Monday, July 05, 2010

REBGV Statistics - June 2010

The Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver released the monthly statistics package for the month of June 2010. Active listings held firm at relatively high levels. Sales were not strong for various reasons. Months of inventory rose to just about 6. Prices have fallen for 2 months now. The market looks very weak and set to weaken further with sales falling in the normal seasonal pattern and active listings remaining high.





11 comments:

Fish10 said...

Great graphs as always Mohican. You rock buddy.

jesse said...

Fvreb was lagging the past few months. Relatively good news in the valley but they had a slow start and lower price rises.. Sales need to remain at current levels or better, or price declines are coming. My guess is there will be significant pressure on sellers to lower their prices through the summer, especially in Rebgv and Vreb

MatticusFinch said...

Great charts. Thanks Mohican.

茂慧茂慧 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Etienne de Cochon said...

Martin Wolf of the FT argues against government policies promoting home ownership, as well as restrictive urban planning policies.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8f06df9e-8ac1-11df-8e17-00144feab49a.html

patriotz said...

This article can only be read by registered users.

Anyway, I am opposed to all government policies promoting home ownership as they simply inflate prices.I also believe that this is the unspoken goal of such policies.

Planning is another matter. RE development produces significant externalities both to existing property owners and to governments. I don't know what the author means by "restrictive" planning - that term is pretty subjective.

What is not subjective is that the actual supply versus demand of housing is indicated by real rents. Real rents in Vancouver have been falling over the last few decades which means that supply has been outpacing demand. Restricted supply of developable land is NEVER responsible for bubbles - bubbles have only one cause, and that is buyers willing and able to pay prices out of proportion to rents. Restrictive development policies can only be held responsible for high rent/income.

雲亨雲亨雲亨 said...

你的分享很不錯.. 謝謝 ..................................................................

Etienne de Cochon said...

Wolf isn't deliberately being obtuse by not describing what he means by restrictive planning policies. It is very difficult to make any changes to ones house, nevermind garner approval to build a development. For a country which emits more platitudes about sustainability and green policies per capita than anywhere else, it is absurdly difficult to replace single glazed windows with double glazed windows, because of concern for the appearance and character of the neighbourhood. Google up Chelsea Barracks and Battersea Power Stattion to see what kind of risks a developer must deal with.

Tell me patriotz, are you some sort of billionaire hedge fund manager? Your understanding of market dynamics and housing economics suggests to me you must have made a killing on housing derivatives. I mean, you're obviously a much more eminent commentator than Martin Wolf.

Etienne de Cochon said...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1293524/The-house-meant-garage--bedrooms-kitchen-diner.html

Witness the wrath of the insular briton.

patriotz said...

you must have made a killing on housing derivatives.

Care to respond to what I said, or are you only capable of ad hominem comments? If the latter, RET is the place for you.

于倫 said...

快樂不需要理由-及時行樂..................................................................