Canada's 'housing bubble' deemed close to bursting

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by Docere

Not sure what you mean. Toronto has plenty of top-tier wealthy neighborhoods that aren't that "new immigrant" - it's not as if there's any sense that immigrant wealth is "displacing" local elites or making "middle class" neighborhoods "out of reach" to the average homebuyer.

Rosedale is just as elite today as it was 100 years ago.

I'm aware that Toronto has wealthy (top tier?) neighbourhoods that aren't new immigrant, obviously. That being said, Rosedale as a neighbourhood is wealthy, not elite. $100-$200,000/year is not elite. What I was saying in response to Stryker's comment, is that the rich neighbourhoods ($1mil+ annual income typically) are not mono-ethnic and quite diverse. The Bridlepath for example is clearly multi-ethnic.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by Stryker

It's not just the property itself it's the being connected.

I.e. Your school, your hockey team, etc etc all give a much more connected environment to develop.

I dunno man, schools here are quite diverse and I haven't met many rich people who play hockey though I'm sure they exist. I have to do a lot of business networking in Toronto due to my line of work and you're just as likely to rub shoulders with a Croatian CEO or Trinidadian $400-500mil entrepreneur as you are a WASP one. Establishment rules like that don't apply in the wealthy classes here, though among politicians, it's quite WASPy due to the fact many of them entered politics decades ago when new immigrant ethnic groups were just beginning to get established.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

I'm aware that Toronto has wealthy (top tier?) neighbourhoods that aren't new immigrant, obviously. That being said, Rosedale as a neighbourhood is wealthy, not elite. $100-$200,000/year is not elite. What I was saying in response to Stryker's comment, is that the rich neighbourhoods ($1mil+ annual income typically) are not mono-ethnic and quite diverse. The Bridlepath for example is clearly multi-ethnic.

There are no neighborhoods where the average income is $1 million in Canada. Maybe micro-neighborhoods like around Dunvegan and Frybrook Rd. in Forest Hill or the "prime" Bridle Path.

The census tract which contains the Bridle Path has a population of about 1,200 and also contains more "modest" (i.e. standard Bayview/York Mills) housing in the south and north ends, though these probably go for around $3-4 million. The average household income in the tract is something like $600-700K.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Docere

In Toronto as well, as a general rule, it seems like the pre-WWII wealthy neighborhoods are WASP/Jewish while wealthy Asians gravitate toward postwar and newer suburbs. That seems to be the pattern in a lot of other North American cities as well, like New York, Washington, L.A. etc.

In Vancouver however they're moving into the 20s-40s neo-Tudor areas and transforming these areas demographically.

And architecturally as well, since it appears they usually raze anything old to build new monster houses on the lots.

[Docere]

Toronto's wealthiest census tracts, by average income (above city average of $46,666 in 2012)

Tract 86 (North Rosedale) 697%
Tract 265 (Sunnybrook-Glendon area) 511%
Tract 130 (Forest Hill) 503%
Tract 125 (Moore Park) 446%
Tract 264 (Bridle Path area) 446%
Tract 87 (South Rosedale) 430%
Tract 138 (Lawrence Park) 430%
Tract 266 (Hogg's Hollow) 397%
Tract 89 (Yorkville) 392%
Tract 140 (Avenue Rd.-Coldstream Ave. area) 389%

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/20...tinues-to-widen-finds-u-of-t-expert.html

Not sure what exactly distinguishes "rich", "elite" and "wealthy."

Though it's true some of these tracts are likely dominated by "just" your standard "1%" wealthy professionals (i.e. tract 140) living in $2-3 million houses and others contain your 0.1% "out of sight" rich (Bridle Path, parts of Forest Hill and Rosedale) within them, though they don't make up the entirety of any tract.

Incidentally, Canada's wealthiest man, David Thomson, lives in North Rosedale.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by Docere

Toronto's wealthiest census tracts, by average income (above city average of $46,666 in 2012)

Tract 86 (North Rosedale) 697%
Tract 265 (Sunnybrook-Glendon area) 511%
Tract 130 (Forest Hill) 503%
Tract 125 (Moore Park) 446%
Tract 264 (Bridle Path area) 446%
Tract 87 (South Rosedale) 430%
Tract 138 (Lawrence Park) 430%
Tract 266 (Hogg's Hollow) 397%
Tract 89 (Yorkville) 392%
Tract 140 (Avenue Rd.-Coldstream Ave. area) 389%

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/20...tinues-to-widen-finds-u-of-t-expert.html

Not sure what exactly distinguishes "rich", "elite" and "wealthy."

Though it's true some of these tracts are likely dominated by "just" your standard "1%" wealthy professionals (i.e. tract 140) living in $2-3 million houses and others contain your 0.1% "out of sight" rich (Bridle Path, parts of Forest Hill and Rosedale) within them, though they don't make up the entirety of any tract.

Incidentally, Canada's wealthiest man, David Thomson, lives in North Rosedale.

Probably why that average number is so skewed, a handful of uber-wealthy can skewer that. One only needs to look at the difference between the houses in Rosedale vs Bridlepath then compare.

[Docere]

So what was your point about Rosedale not "really" being in the same league as the Bridle Path?

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by Docere

So what was your point about Rosedale not "really" being in the same league as the Bridle Path?

Rosedale isn't in the same league as Bridle Path. The latter has more than double the average net worth and yes David Thompson skewers the average for all of Rosedale, the man has homes everywhere. The numbers you presented only make sense if people are using the definition of Bridle Path that includes all of the neighbouring district. When people talk about Bridle Path they're referring to the narrow area of about one hundred monster mansions which are about twenty times the size of your average Rosedale home.

[Docere]

Gerry Schwartz lives in Rosedale as well.

Do you think he cares that his neighborhood is less "truly rich" than the Bridle Path or that there are some not all that expensive apartment buildings in his census tract?

Your argument is akin to saying some uber-wealthy hamlet on Long Island with 800 people is more "prestigious" than the Upper East Side of Manhattan.

The fact is Rosedale and Forest Hill have more uber-wealthy people in them than the Bridle Path do, even if they also contain more "modest" housing. Nobody "rejects" them for being insufficiently exclusive.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by casper

The question you should ask is:

What kind of housing does a prof at Columbia University (New York) expect to live in? Perhaps a small apartment in the city or a home an hour away in the suburbia.

What kind of housing does a prof at City University in London epect to live in? Perhaps a small apartment in the city or a hose two hours away in suburbia.

London. New York. Vancouver.

[Innsertnamehere]

Bridle path is new money, rosedale old money. New money want to show it off, old money go for the wealthy but understated look.

As for wealthy, rich, and elite, I would think of them as this:

rich - new money.
wealthy - old family money that has existed for generations. Its not just you who is loaded, your family has long been in the 1%
elite - being in the uppermost social class. go to expensive dinners, etc. have a membership at the rosedale golf club.

[Docere]

I don't think it's that simple. Plenty of first generation wealthy people live in Rosedale. And I'm pretty sure a lot of "old wealth" has moved out as fortunes dwindled over time.

Gerry Schwartz lives in "old money" Rosedale. Bill Morneau is married into the McCain family and they live on the Bridle Path.

Is some wealthy professional in a $3 million neo-Tudor house in Forest Hill "old money" even if their parents weren't part of the "1%"?

[whatnext]

Cool, in today's Telegraph article on getting out of the bond market, Vancouver is shown as #4 on UBS' real estate bubble index, just behind London, Hong Kong & Sydney. We're world class!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econo...reflation-and-a-bloodbath-for-bonds.html

[geotag277]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Cool, in today's Telegraph article on getting out of the bond market, Vancouver is shown as #4 on UBS' real estate bubble index, just behind London, Hong Kong & Sydney. We're world class!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econo...reflation-and-a-bloodbath-for-bonds.html

UBS doesn't call out Vancouver as being in a bubble, it is categorized as simply "overvalued". Which I would happen to agree with concerning condos. Single family detached housing on the other hand will likely remain undervalued and climbing for the foreseeable future.

[Berklon]

I guess this article can also go in the Provincial Economies thread:

The average house in Fort McMurray has lost $117,000 or 20% of its in value in one year

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Cool, in today's Telegraph article on getting out of the bond market, Vancouver is shown as #4 on UBS' real estate bubble index, just behind London, Hong Kong & Sydney. We're world class!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econo...reflation-and-a-bloodbath-for-bonds.html

Well, the other 3 cities are.

[mistercorporate]

Did someone say bubble??

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Berklon

I guess this article can also go in the Provincial Economies thread:

The average house in Fort McMurray has lost $117,000 or 20% of its in value in one year

Probably set to dip further by a similar amount in the coming year.

[geotag277]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Probably set to dip further by a similar amount in the coming year.

I doubt it will be as much the following year, but it was set up for a slide based on the ridiculous values for homes coming out there. Even with another 20% slide I would still characterize the houses there as grossly overvalued.

Most of the cap ex and head count has already been reduced assuming 45 oil by this point. Some projects are going ahead, some are cancelled. I expect next year will see a slide but not as much.

[ssiguy]

The thing that sticks out with all the cities surveyed on that list is that, despite being #4 most over valued, Vancouver would have the lowest income.