Saskatoon real estate sales were certainly brisk this week with eighty-three house and condo deals firming up, trumping last week’s sales by seventeen units and finishing well ahead of the same week last year when just forty-seven properties changed hands. As the week drew to a close, so did the October sales month. My preliminary research shows a total of three hundred and eleven residential sales for the month, an increase of forty-six percent from last October’s dismal numbers, and growth of twenty-five percent when compared to the five-year October average of about two hundred and forty-eight Saskatoon homes.
New listings of houses and condos slowed again and dropped to their lowest level since the first week of 2009 to finish at just sixty-three, making this one of just four weeks this year in which unit sales exceeded new listings. This week’s total listings fell by nine properties compared to last week, and dropped thirty-one homes compared to the same week last year.
Naturally, the number of residential listings offered for sale on the Saskatoon multiple listing service declined again, falling fifty-three properties from last week to nine-hundred and forty-three, reaching their lowest level since early May of 2008. On a year-over-year basis, total active residential listings are down six hundred and sixty-one properties. The existing inventory of single-family detached houses sits at five hundred and fifty-six, down from nine hundred and seventy-nine for the same week last year. Active condo listings are presently at three hundred and twenty-one, off from five hundred and twenty-three at this time last year.
The number of cancelled or withdrawn listings fell to just sixteen this week, and seven of those rose from the ashes (hey, it’s Halloween) to reappear as a new listing on the Saskatoon MLS system. Approximately zero home buyers were fooled by the move. An additional forty-eight sellers adjusted their asking price in hopes of attracting a buyer.
It was another huge week for condominiums which accounted for thirty-six of the eighty-three reported sales. Perhaps more significant, ten of those condos showed sale prices from $75,000 to $99,900. Consequently, the average selling price of a Saskatoon home took a beating falling to just $254,912, its lowest level since June of this year and about thirty-five thousand dollars below the same week a year ago. The six-week average slipped four thousand dollars from a week before to $276,159, and finished roughly sixteen thousand dollars below last year’s number. The four-week median price slid six thousand dollars from last week to $264,000, off nine thousand dollars from the same week in 2008.
Click the image for a larger version of the graph.
Lower sale prices brought the average underbid down from $9,807 last week to $9,043. The average discount as a percentage of the asking price in those instances where the home traded below list price was about 3.4%, just a slight change from last week when it was 3.6%. The percentage of home sellers who struck a deal within ten thousand dollars of the asking price increased again to seventy-seven percent, while the percentage that closed within five thousand dollars fell from fifty-three to forty-one percent.
Thanks again for reading. Have a spooky day!
Map displaying the boundaries of Saskatoon real estate areas
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.
Real estate geeks can follow our daily updates on Twitter @norm_fisher.
Our Saskatoon home search tool offers MLS listings represented by all real estate brands, presented with more detail than you’ll find anywhere else. Check it out here.
Norm Fisher
Royal LePage Saskatoon Real Estate
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.teamfisher.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.teamfisher.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.teamfisher.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[LinkedIn]](http://www.teamfisher.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/linkedin.png)
![[Twitter]](http://www.teamfisher.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
![[Email]](http://www.teamfisher.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
{ 17 comments… read them below or add one }
Hey Norm,
Ten condos between the price of $75 and 100k, that does sound interesting and somewhat strange? And sales, amazing what low interest rates and lenders who make all the profits and share in none of the risk can do for the housing market. But the government claims to have many more arrows in their quivers, you know 10% down and 25yr ammortizations. Of course now our economy has reached total goverenment control, intervention and manipulation. The economy can’t correct, the government won’t let it. We are no longer in a market economy, this approach did’nt work well for the Soviet Union, and of course it’s just a matter of time before the government gets a big slap which they don’t see whilst they are so busy with their fancy financial foot work. The tax payers will pay more tax then they should have which doesn’t help GDP much, to pay for Harper, Flarety, and Carney’s boondogle economic approach. The three &*^$%’s
“Ten condos between the price of $75 and 100k, that does sound interesting and somewhat strange?”
I believe this building was converted to condos and the units are being sold off as is, so they’re a bit dated and need some work. Nine of the ten sales were made by the same agent, perhaps to the same buyer who picked them up for revenue or resale. Guessing.
Rick,
I think the boondogle is Harper’s, and Flarety’s. Carney stepped into David Dodges
shoes after the boondogle got started. Carney is pursuing other measures to cool houses other than raising interest rates. He hasn’t said it yet, but I think he’s going for shorter amortization and higher down payments on houses. I’m all for it! I disagree with CMHC and have never bought a house with them underwriting it. CMHC has grown to a uncomfortably socialistic point that Canada is pushing communism.
“Carney is pursuing other measures to cool houses other than raising interest rates. He hasn’t said it yet, but I think he’s going for shorter amortization and higher down payments on houses.”
He hasn’t said he’s going to do anything yet, has he? I think he said that he has options to cool the housing market besides raising rates if he deems it necessary.
“…that Canada is pushing communism.”
Communism Steven? Because of CMHC? How is CMHC pushing our country towards communism?
That’s right I don’t think Carney mentioned anything other then options. Now we all know hindsight is 20/20 but after the huge bubble in America and our own inflationary pressures in housing, you would think that the government could have raised qualifications for home purchasers while lowering interest rates to stimulate the broader economy. Now Carney may have some success talking down the irrational exuberance if he directs it to the lending institutions, but the borrowing public will just continue to borrow as much as the banks are willing to lend. If he mandates that the lenders share in some of the default risk and borrows have to put up more money over shorter ammortization periods as well as reduce the amount of RRSP withdrawls, that would likely cool things down a bit. Of course the question now is what is he waiting for. An further, with all this tightening and loosening and suggested rule changes, it really makes you wonder who wins and who loses out.
Rick,
The key will be to bring just enough pressure to “cool” the market, not to crash it.
Norm, “The key will be to bring just enough pressure to “cool” the market, not to crash it.” Anything you adjust (amortization, financial requirements or interest rates) has the potential to crash the market in a few years time when everything resets.
Rick, “Of course the question now is what is he waiting for.” I would say the aforementioned economic recovery, wouldn’t you?
“CMHC has grown to a uncomfortably socialistic point that Canada is pushing communism. Steven, you bring up an interesting point. At one point in time there was a tradeoff in terms of lifestyle, spending habits and discipline to become a homeowner. CHMC has removed this requirement and diligence by rewarding and incentivizing bad behaviour.
Communism is defined as “actual ownership being attributed to the community as a whole or to the state”. CMHC is communism, or a socialist policy. I ask you how is it capitialistic? Is it mainly funded by private investors? – No! If I end up paying greater taxes because I am part of the community that funds the feds for underwriting my fellow neighbours house, that is communism to me. However; if CMHC raises the mortgage insurance fee to cover its losses, I would consider that to be more like capitialism.
Carney’s mandate is to control inflation. He has no powers over the banking act that controls amortization and downpayments. And who changes acts in this country – politicians. He can only suggest and influence the policy making of Flarety and the CMHC. Norm, do you think politicians know what the “key” is. I am sceptical that policy makers have the guts to make hard decisions and tell Canadians what is really good for them.
Society has learned very little from the Great Depression. The thinking behind current stimulus was that during the Great Depression governments were slow to react. I feel society will learn from current economic conditions that stimulus/relief acts against the longer-term interests, and undermines the independence and resilience of economy regardless of how fast money is injected.
The economy is a force that society can only debate over until a resolution is achieved. Just imagine we are on a flight in a airplane called “the economy”. If it’s gonna crash, there really is nothing that can be done other than to take preventive measure to have a safe landing. So far some measures have been taken to prepare for the landing, but “may I have your attention please” there is still fuel in its wings. Any proposals on what to do with the explosive material? I know fuel is expensive, but I don’t want to be burned because someone else sees value in keeping the fuel. I suggest dumping the 35 year amortization and low qualification to buy a house combustible!
Jason,
“Anything you adjust (amortization, financial requirements or interest rates) has the potential to crash the market in a few years time when everything resets.”
That’s my point. I’m just saying that the powers that be a very aware of how quickly things would go from bad to worse if they move too much too quickly.
Steven,
I suppose it’s safe to say that you have ever used CMHC to buy property then?
I’m not suggesting for a moment that standards have not become too lax. I am suggesting that over time, CMHC has done much good in terms of opening up how ownership opportunities for Canadians, and I suspect that we have all be enriched through those opened doors. There’s a a fair bit going on between capitalism and communism, and while we have definitely moved further to the left, suggesting that we are in danger of becoming a communist nation is a bit over the top.
Oh, by the way, is CMHC losing money or are you forecasting?
CMHC is an insurance scheme that generates a ton of money for the government. It protects capitalistic organizations, ie banks. It is also possible to get similar insurance from completely private sector insurance companies. There are a lot of things about it that I find frustrating, but to suggest that it is tantamount to communism is truly bizarre.
Almost as bizarre as suggesting we haven’t learned anything since the great depression. We’ve just witnessed the worst bay street implosion since the great depression and the result was a recession no worse than what we saw in the 1980’s. Heck, outside the automoble industry where they’ve caused their own pain things are that bad. Life for the average consumer is actually MUCH better then almost any recession in history. Things aren’t fantastic, by the hyperbole by some here borders on things I can’t say due to blog rules!
These are all good points. We also have to think about how these policy changes have interacted (longer amortizations and temporarily low interest rates) and how they might have the potential to hurt the very people they were set out to assist when interest rates start their inevitable rise. Particularly if the economy doesn’t smarten up pretty quickly, or employment or wages soften further.
In fact, the lengthening of amortizations was an issue before the economic downturn and the subsequent historically low interest rates, via increasing demand by previously nonqualified buyers, lowering supply, and driving up prices. If wages had also risen, this may have been sustainable; unfortunately, it just became easier to carry the debt. The two of them together (long amorts plus very low borrowing costs) have created a scenario in which the pendulum of affordability has perhaps swung too far, given the precariousness of the economic recovery and the future direction of interest rates. People on the edge of affording the monthly payments at these rates and amortization schedules may not be able to carry the debt when things change. Amortization length is still up in the air, but interest rates are certainly not going down from here.
Just caught this- thought I’d pass it along:
Housing activity seen reviving: Activity and prices will improve in the second half of this year and grow further in 2010, CMHC says
“Among provinces, housing starts in Saskatchewan will slide to just 3,600 units this year, nearly half levels of the previous year. A strong economy and a relatively robust labour market, which will attract migrants to the province, will cause housing starts to rebound to 4,350 units next year, CMHC expects.”
Thanks Jen.
“Activity and prices will improve in the second half of this year”
I wonder of CMHC is aware that the year is all but over and that the housing market probably can’t really “improve” in most parts of the country?
Competition Bureau seeks real estate shake-up
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=2173949
“A landmark investigation by the federal Competition Bureau may dramatically change the way homes are bought and sold in Canada. The Canadian Real Estate Association has informed its members that a two-year inquiry by the Competition Bureau has been completed and that significant changes to their practices have been requested.”
“CREA is still negotiating a settlement with the Competition Bureau, but it is expected that the industry will be forced to loosen its restrictive access to the MLS system and allow discount brokers into the market. More significantly for Canadian homebuyers, they may pay less in realty commissions and fees if the Bureau gets a favourable settlement.”
“If CREA reverses its stance on MLS, home buyer’s agent will be able to negotiate directly with the seller or the seller’s lawyer if the seller chooses, and not be required to have a listing agent involved in the negotiations.”
“In addition, consumers could pay a fee to list their homes directly on MLS.”
Ryan, “We’ve just witnessed the worst bay street implosion since the great depression and the result was a recession no worse than what we saw in the 1980’s.” We’re still not out of it (latest GDP data), the Bank of Canada is alluding to another housing bubble, interest rates are slated to rise in the near future and another stock market correction is just around the corner. I don’t think this is over by a long shot, and we could very well see another round of bank collapses, additional bailouts and a subsequent second stimulus package.
“Competition Bureau seeks real estate shake-up
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=2173949”
Wow, that’s great. I wonder if it’ll ever go through.
Rivera, “I wonder if it’ll ever go through.” I think at the very least, buyers and sellers are going to find more options available to them. And finding a good real estate agent (to buy or sell) will be more important than ever.