quite as depressing if you don’t own a home and would like to.
Here’s something we haven’t seen in awhile.
Canada adds 36,000 jobs in April.
http://tinyurl.com/r3xx3v
May 9th, 2009 at 11:17 am
Further to the “Oh, you can’t compare this year to last” discussion, I found this comment from CMHC to be a fitting contribution.
“The turn down in housing starts this year is deceptive, because we are comparing this year’s numbers with 2008, which was one of the strongest years on record,” said Paul Caton, senior market analyst with CMHC.
Tell that to a home builder.
Saskatoon housing starts down 88% from 2008.
May 11th, 2009 at 1:01 am
Norm,
I think your statement suggesting that bears do not own property is is false. I’m bearish and I own property in Saskatoon.
L.oki
Saskatoon had a good boom, I was bullish and sold when I saw the opportunity. However, a bull run can’t go on forever. I am certainly not bullish (I mean not full of it) to run with the herd that goes off the cliff.
Domesticate = herd follower
May 11th, 2009 at 7:11 am
Steven,
“I think your statement suggesting that bears do not own property is is false.”
Then I haven’t been clear in conveying what I intended to convey.
I wasn’t intending to suggest that only someone who doesn’t own property could be “bearish.” What I meant to convey is that falling prices are not “depressing” for everyone, and for some, they bring back some hope that they may also own a home some day.