Tags: Market

17 Jul 2009, Comments Off

Pure Insanity

Author: admin

Good ‘ole insanity is back!

Paying 10% more than a property is “worth” is back in high fashion, and this mentality was exemplified with the recent sale on Portland Street in the thriving King West area.

What a property is “worth” is anybody’s guess, but what if a comparable sale was staring you right in the face?

insanity.jpg

I consider a “buyer’s premium” to be anything paid above what the property should reasonably sell for.

If a property is under-priced by the seller and the seller’s agent and comes onto the market at $199,900 when it “should” sell for $225,000, then a $232,000 sale price would indicate a $7,000 “buyer’s premium.”

I also call this an emotional premium.

It’s hard to pin-point a value of any house or condo in the city, but we can sure come close!

So what do we make of a condo that is “worth” $340,000 selling for $385,000?

It’s pure insanity, in my opinion.

Before you judge, let me give you the backstory…

I detailed my experiences with this unit as part of another post last week, so forgive my redundancy.

Portland Street is located in “FreedVille” where Freed Developments has built half the area and has many more projects scheduled for construction in the not-too-distant future.

It is also in the heart of the thriving King West area between Spadina and Bathurst where all the chic restaurants and bars are located for the 24 – 30 year old crowds to pounce.

Brant House, West, Conviction, Brassai, Bier Market, The Spoke Club, Cheval, and even Blowfish if you feel like walking more than three minutes; are all at your doorstep.

I knew there would be action on this very dressed-up 1-bedroom unit in a 2-year-old building on Portland Street, but never did I think I’d see the complete insanity that plagued our market in 2007.

I mentioned last week how I stood outside the building with my clients one night waiting for another Realtor to come back with the key all while other groups of buyers showed up with their agents in tow.

We ended up seeing the unit with another group, and 2-3 more groups passed us by from the front door, to the elevator, to the lobby.

It was a complete mad-house, and the subsequent insanity should have come as no surprise.

But I’m naive, I suppose, and maybe a bit old fashioned.

I don’t get drawn in my the glitz and glamour of being able to pre-drink at my Portland Street condo before stumbling a block to Brant House with my buddies while my daddy’s Visa burns a hole in my pocket.

And when I see numbers and values staring me right in the face, I use them to make a rational, informed decision.

This unit on Portland Street was listed at $325,000 and immediately became the buzz of the industry.  All my colleagues had shown it; some of them to 2-3 different clients, and every young buyer in the city was sent this listing by their Realtors.

The unit was perhaps a touch over 600 square feet, but it was meticulously staged right down to the color and organization of the bowl of jelly-belly on the counter.

It was a fantastic unit, but my buyers didn’t like the fact that the second-storey balcony overlooked the alley-way below.  With the City of Toronto not picking up garbage and the hot summer heat, it was a pass for my clients.

We did our homework in advance, however, and found that the exact same model unit had sold for $345,000 only a month prior.  This unit was on a higher floor and was facing south, meaning it didn’t look at a garbage-alley from ten feet above.

We determined that since the two units were the same inside, but not the same outside, perhaps the unit currently listed for sale was worth a hair less than the $345,000 asking price.  I told my clients $338,000 but added that there may be a buyer willing to go right up to $345,000 just to ensure he or she gets the place.

My clients are both savvy people and said, “Why would we pay the same $345,000 price for this unit when the other one was substantially better?”

I told them “you wouldn’t, but somebody else might, and probably will.”

Emotion plays a huge part of the purchase process, but none of us were ready for the final selling price.

I ask YOU, the reader, to come up with an idea right now of the “insane” price you think I’m speaking of.

Do the math yourselves – the unit is “worth” slightly less than the exact same model that sold for $345,000 a month earlier because it happens to be on the second floor over looking an alley way behind a row of King Street restaurants.

The unit is “worth” $340,000, but somebody paid more, didn’t they?

Am I talking about $350,000?

How about $360,000?

Wouldn’t that be a gas?  Somebody paying $20,000 more than all rational thought would indicate they should?

Try again.

How about $370,000 then?

No.

This unit sold for a whopping $385,000.

If you’re the guy that just paid $345,000 for the same model one month ago, congratulations – your condo just went up in value to the tune of forty-large.

But if you’re the moron that just paid a $45,000 emotional premium for this condo, please tell me WHY!

This is one circumstance where the old adage, “It’s worth what somebody is willing to pay for it” is completely false.

It’s not worth $385,000, now way, no how.

It simply can’t be worth $385,000 when the same unit just sold for $345,000!

If you are this buyer’s agent – you should be ashamed!  But you won’t be, because you’re an a**hole who sold out his clients for a $9,625 commission…

This buyer got carried away, and simply said, “Screw it,” while throwing all caution to the wind.  Perhaps the buyer had been looking for six months and finally found the “perfect” place to call home, but the price he paid should haunt him for quite some time.

One of the first things I tell my new clients is, “If you have a mental stumbling block about being in competition, you need to get over it right now.”  Because for ever Dick or Jane looking at 1 Shaw Street, 1029 King Street, or 66 Portland Street, there is a Tom, Dick, or Harry looking at the same property with the same gleam in their eyes.

But when absolute INSANITY kicks in, I tell my buyers to walk away.

The price paid for this unit on Portland Street makes me sick to my stomach, and it has nothing to do with those awful ribs left over from Sunday night that I just microwaved and downed with a large glass of milk…

It has to do with the ridiculous price that somebody paid while tearing up the comparable sales and saying, “I’ll pay anything to get this place.”

That’s when you know the market is out of control.

I can’t predict the market – I can only comment on the current conditions.

But if this sort of thing starts to happen with increasing frequency, I’ll be very, very worried as we move ahead…

http://torontorealtyblog.com/2009/07/17/pure-insanity/

reviewed by Moishe Alexander,   CFC  Canadian Funding Corp CEO

17 Jul 2009, Comments Off

Been There, Done That…

Author: admin

As the hotel investment world in 2009 painfully deals with a slumping market and problem loans, we recall that in 1993, Bruce Baltin, Senior Vice President and Consulting Practice leader in Los Angeles, wrote about solutions for his clients then and they are still appropriate today. Evaluating Performance

‘Evaluating performance – or lack thereof – for commercial properties will continue to occupy a significant portion of lender effort as the decade wears on. Distinguishing among the hopeless dogs, the chronic underachievers, and the potential comeback kids will require the careful scrutiny and judgment of the property on a case-by-case basis, and nowhere will this judgment be more critical than the area of hotel loans. Fortunately, for both the diligent borrower and lender who find themselves in a down market, a workout can be a win / win relationship…’

Lenders have three choices when faced with a non-performing loan:

• Loan restructuring – the workout solution.

• Negotiate a ‘deed in lieu’ of foreclosure or other method of transferring title, or

• Instigate title contest through local courts or, potentially, the federal bankruptcy court.

‘If the lender believes that the borrower in place can optimize cash flow to the lender, he will be far more motivated to restructure the debt. On the other hand, if the lender perceives operational or managerial weaknesses on the part of the borrower, he will be induced to push for control of the asset…

…The weaker the lender’s position relative to collateral and the weaker the asset itself, the more costly will be the process of taking possession versus restructuring the debt.’

http://www.htrends.com/article39979.html

r e v i e w e d  b y  Moishe Alexander, CFC  Canadian Funding Corp CEO

9 Jul 2009, Comments Off

Juxta

Author: admin

NOTICE TO VISITORS
A fire in the Toronto data centre hosting our servers knocked out network connectivity and disabled this site, from 2:25 am to 9:15 am EDT Sunday morning. If your comment was lost, please repost. My apologies. — Garth

sold1

GF special? Listed: $799K. Sold: $825K. Lot 25 x 122.

Historians may rue that, in the early 21st Century, as the planet reeled under three times its sustainable population, the climate tipped towards the irreversible, a fossil fuel-driven economy ran out of reserves and a billion faced hunger as foodstocks were diverted to run cars, young couples would sacrifice all for a mortgage.

That is, I guess, if there’ll be historians.

Anyway, here’s an interesting juxtaposition for you between the young who have wants, and no resources, and the mature who have funds, and smarts:

From this week’s Georgia Straight (which used to tell it straight):

For a week after they signed the papers on their Douglas Park townhome, John Morettie and Jessica Wilson felt nauseated with anxiety. Like about 40 percent of first-time home buyers, according to Statistics Canada, the couple waited until their 30s to dive in. On the one hand, they now have enough money flowing in to afford a Vancouver-sized mortgage. On the other, they need more space than a typical box-in-the-sky condo provides, due to a work-at-home situation and the imminent possibility of kids. So thanks to a once-in-a-lifetime low interest rate, they snagged a home.

The facts: John and Jessica lived in an apartment for which they paid $1,800 in rent. When mortgage rates temporarily dipped to 2.75%, they figured they could afford to ‘buy’ – which actually meant they could afford to rent a steaming pile debt.

“But we don’t have a lot of [wiggle] room,” he said. “We can go up to four percent, but then we’re done.” Oh crap.

Actually, it appears the two moist children borrowed $600,000, with monthly payments of $2,221. Plus property taxes, house insurance, mortgage insurance, amortized closing costs and maintenance, they will likely see a monthly carrying cost of at least $3,000, or 65% more than they paid to rent a home. The best part: they’d been offered $850,000 in financing.

But not to wory. The executive director of the Mortgage Brokers Association of B.C. (Tamera Olsen) said, “I don’t think anyone wants to see what happened in 1981. The lenders are aware; they don’t want to see anyone lose their homes.…What I’m hearing is that any increase in rates will be gradual. Very gradual.”

Maybe someone should tell Tamera that lenders do not set mortgage rates. But perhaps that’s a little technical for her. And where did she ‘hear’ what interest rates will do? Ben Bernanke on Twitter?

Meanwhile John and Jessica might want to know payments on the $600,000 mega-loan, amortized over 35 years (meaning virtually no equity is being built up) can double to more than $4,200 if rates return to 8% – which is still a tad below the historic norm for the last two decades. It’s also twice the point at which they’d be financially screwed.

Now, this:

Mr. Turner: I have read your Real Estate book and followed your financial advice for several years.

My question is simple… I am 45 years old with about one million dollars in cash.  I have been waiting for the real estate market to collapse but each time it starts heading south the Government steps in to change the rules…whether it be extending the legal duration of a mortgage, or reducing the amount required for a downpayment, or most recently slashing interest rates and thereby making mortgages cheaper.

So it would seem that now we have just about EVERYONE who has thought of getting into the market in…speculators, 1st time home buys…everyone.  and many of these people are the greater fools because the prices have not retracted much compared with other countries around the world.

My question is this…does our government make their policies to protect the dumbest Canadians out there?  Is there a chance that real estate will ever be allowed to fall?  Will the government resist raising interest rates to keep inflation in check now because it would cause havoc in the real estate market (prices dropping, foreclosures everywhere)?

What would you suggest I do?  I don’t want to rent for the rest of my life. — Dave

Well, Davey the millionaire, you did not get all that money by being naïve. So, you know the answers: Absolutely, the government will do everything in its power to distort the marketplace, tilt the playing field in favour of the John & Jessicas of this world, encourage a rapid plunge into debt and aggressively discourage people like you from saving money.

Since our economy is essentially unsustainable, it can only maintain the semblance of status quo through growth. That growth gives ever-larger tax revenues, allowing the government to augment, and citizens and corporations to maintain debt payments with marginally increased incomes. When growth falls to zero or (as today) into slightly negative numbers, it is called a ‘recession.’ If it drops to 90% of former growth levels, it is called a ‘depression.’

Governments in Canada, the US, Europe and most of the rest of the world are currently doing everything they can to encourage borrowing and spending, in order to create demand and growth. The techniques include dropping interest rates to almost zero, deficit spending, printing new money, massive bailout loans to corporations, tax cuts to individuals, grants to new homebuyers and the propping up of unstable and failing companies and sectors in order to maintain jobs which will not last.

But, Dave, you know this. You have no debts, and a million dollars. You are a deity.

Wait.

http://www.greaterfool.ca/2009/07/04/juxta/

reviewed by Moishe Alexander,  CFC Canadian Funding Corp CEO