May: Market cracks 4000 listings
Well there were some signs of life in early May, but it wasn’t enough to turn the market around or prevent listings from climbing past the 4000 mark. That’s something we haven’t seen since May of 2015, exactly 11 years ago. May or June usually marks the high point for listings for the year, so we won’t be breaking any inventory records this year, but it is creeping closer to the all time high (5189 properties in June 2012).
Very little happened in terms of change in sales activity in May. Single family sales were unchanged on a seasonally adjusted basis, while condos dipped a little and townhouses increased a little, but none of the moves are distinguishable from noise.
Sales remain very sluggish (though I will note that they are not quite as slow as in the buyer’s market of 2012/13 when we had even fewer sales set against higher inventory).
No great change to the rate of new listings, they remain strong, and up 10% from last May.
Inventory trend remains positive. As usual, even though inventory levels may start dropping slowly as we enter the summer, the seasonally adjusted trend will tell us whether beneath the normal seasonal variation we are still building inventory.
Market conditions little changed overall, with months of inventory weakening slowly while sales to new list ratio is slightly stronger than it was earlier in the year (but still quite weak).
Combining the two measures shows a slight improvement from April, moving back a bit into the cool end of balanced.
You might wonder why I’ve been saying that it’s still a cool balanced market despite over 4000 properties on the market and slow sales. Well if you compare the market to 2012, at that point we had over 5000 listings and even fewer sales so months of inventory was substantially higher than now. You can see the combined measure of the market was substantially weaker back then, floating around 25-30% vs about 40-45% today.
Also, what we’re of course mostly interested in is prices, and the reality is that prices aren’t moving much, consistent with a cool/balanced market, not a strong buyer’s market. Condos are weaker than detached, but overall if you look at where prices have gone in the last 3 years, it’s about nowhere (you could argue detached is roughly pacing inflation)
What we need to turn the market around is better vibes, and that’s tough with gas over $2 and unemployment still creeping upwards. Victoria remains at a very low comparative unemployment rate, but it’s worth remembering that our second largest buyer group after locals is from the lower mainland, and people are less enthusiastic to cash out when their job is uncertain and their property value remains below peak.
I’ll keep saying what I’ve been saying for a long time, history tells us it’s an opportunity for those who can run counter to market sentiment. But if logic trumped sentiment, we wouldn’t pay attention to sentiment in the first place.
June https://househuntvictoria.ca/2026/07/05/june-overall-conditions-improve-but-not-for-condos/
Another no view >$1000/sf 1 bed sale at capital park. Bottom could be in or close to being in for downtown condos.
All good Slick, enjoy your weekend.
Sure whatever floats your boat boss.
Pretty sure I tied pipelines not being built being built by private because of the regulations and the backlash on the Vancouver real estate buy was going to cause a back pedal, but enjoy making your own thing of it.
Penthouse at 4009 rainbow hill looks like a good value buy at 1.365.
Looks half decent and on a .23 acre lot located on a side street beside the cedar Hill golf course, seems like a fair price transacting at 1.165. What price do you think is fair? Someone can buy it, throw 350k at it for upgrades and have a nice house for 1.5 in that location, actually sounds like a pretty good deal imo.
No your statement was no pipeline will be built.
>The government is doing it because they can’t get private backers because of the regulatory environment.
Lol speculation vs actual proposed framework.
Lol who said things are ran well? P.s. pretty sure they recently said they are specifically not buying Vancouver condos.
Uhhh, no.. Kind of proves my statement, not sure of your point. So, a 34-44 billion in public dollars and the Pembina 10% is not actually a commitment, it was a non-binding possibility (lol). The government is doing it because they can’t get private backers because of the regulatory environment. As well, a business model based on “bring us your projects and we will give special permission” (outside the existing legal and regulatory frameworks) is not a way to draw investment because it’s vulnerable due to it can change on the opinion of the moment. But hey, things are being run so well, they see the need to buy a bunch of Vancouver condos too.
Can anyone explain the recent way over ask sale at 1296 Astoria to me? The house needed so much work, the layout was terrible and the lot was solid rock. Multiplex, renovation or ? Just seems like a crazy price.
Smartest guy on the island and low key the hero. Ralph is ineffective and Jack is an a-hole.
it’s been a while since I read Lord of the Flies, but wasn’t Piggy one of the good guys?
Isn’t the government building it? so he is right, they couldn’t get any private investors other than Pembina for 10%.
Well, Piggy, my first attempt was using Lord of the Flies, but I just couldn’t work Max’s banishment into the post. So you’ll just have to settle for being one of Napoleon’s dogs.
Lol want to retract your comment now?
Seriously, two sentence post and you still got AI to write it for you?
Yup – looking for some divine intervention.
>> Maybe not pure luck. I think FIFA groups teams so that host nations don’t face top-tier opponents in the group play stage
Yes. The 9 top ranked teams and the host countries play in separate groups, which is a perc.
But some luck happened for the knockout game to get into group of 16… (fifa rankings in brackets)
Mexico (15) won their group with 9 points, and had to play Ecuador (23)
Canada (27) was 2nd in their group (4 points), but lucked out and got to play South Africa (61)
Luck’s over for the scheduling now, as they face Morocco (6) tomorrow 10am in Houston.
Sure, it’s real estate blog. But underneath?
We have our Napoleans, dogs and sheep as well as the purge aka the “mute” button. And Max well he was Boxer the horse sent off to the glue factory by the group.
Every time he happens to post on a topic I know he is spouting complete hogwash. So 100% I am not going to trust him on other subjects.
Maybe not pure luck. I think FIFA groups teams so that host nations don’t face top-tier opponents in the group play stage
Go figure. Canada destined to finish no worse than 16th in the World Cup. Ahead of Netherlands, Germany and Croatia (heartbreaking loss to Portugal). All three will end up 17th-32nd. .
And of course, Canada lucked out on getting some easy matchups. But soccer is full of bs rules so there’s always plenty of excuses. Canada does have a young team, 5th youngest of 48 teams.
If they didn’t have an external RE advisor for this transaction then that would be very carless use of tax money. I too have contacts at Colliers and CBRE and they are often involved in public sector advisory for RE deals.
Rodger, real estate agents are governed on how they can enhance or alter listing photos — especially in British Columbia, where the rules are unusually explicit and recently updated.
https://www.listingai.co/blog/virtual-staging-compliance-guide/canada/british-columbia?utm_source=copilot.com
Read the court documents, there is a few hundred pages worth. My contact at Colliers came to same conclusion, 5.5 over market value.
Then the mandate is idiotic if it notes you need to pick up 40 units today versus waiting 30 to 90 days for occupancy on a PBR rental to pick up 50 at the same price.
Also, if there is a time frame mandate why have they only moved in a few people? I drove by yesterday and only two top floor units are occupied rest is still vacant.
Now is a different time than then, it could be that they had a mandate to acquire x number of units by a certain timeline and that is the best they done. They almost certainly would have engaged an external real estate advisor (e.g. colliers, CBRE etc.) on the transaction, I doubt it was a couple of flex friday union workers was doing all the negotiations and deal structuring.
There is a long list of comparables that have sold for less, with more units -> https://macdonaldcommercial.com/properties/687-admirals-road-victoria-sale/
The counter argument is these comparables are occupied; however, I know several developers right now that would unload their PBRs approaching completion for attractive prices. Mike Geric is trying to sell Tresah to BC Housing, etc.
and even if they don’t believe the comparables they paid more than the value of each individual unit if it was sold as a strata condo.
For example, the condos in Vancouver are sitting vacant at $1 million not selling and you can buy 50 for $50 million individually. Carney comes in buys all 50 in a package for $55 million. That is what happened on the Island Highway and probably what will happen with the condo bailout.
I recently rented out a unit of mine to a military officer and I asked her why she wasn’t trying to get a unit at the Island Highway project and she said it was expensive so must be pretty close to market rents? I thought there was a long wait list for military housing.
A lot of my seller clients are asking me for these virtually staged photos. Unfortunately there is a long list of things I have to do that I really don’t want to do; however, I agree to them do these things so I don’t get fired by the seller.
Problem is sellers see everyone else doing it and then they think it is effective.
How do you figure they overpaid by $5 million?
Roger, when it comes to condos, people still want them — just not at the pace they did before. That’s the part that gets lost in the headlines. Demand hasn’t vanished; it’s just cooled from the frenzy of a couple years ago. Slower absorption isn’t the same as no demand, and a lot of commentary misses that nuance.
BC developers know this too. They’re well aware that financing for new projects has tightened, which means fewer projects moving into the pipeline. With that in mind, I wouldn’t expect most developers to start slashing condo prices anytime soon. They’re selling — just more slowly — and the real pressure is on future projects that can’t get financing, not on existing inventory.
Agreed, this individual has also missed on two separate huge run ups in house prices while waiting for a crash, the price has now more than doubled since his first crash posting. Hopefully not many people listened to him….
There is a fundamental flaw in your argument. People are not buying these condos because nobody wants them, especially at current prices. Your argument is the government should buy them so the condo developers can build more of the same that nobody wants?
It’s a lot easier to virtually stage a house than move in a ton of furniture. Helluva lot cheaper too.
What’s the deal with the MLS listings nowadays? Every listing shows only virtually staged pictures.
I wish they would come up with a test for future prospective parents to have to pass before they bring a human being on this planet.
When I share something, I make sure I’ve researched it and cited my sources. I’ve also acknowledged several times when Marko has posted ideas I found genuinely thought‑provoking. If you want to debate the points, then debate the points — but there’s no need to slip into ad hominem remarks.
People are entitled to their opinions — that includes me — but it’s also important to recognize that every argument has counterpoints. Without that, the blog stops being a place for discussion and turns into an echo chamber.
When someone can’t defend their argument, they often attack the writer or shift the conversation to a point they think they can win. That doesn’t strengthen their case — it just shows they don’t have one.
In the preceding discussion about the homeowners’ building exam, my point was simply that owner‑builders should demonstrate basic competency — both in understanding their obligations as potential sellers and in protecting buyers as consumers. That’s why the exam falls under Part 7 and Part 8 of the Homeowner Protection Act, along with the Real Estate Services Act (RESA) rules on disclosure. These are mandatory requirements that real estate agents must follow.
Whether the owner‑builder exam makes a home more expensive to build or has created a barrier to entry is a separate discussion.
Mute is your friend, this individual has been posting complete non-sense for 15 years but most readers don’t have enough knowledge to figure how much mis-information he is posting. It’s honestly scary to think he is a licensed appraiser as he claims.
I made a video about this. Even if the idea is good (I personally don’t think it is) guarantee the government will overpay. It’s human nature when it isn’t your money.
Military just overpaid by $5 million for a rental building in View Royal. What are the consequences for the decision maker? Absolutely zero.
I would buy an owner builder in a heartbeat. Having attended 100s of inspections the spec builds can really have some crazy cost cutting measures. Recently on spec builds I’ve seen builders not installing H-clips on roof sheeting due to some provision in the building code and the structural engineer signing off it. and of course the sheeting OSB.
What owner builder is going to the extreme to save on H-clips.
That would mean government workers without something to do thought. Can’t have that.
Owner builder exam also required for garden suites so it creates a barrier to housing there as well. If you are forced to use a builder with a licence for the garden suite of course the cost is going to go up.
Why are the majority of the test questions on construction then? Some of the remaining on farm corp regulations? It’s definitely a manufactured hurdle.
I don’t know a lot about this, but I’m not convinced there’s a strong case for this conclusion, and I haven’t seen Carney mention it either. What he does mention is things like buying at a discount in bulk and then maybe even implementing a rent-to-own type of program. I suppose that part could make some sense in theory.
I’m thinking the bottleneck preventing new condos from being built and the disruption to that pipeline you cite has a lot more to do with them still just being overpriced for the market of realistic buyers. Which to me means more price discovery in the market of willing buyers is needed. It’s a process, and an ugly one. Yes, government stepping in could theoretically be a positive, but given everything we know about large-scale government intervention in just about anything, is more likely to end up being another waste of taxpayer money. Let the market sort it out and let these developers take their lumps.
I’m thinking/hoping that this proposal goes nowhere. And I’m sure you’re right about future shortages already being baked into the cake, but I think that’s happening anyways for sure, and is more due to bigger market forces and not something this bailout would significantly address.
I would buy that house in a heartbeat (if I could afford it). Some of the places I looked at seem to have been built with a 30 year life span in mind.
Looks like he brought a bit of the old world to the new world. Love the big roof overhangs.
That’s the way it was done before. The home owner just had to sign a declaration. They didn’t even have to read it.
A signature is only a claim of understanding, while an exam provides proof of competence.
For owner‑builders, the exam confirms they genuinely grasp their legal and technical obligations.
It’s the same principle used in education — students show what they know by taking an exam, not by signing a one‑page declaration.
That could be a 1 pager you sign.
The Owner‑Builder Exam is not a construction‑skills test. It doesn’t certify you to build a house, it doesn’t measure technical competency, and it doesn’t replace trade training. It’s a regulatory compliance exam designed to make sure the applicant understands their legal responsibilities, warranty obligations, and disclosure requirements — not how to frame a roof or pour a foundation.
I guarantee you, the house my dad built (largely doing the work himself) is sturdier than most of the professional built homes in the 90s.
Would he have passed a technical exam in english at the time? Hard to say. Certainly there wouldn’t have been any testing centres nearby.
It’s even more clear when looking at the percentage of single family homes built by owner builders. (Calculated as the number of owner builder authorizations divided by number of new warranty registrations + owner builder authorizations)
An owner‑builder who receives an Owner Builder Authorization (OBA) from BC Housing does not need to provide 2‑5‑10 warranty insurance on the home they build for their own personal use.
If you sell within 10 years, you must provide a Disclosure Notice to the buyer stating that the home has no 2‑5‑10 warranty and that you, as the owner‑builder, are responsible for defects. Buyers can pursue you directly for construction defects for the full 10‑year period.
These requirements are enforced by BC Housing under the Homeowner Protection Act.
https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/11_29_99?utm_source=copilot.com
Interesting how it dropped it half when the exam was introduced in 2016. I guess that is what the government wants, no SFHs. Some owner builds are garden suites but most are SFHs.
Actually, I have clients in Victoria they did an owner-builder for their SFH and now they have to do an owner-builder again for a garden suite on the same property to accomodate an eldery parent.
In fact it’s increasingly rare to come across an owner-built home, period.
Month Jun Jun
Year 2026 2025
New Unconditional Sales 719 760
New Listings 1,510 1,545
Active Listings 4,054 3,778
No, it isn’t. A person I’ve muted regularly posts complete misinformation; hence why he is on mute. Owner builder is still liable but in real life not that many owner-builds are sold before the 5-year mark and the ones that are sold are sold at like the 3- or 4-year mark so realistically buyer could come after owner-builder for a year or two for a roof/envelope deficiency. After the 5-year mark who cares, structural issues are incredibly rare.
People also don’t understand had the 2-5-10 home warranty works. My builder friend has a difficult client on a brand new build that was being very demanding in terms of deficiencies so I suggested he just let it go the to warranty. Warranty went out and reject all 11 of owners complaints and my friend got the report via email, didn’t have to fix anything 🙂 Builder/2-5-10 warranty is not some perfect system.
There are some common sense things that do work thought. All my clients buying brand new I recommend they have the envelope/roof inspected just before the 5 years warranty portion comes up and that has resulted in builder’s subcontractors coming back out. Mostly smaller roofing issues.
That being said I’ve had the warranty company deny envelope claims for some techincal reasons (doesn’t fit “speciifc performance guide” etc).
owner‑builders are exempt from providing the standard 2‑5‑10 home warranty insurance that most new homes must carry
Is that new? I was personally liable for the 2-5-10 as an owner-builder. I could have purchased insurance to cover myself, but it was very expensive.
And here is a bit of common sense.
When you purchase a newer home built by an owner‑builder, you’re not getting the same protections you would with a licensed residential builder. Under B.C.’s Homeowner Protection Act, owner‑builders are exempt from providing the standard 2‑5‑10 home warranty insurance that most new homes must carry.
The 2‑5‑10 warranty is designed to protect buyers from the most expensive and disruptive issues—water ingress, structural failure, major systems defects. Without it, you’re relying entirely on the owner‑builder’s skill, honesty, and financial ability to fix problems.
The key fact — and it’s one most owner‑builders genuinely don’t realize — is that under B.C.’s Homeowner Protection Act, an owner‑builder is legally responsible for all work performed on the home, including every subcontractor they hire.
If the owner-builder is unwilling or unable to address defects, litigation may be your only option.
Marko, stop it with common sense, there’s alot of money to be made with disfunction. Anybody that has property has benefited from it and the rest can eat cake
Best was during covid making people driving 6 hours in the middle of winter to a testing center.
I have so many insane stories from people. Older couple building their owner-builder retirement rancher. They get to drywall. Husband dies in a motorcycle accident. BC Housing sends someone an eight hour drive from Vancouver to put a “stop work” order on the home. 76 year old widow emails me asking for help with the exam.
At this point I was like wtf, but than after doing some investigating work I figured out how BC Housing found out. They get an alert from BC Land Title if title updated and the wife removed the deceased husband from title (he wrote the exam) which caused an alert at BC Housing. I am guessing the BC Housing person also probably had to stay at a hotel driving up to this place.
The priorities in society are wild. You wait 12 hrs in emerg because you have no family doctor but we have the resources to enforce something that is complete non-sense.
I’ve interacted with over 5,000 owner-builders in the last 10 years and not one individual has said the exam was in any way helpful, even after they pass the exam. Below is a question off the exam. This is what someone trying to re-build a home in rural BC after a fire where there are no licenced contracts has to memorize (closed book exam) to pass the exam. You know what else is wild? In areas where there is no permit required you still have to write the exam 🙂
SFHs construction has completely collapsed to levels not seen in 70+ years. The government is running a massive deficit. Yet, we are running a department at BC Housing contributing to this massive deficit administering an owner-builder exam that is a barrier to housing being built. Even with all my FOI requests BC Housing has never provided or explained what this exam achieves. It’s odd that it is somehow required in BC, but not any other province in Canada. Haven’t seen any stories in the new owner-built homes elsewhere in Canada collapsing and killing people, odd.
If we had leaders with any common sense whatsoever someone would make a call and cancel this exam effective tomorrow morning.
What must a principle of a farm corporation do to receive an HPO permit?
a. Must not sell land for one year
b. Request a rezoning of the property
c. File special resolution not to sell interest in land for 1yr
d. Owner builder cannot work with farming applications
British Columbia doesn’t have a problem with unsold condos. It has a problem with condos that will never be built.
Walk through downtown Vancouver or Surrey and you’ll see completed units sitting on the market longer than usual. But these finished homes are not the system‑level threat. The real danger is upstream: the housing pipeline is stalling, and if we don’t intervene, the province will face a severe shortage of new homes years from now.
Developers across B.C. are reporting the same pattern. Pre‑sales have weakened dramatically. Projects are being delayed, mothballed, or cancelled outright. And because most lenders require 60 to 70 percent of units to be pre‑sold before releasing construction financing, even viable projects can’t get shovels in the ground.
This isn’t a matter of speculation or market psychology. It’s a structural choke point.
That’s why the provincial government’s proposal to purchase pre‑sale condominium units at below‑market prices — a $2.3‑billion program — deserves serious consideration. It’s not about absorbing unsold finished units to bail out developers. It’s about unlocking construction financing for projects that are otherwise stuck in limbo.
Details of the program have not yet been announced. But if the policy is designed to target the bottleneck preventing new homes from being built at all, it could play a critical role in stabilizing the housing pipeline.
Owner-builder exam was just another hoop to jump through – it really didn’t improve any aspect of the process or product. Inspectors were great (other than one) and I enjoyed working with them.
New owners seem pretty happy, especially when they learn there’s already provisions for something they want to do (no need to run new wires from panel etc.).
Shame that owner builder can’t do multi-family.
That’s good, I have definitely seen some and most of the time the builder has a last name belonging to a specific ethnic group. Also heard of realtors advising clients on pulling the building permit to check the last name. Things usually go wrong when you cheap out on things trying to be slick.
Actually one of our own HHVers sold his owner-builder home a few years ago and it was really top notch design and quality.
I haven’t come across owner builder nightmare builds. It is so highly regulated in terms of permitting/engineering/etc. I know when I built my owner-builder home the structural engineer came out 6 times during the build.
Lots of owner builders across BC email me because there isn’t a licenced GC that services their area. BC Housing has made it much more difficult to obtain a residential builder licence, so you have people that have the skillset, but they don’t have the licence.
So you can’t get a licenced builder and then if you hire a GC (that isn’t licenced) you are in contravention of the act and can face huge fines -> https://www.bchousing.org/publications/Owner-Builder-FAQs.pdf
Believe it or not if you hire a framing contractor to do your foundation, structure and then if he or she is in-between jobs and they also do your siding you are in contravention of the act.
Personally, I’ve sold 14 owner builder homes in my career and hands down I would take a owner builder home over a spec build. I sold one on Lochside a few years ago and it was top notch. For example, most spec builds I find sheeting is OSB and every owner builder home I’ve ever sold it has been plywood which makes sense when you are building for yourself you spend a bit more on quality.
Sounds like shitty overall project management, likely wouldn’t have been successful building a home. Many stories like this of people thinking they can build and be their own GC and end up in a disaster situation.
and while we are talking about the condo bailout keep in mind there are decisions that the government could implement overnight that would make housing more affordable while saving taxpayers money such as eliminating the owner-builder exam and the associated department as BC Housing.
“Hi Marko,
I just wanted to thank you for the study material you provided. I recently received my exam result, and I’m happy to share that I scored xx out of 100.
I’m still waiting for the final authorization, as I was advised that they need to verify a few additional eligibility requirements before they can officially issue it.
I found that the exam did nothing to prepare me for the practical realities of building an owner-builder home. The content focused heavily on administrative and regulatory topics but provided nothing of use when it comes to actually building a home
Unfortunately, the delay in receiving my authorization has cost me the framing contractor I had lined up as he was unable to wait through and took on a commercial project instead. As a result, they are no longer available to frame my home, so I am no scrambling but all other quotes are higher.”
According to the strata plan the yards are LCP (private), but the parking spots are not defined so not sure who gets the parking spots.
Does have that private yard in the back though. Has any of the front ones sold? Also are any units assigned to the 2 parking spots or is it first come first serve?
Product is top notch, I have several family members with BYDs. For every Tesla I see in Croatia I see 5 BYDs. I am selling my parents’ Mazda2 and have ordered them a BYD Surf. They are on a small island in Croatia most of the year now so servicing the Mazda2 once a year is a pain as they have to take the ferry. Also, none of the Tesla cars work for them in terms of getting to their olive fields. Model 3 is too low and Model Y is too wide.
In Canada Tesla is much better positioned as where BYD has a product advantage Canadians don’t gravitate towards those product. What Canadian wants a Surf? We can’t even have most manufactures third smallest car let along their second or smallest car. We have no Yaris, no Fit, no Fiesta, no Mazda2, etc., and Yaris isn’t even the smallest Toyota you can buy in Europe, for example.
and then on top of it the pricing in Canada is very aggressive. 39.5k for the 3 and 45k after rebates for the Y (BYD won’t be eligable for EV rebates). I just paid 22k euros for the Surf which is 35k CND so I can’t see them undercutting Tesla by a wide margin in Canada and then on top of it there is the max quota issue.
In my opinion it’s going to be a few years of Elon shipping us China built Teslas. It has been almost 6 months since the deal and Tesla sales this year are exploding in Canada. All the forums are packed with people eagerly awaiting their China Model 3. Every car that arrives in Vancouver (China) and Halifax (Germany) is spoken for before it is even unloaded. Can’t even order a BYD yet.
Another Dale Street missing middle sale today morning for $875k. No garage (that you can drive into).
97 SFHs in the Victoria core under $1 million. Many livable.
At the end of the day the market speaks and obviously there appears to be a strong market for these missing middle units when the same buyer could buy an entry level SFH as an alternative. SOS on Facebook would lead you to believe that no one wants to live in these but relatively speaking (one of the slowest markets we’ve seen in the last 10 years) these are selling well.
I am guessing the no GST for first time buyers is helping big time. That is a 45k savings on a 900k missing middle unit.
Location location location. I bed condo in capital park with no views sold for 810k.
Australia is in no position (geographically) to piss off China.
I doubt it. Australia, unlike Canada, doesn’t have quotas on importing Chinese cars and an auto industry to protect.
The problem with BYDs in Australia is that they they have the lowest resale value among their competititors. Not because they are bad cars just that they flooded the market.
>.>> BYD has zero retail sales locations in Canada — no dealerships, no showrooms, and no official service centers. Tesla has 36.
That sounds similar to the situation in Australia 4 years ago. Just before BYD entered the market, which they now dominate 10:1 vs Tesla.
“ BYD has been in the Australian market for 4 years (since launching passenger vehicles in mid-2022), while Tesla has been established in Australia for 12 years (since officially launching sales in December 2014).”
Groot , it won’t take them long before they’re presence is felt . They have a very nice product and are moving quick
How about that common sense factor.
BYD has zero retail sales locations in Canada — no dealerships, no showrooms, and no official service centers. Tesla has 36.
“ Australia has become a case study in what happens when Tesla faces real competition from China without a home-field advantage.”
Result… BYD outsells Tesla 10:1 in Australia.
https://electrek.co/2026/02/09/byd-outsells-tesla-10-to-1-in-australia-as-chinese-evs-dominate-january-sales/
If it boils down to a price war, I’d expect Tesla to fold before BYD.
The memes have begun.. This is going to be funny to watch how far they try to keep selling to government condo buy..It must be like an episode of “The Thick of It” behind the scenes right now.
After we take 5 years to approve a permit to build infrastucture to diversify trade.
and Carney is diversifying trade, he signed an EV deal with China so Elon can bring is Model 3s at very low prices from China. A friend just picked up the $39,500 China Model 3 and it is so much car for under 40k. Even BYD is going to have trouble competing based on their prices in Europe. I think Tesla is doing this in purpose to slow competition in the CND marketplace. 39,500 CND is like 27k US, they can’t be making any money on that.
The backtracking post condo bail out press conference by both Eby and Carney were so bad. I can’t say I have much more faith in Carney than Eby/Trudeau.
It’s never been on the rails. There is no point to making any “deal” with the child rapist, because a week later, he’ll just be back for more. Look at Europe. Just as they signed off on their “deal”, he started threatening more tariffs. Look at the current shakedown they’re attempting with the Gordie Howe Bridge, even though the terms of that were long ago agreed to. The Mafia would be a more reliable trading partner. Carney is absolutely correct to kick the can down the road as long as possible. Leaving CUSMA would be disastrous for the American economy, so it’s reasonable to dare the idiot not to blink. Diversify trade as much as possible, and hope that in a couple of years there’ll be a functioning adult running the American government, and Canada will have learned a lesson about too many eggs in one basket. Trudeau should have figured this out around nine years ago, but he was too busy bringing in people without considering whether they’d have a place to live.
Just some context on how slow it is
2015 – 8,295
2016 – 10,622
2017 – 8,944
2018 – 7,150
2019 – 7,255
2020 – 8,497
2021 – 10,052
2022 – 6,804
2023 – 6,207
2024 – 6,893
2025 – 6,918
2016 – current pace is a about 6,400ish +/-. I think we will beat out 2023 but unless something crazy happens can’t see beating out 2022, 2024 or 2025.
The other interesting thing I am finding is the numbers aren’t looking that bad compared to the 10 year average as the last 5 years have been so slow those 5 years are now half the weight of the 10 year average 🙂
Month Jun Jun
Year 2026 2025
New Unconditional Sales 664 760
New Listings 1,426 1,545
Active Listings 4,078 3,778
If we get 60 sales in the next two days we are at 724 for the month so the trend of lower sales YOY continues. Inventory appears to have peaked for the year. Maybe we break 4,100 but we likely won’t get to 4,200.
Given how slow the market is missing middle selling relatively ok. Another missing middle sale in Esquimalt this morning at $1,653,750.
Tiananmen Square massacre occurred in June of 1989, that sent prices skyrocketing. I bought in February and took possession in May 1989. According to one agent, the property I purchased (and other properties on the mainland in that price range) went up 40%.
somebody has to be in charge…would you guys really rather it be someone like Trudeau or Eby? I didn’t vote to support Carney, but I would if we had an election right now, notwithstanding this stupid condo thing (it would admittedly be better if he’d just come out and admit it was just a mistake). At least in general he knows how to think. I think he needs a decent mandate to deal with Trump or the fallout if that whole negotiation goes off the rails.
Fly someone gave me from 1989.
December 11, 1989
Mr. & Mrs. xxxxx
What a crazy market!
We had a short breathing spell in the early summer, and then October and November saw the average home price increase by $19,800. The 1981 peak prices have officially been surpassed. The average 1,250 sq. ft. new home is now selling for $145,000–$150,000.
Building lots are as high as $76,000. Prices are being driven by strong demand and an extremely short supply. This year, approximately 5,600 lots were used, and it is now difficult to find 50 available lots anywhere in the Fraser Valley that you could buy. Finished new homes are also virtually unavailable.
A strong economy and the belief that foreign investment will continue flowing into the Lower Mainland like never before are driving forces in our market. A significant portion of the economy is construction. For example, if each new residential home creates two man-years of work, then 5,000 homes generate approximately 10,000 jobs. Hopefully, this construction boom will continue.
Yes, foreign money is here, but is it really the speculation of foreign investment that is pushing the market higher?
The big question is: Will these skyrocketing price increases continue? Who knows?
Here are some facts. Most of my buyers are coming from Vancouver, and they still believe prices here are reasonable. Population growth in the Fraser Valley has remained steady, with more than 4,500 new single-family homes built each year for the past three years. This is a much more stable pace than the 1980s construction boom. We expect continued upward pressure on lot prices because projections indicate that lot supply will remain tight. Notably, Surrey, Maple Ridge, and Langley are already short approximately 33% of the 1,800 lots produced last year.
Mr. and Mrs. xxxx, this is a period of both high opportunity and high risk. Normally, every action in the market has an equal and opposite reaction. Is this time different?
Your property at xxxxx is currently at a seven-year high. If you are thinking of selling, or would simply like an updated estimate of your home’s current market value, please give us a call.
No, he’s a politician, that makes him as deceitful, shameless, scummy and self-serving as Elizabeth May.
Mark Carney is a banker.
He supports bankers.
What did everyone expect to happen?
And buying a few condos is the least of our problems.
Carney is leading Canadians into the trap with Brussels.
Why?
Because that’s the bankers nest 🙂
It’s dropped 40% from some price that was peaked out of thin air, not sure if that means much. If they had started at $4 million the drop would be even bigger, but not sure if it changes anything tangibly.
It’s dropped ~40% since initial list. That’s not unremarkable in my books.
I don’t think this one is anything exceptional. Only on their second agent and regular price adjustments lower over the years.
I’ve been the 5th agent on a listing and the 6th listing agent sold it.
Take a look at the listing history of 690 Dallas. I don’t even know what to call that. Given how stubborn they are I can’t really call that desperation. Perhaps delusion is the right word.
Cdn economy gettysome BBC attention now:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c70y1y909pdo
It’s likely to disappear quick now as Eby and Carney are now blaming each other for it as they discover it’s political poison from all segments. One of those things from parties that have been in power too long, that sit in their own echo chambers, and their closed off-limited inner circles can’t identify what is out to lunch or they are too cowardly to tell their bosses what is dumb.
Hmm, maybe the ones in Oak Bay?
And likely Kahlon Developments….
Middle Broadway unit old today for 940k so I predict these will move quickly at 950k. At 950k they are 1/3 of what the brand new home sold next door so in this case I think one could argue this is relatively affordable.
Bailing out condo developers, but can’t eliminate the owner builder exam to help out Joe looking to building some housing. 11 emails this week people asking for help. This exam was brought in without an issue to address, it hasn’t addressed any issues since introduction 10 years ago, we are at all time record lows for SFH construction, and the exam delays people and adds expense to building. and they can’t eliminate it. For obvious reasons, it employees government workers doing absolutely. Actually worse, government workers working to make housing less affordable 🙂
“Hello Marco wondering if you can send me your study information for the owner Builder exam? I have a red seal Carpenter going to help build our 1,100 sq.ft. racnher in xxxxxx but he doesn’t have the warranty thing or whatever is needed so it looks like I’ll have to do it myself if you can help me out I’d greatly appreciate it thank you so much. Love your videos. “
Ash road multiplex price drop 125k to 950k now for the middle units.
More news coming out bit by bit. Seems the bulk purchases of condos will most likely be in the Fraser Valley, Okanagon, and Vancouver Island were new condo prices are lower.
Maybe they will bill themselves the flipping and vacancy taxes. This is the government that fined BC Ferries for cancelled sailings……
https://youtu.be/pHtnutB-06o?si=VvMCNXBaYb2-ZR5E
Does anyone take her seriously with that nose ring?
To add to below comment, I example I link is rented out but guaranteed with rents dropping 30 months straight you could approach developers finishing PBRs and get great purchase prices on newly completely PBRs without tenants in place.
The other thing I don’t understand is there is a ton of purpose built rentals for sale, for example, this newer one just cut their price by 750k or less than $370,000 per unit and you can probably further negotiate the price.
https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/29694738/284-belmont-rd-colwood-hatley-park
Why are they trying to buy up condos when they can by PBRs for way cheaper per unit?
Eby did a press conference yesterday and said removing GST would only help people looking to buy second homes? What?? I have lots of non-first time buyer clients right now that would be nudged in the direction of brand new product if GST was removed on all new builds.
Not only would it nudge buyers towards new product but as a result it would lower re-sale value of slightly used product so you clear out inventory and keep prices in check.
He literally don’t grasps basics.
Here is a really life example.
In Royal Bay right now you have nice brand new three bed + den + double car garage townhomes for $749,900+GST. You also have re-sales between $750,000 to $800,000.
Your remove the 37.5k of the GST from the new build (also no PTT) it’s a big difference. All of a sudden the re-sales also have to adjust their expectation as no one is going to pay $775k for a re-sale when they can get a new build for 750k no GST no PTT.
Remove GST and a million other levers accomplish moving inventory without bailouts.
There is no statement that suggests the units will be resold.
https://www.piquenewsmagazine.com/economy-law-politics/premier-eby-on-bc-condo-purchase-proposal-we-dont-have-to-do-it-12474105?utm_source=copilot.com
Yes the government is trying to save the condo market cause it is stuck, There are more than enough rentals out there if someone wants one and soon it too will be a glut . This is just stupid idea , and it’s another ndp idea , not sure why carney went s as long with s socialist idea . Just put incentives in place if u want to help with condo sales across Canada
It doesn’t matter if you call it “attainable” or “affordable”.
If the government plans to sell properties under current market value, that’s an unfair approach where special interest groups favourable to the government are likely to be preferentially chosen to “win” the home purchase below market.
Which then turns into a scam where people figure out how to game the system to be able to buy these bargain priced units.
The “40% of asking price” line the PM used in one clip oversimplifies the economics. If the goal is to deliver immediate, attainable housing, there’s no world where a single, universal discount off an MLS listing makes sense.
A realistic valuation method — the same one used by institutional buyers and non‑profits — would never rely on assessed values or whatever number a developer posts online. Instead, you’d base the purchase price on economic rent: a discount from the multiple of the gross rent the unit can actually earn. That ties the value to real income potential, not speculative listing behaviour.
After listening to the government’s comments, I don’t see this as a bailout. It’s essentially a bulk‑purchase proposal to the stakeholders of a development that’s already restructuring and negotiating with creditors. Those stakeholders can accept or reject the government’s offer just as they would with any private or institutional buyer.
The government isn’t trying to “save” the condo market. It’s trying to accelerate rental supply by acquiring units that already exist, instead of waiting for purpose‑built rentals that won’t be completed until the 2030s.
And this matters because Vancouver and several other BC cities currently have a temporary glut of condominiums and a shortage of rentals and attainable rent‑to‑own options for households without large down payments. Converting unsold or distressed condo inventory into rental stock directly addresses that mismatch.
Marko, yep I have said it before too. People have a luv affair with regulation. We fix overregulation with more regulation.
People complain about overregulation, but this is what people want. My strata on Tuesday is voting to bring in “short term rental” restrictions more stringent than what both the COV and BC have in place. Now when I go away for a month in the wintertime instead of renting my unit to a retired couple from Winnipeg for a month I am going to have to leave it vacant. I also pay 54% income tax on this Airbnb income, that will be now gone too for government coffers. Prices of Airbnb will go up even further and eventually that retired couple will buckle and go to the US or Mexico for a month.
My property manager also confirmed there has never been a complaint stemming from a guest staying between 30 and 90 days in the building; however, the strata is banning it none the less.
I was explaining this to a real estate colleague in Croatia and he was shocked. “You mean to tell me a strata can override provincial rules?”
You simply can’t do anything productive in this country.
Yes roll back the ndp attempt (successful) to kill demand and real estate market and let the market play out. This new plan is half baked retarded, brought to u buy the same folks that rolled out free drugs lol .
Watch the BC Housing Minister try to answer basic questions about the government’s “plan” to buy 2200 condos.
Absurd….
https://x.com/SteveSaretsky/status/2070520113305190733
The irony here is that if the govt buys these condos for resale, the government is becoming “flippers and speculators”, the “evil” bogeymen they have targeted with the speculation and flipper taxes.
I’ve got an idea for the govt. Cancel this idea to buy condos. Instead, exempt new condos from speculation/vacancy tax, and the condos will sell themselves.
Why there wasn’t a zoning specifically for short term rentals blows my mind. Give the investors their over priced spec asset, give the long term renters their PBRs and build the three bed room townhouses for the missing middle. Calculate a tolerable ratio of each type and affect it with zoning.
What does the government expect to pay for these condos? 30% below assessment or ask?Are the assessments too high on these properties? I see another impending disaster on the horizon.
One quick solution, allow the return of short term rentals for condos. Then they will be snapped up quickly, values would increase and the condo unit owners would have a saleable asset.
Both sides hate it for opposite reasons: the left sees it as undermining low‑income households, while the right imagines skid‑row residents ending up in waterfront penthouses.
The Fraser Institute is no better than the Broadbent Institute, Centre for Policy Alternatives or the CD Howe Institute (Political based think tanks), but the pic the released summed it up.
Doesn’t matter without a private investor. They haven’t done anything yet to prove they have corrected the last decade of regulatory activism to get any private stakeholders interested.
The press conference today was painful, like no concrete answers. I like how he replied no developer “directly” asked him for a bailout only Bob Rennie on behalf of all Vancouver developers
Did he answer the reporters question of why there were so many developers at his fundraiser? Didn’t catch his answer, but the list is impressive.
Assuming they haven’t already penciled deals this might not go anywhere. The left and right both hate this bailout, he is doing a good job uniting the country. This is getting so much negative attention I wouldn’t be surprised if they backpeddle.
We don’t have any details about the bail out. But the governments have mentioned innovative financing tools and rent-to-own. The aim being that the monthly payments will be higher than an interest‑only loan, but much lower than a standard private‑sector mortgage. The condos will be more attainable by more people but not cheap.
.>>.>>> Right now would be a perfect time to cut GST on new builds for everyone (I’ve now had 9 first time buyers take advantage of the program), taxes, DCCs, pump out the permits faster to lower costs/carrying costs so construction stays at a higher clip to keep supply constant.
More government intervention? No thanks. How about letting the market sort it out, via price discovery.
This is Eby’s idea and BC is funding 90% of the cost, Feds is only 10%
There are too many condos sitting at $1.1 million and rents are still insane. Whenever I have a tenant move out the re-rent is at a substantially higher prices because while rents have come down for 30 months straight they are still a lot higher than they were 60 months ago, for example.
So I don’t think we have too many homes. We have too many homes not selling/renting at $1.1 million for a condo/$2,500 for a one bed apartment.
Right now would be a perfect time to cut GST on new builds for everyone (I’ve now had 9 first time buyers take advantage of the program), taxes, DCCs, pump out the permits faster to lower costs/carrying costs so construction stays at a higher clip to keep supply constant.
There are literally hundreds of levers you can pull that don’t include bailouts. For example, if you moved DCCs/Permitting Fees/etc., to occupancy that would get some projects off the ground and collecting these fees at occupancy is better than collecting nothing.
Bailing out Carney’s friends, not in support.
The narrative that we have too many homes and don’t need to build anymore will quickly backfire as inventory will be absorbed and then we will end up in a supply crunch yet again. Focus should be on stimulating construction (not via bailouts) so rents and prices continue to trend down slowly (and the margin for developers comes for less taxes/muncipal non-sense).
Because they are friends of the government -> https://www.biv.com/news/commentary/condo-king-bob-rennies-abdication-chief-liberal-fu-8248447
Hearing talks of a new pipeline deal between the province and feds.
Wasnt it just a few months ago some folks were yammering on about a lack of supply and we are in a crisis. Those damn municipality’s aren’t rezoning properties quick enough . Now the same government says there’s too many homes and they should buy them up and give them to poor people . Too funny
They should be hit and everyone with them. That is the risk they take. It is the consequence of participating in bidding up land values and fucking everyone else over. When the millenials used bank money to cut each others throats when they bid $200k+ above asking in 2021 and then their property values fell, did they get bailed out? No, rightly so. Think of all the knock on effects of those mortgages – all the goods and services they aren’t buying. Why should any irresponsible developer planning to make millions on a bull market not be punished by the same market on the way down? They privatize profits and socialize losses and most people are rightly not buying it.
Good luck waiting another 20 years for the big crash 😉 I think I’ll stick to pulling out equity on my rentals while maintaining a health LTV and living life.
There’s a lot of noise online about the condo “bailout,” and most of it is pretty negative. A lot of people seem eager to see the developer go bankrupt, but that view ignores the reality of how many people would actually be affected. It’s not just one developer — there are trades, suppliers, lenders, and presale buyers who all get caught in the fallout.
When legal actions start showing up on a project’s title, it doesn’t just punish the developer. It makes the condos harder to market, scares off financing, and puts the entire project at risk. That hurts everyone involved.
I want condo prices to come down too so more people can afford to buy. But I’d rather see a gradual, healthy correction than a total freeze in the new‑build market. If investors and lenders lose confidence, projects stall, supply dries up, and affordability actually gets worse.
Condos always seem to take the first hit — whether it was the credit crunch in 2008 or the leaky‑condo crisis in the 1990s. They’re the part of the housing market that gets bludgeoned early and hard. But if things aren’t managed carefully, the damage doesn’t stay contained. A sharp shock in the condo sector can easily spill over and trigger a domino effect in the single‑family market too due to a lack of confidence in the broader marketplace.
Bc hydro and most municipal government entities charge 2% plus fees to pay via credit card, that’s why using chexy is preferred.
Chexy marks the payment as recurring where I get 4% back on my CC so the net is 2.25% (I also have another CC that is 3% back) with over 20k of property taxes between all my properties it pays one nice dinner for me and my family with zero added work.
Canadian Tire World Elite Mastercard. It has no annual fee and has a decent roadside assistance benefit that allows me to forego BCAA membership for the household. I bank with CIBC and TD but that doesn’t factor into how this card works.
That makes sense, but I guess it’s a feature of the card or your bank? Which card & bank do you use?
The Chexy service seems to charge a flat 1.75% fee for all transactions so you pay more than you get back.
You’re right in general but there are some cards allow you to make payments as if you were doing a bill pay transaction through your bank at no cost. I have one card for all my local government fees + taxes as well as utilities like natural gas and electricity. It earns at 1%. I run about 15k through the card that would otherwise net me nothing if I paid through my bank.
What was the population of Canada in 1989? Around 27 million, today 41 million, a 50% increase. Real estate was a no brainer back then. Our population is falling now.
People who reminisce about the “good old days” of real estate sound a lot like door‑to‑door apologists. The structure is identical: a perfect past, a fallen present, and a personal story offered as proof of their worldview.
What’s really happening is simple — both rely on mythologizing the past to make the present seem broken and their perspective seem necessary.
The truth is less mystical: the “good old days” weren’t better, just built on a completely different economic architecture.
Why would I pay 1.75% extra to earn 1% cash back from my card?
I guess if you had a card that conssitently paid out more than 2% in rewards but then you’re likely paying for it elsewhere. Adding a parasitic middleman does not sound like a way to come out ahead.
Well in 1989 in Vancouver the market was actually pretty good . 122,000 was probaly about a 1000 sq foot house in cloverdale or the Fraser valley . The market in Van in the 90s was shite and we called it the lost decade . So Frank was probably the only one that made a good return. I too bought a house in 1990, tsawwassen, 11000 sq ft lot and 3800 sq for 225,0000 . I sold it in 2000 for 275000. Very nice updated on a nice street. Frank did much better than me .
1989 average income BC $40,112. House cost at $122k was a paltry 3x yearly income, and he made a 13% gain per year. Average income in BC in 2025 was $66,232. The average absolute dogshit piece of shit home anywhere – $800k, or 12x average income.
30 minutes east of Vancouver, in Cloverdale. 1970’s box, never put a cent into it. Sold it 5 years later for $202,000.
Frank, that couldn’t be much of a house or close to Vancouver
How many hhvs are paying their property taxes via chexy?
Those were the good old days, when I bought on the mainland for $122,000 in 1989. 12.25% interest rates. Rented for $900/ month, barely covered the $90,000 mortgage. Nothing left for property taxes, insurance, repairs, etc… I was making around 50 grand a year.
Just for fun…. hope you can read the prices on this posting.
The government is planning to purchase condominium units for affordable housing, and Greater Victoria is expected to be included in the targeted regions. However, no specific buildings or unit counts for the region have been announced yet.
Because Greater Victoria is a smaller market with lower condo prices and far fewer large developments than Vancouver, it doesn’t attract the same level of attention. Given the relative size of the two markets, it’s reasonable to assume that any acquisition program here would be much smaller — likely around one‑tenth the scale of Vancouver’s — and concentrated in areas like Langford, Colwood, and Saanich where inventory is highest.
In my opinion, the scale wouldn’t be large enough to noticeably affect local condo prices, but it could have some limited impact on the purpose‑built rental market. We might see incentives similar to Vancouver’s — for example, one month of “free” rent increasing to two, or occasionally three, for a short period.
For renters, looking for a new unit that could be welcome news in early 2027. Just be cautious with “free rent” incentives, since the discount is typically prorated into the monthly rent rather than truly free.
Lol what?
Once again, why I am not selling my rental properties. In my opinion, the government should let the market just sort it out, but over and over they intervene. Real estate prices going down substantially you are betting against the entire system which is trying to prop it up.
Fundamentally the underlaying initiative from Carney/Government is to maintain HOUSING SUPPLY not to maintain STRATA housing supply; therefore, you argument of lack of lending is a weak one because developers can just pivot to building rentals which they already have done so.
Because the subject is the 2000 strata units the government is buying in Vancouver.
Is there a particular reason why developers specifically have to build strata? When Carney or whomever comes out with housing targets they don’t give a break down of how many they want to be rental/strata/etc.
If you can’t make money building strata build rentals. Many successful developers have pivoted from exclusively condos to excluviely rentals. It’s called business. You can’t pre-sale and get financing you go CMHC and get financing for a PBR.
Building rentals seems like a better option than the government bailing out overpriced strata condos to be used for rentals.
For market value strata condo projects in Vancouver?
Majority of housing units being built in BC are CMHC insured, no shortage of lenders.
Vicre, I wouldn’t want to one of a few in a rental building , it’s probably not how I envisioned it . Not sure how that reflects on values . Having said that not sure if they are planning on buying whole buildings or buying up suites
I agree that governments shouldn’t be throwing money at developers by cutting development charges. Those fees exist for a reason — property owners benefit from upgraded infrastructure, so it’s reasonable that they help pay for it. The problem is that property taxes are already rising at close to double‑digit rates every year. After decades of municipalities delaying infrastructure upgrades, the bill has finally come due, and there’s no painless way to cover it.
And let’s be honest: twenty years ago, if any city councillor had suggested shifting DCC costs onto existing homeowners instead of developers, they would’ve been politically burned at the stake. No one wanted to touch that conversation.
There’s also a practical financial angle people forget. Property taxes factor directly into your debt‑service ratio, which determines how large a mortgage you qualify for. Higher taxes reduce borrowing capacity, which in turn limits what buyers can pay for a home.
When a developer goes belly up they won’t develop anymore… If lenders get hosed then they will be more selective of lending going forward, lack of lending also leads to lack of development
How? They will be rented on the secondary market, not sold.
If development costs go down that makes a bigger profit margin for a developer. Bigger profit margins cause more developers to enter the market.
I have seen the opposite happening in the market. Land values have been coming down as prospective home buyers are switching from starter homes to new townhomes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaaHGdm2vGk
https://app.standardres.ca/3426-calumet-ave/
>>>> There is a very long list of reasons why missing middle makes far more economic sense versus SFH for the builder/developer. For example, with the COV
The ideas presented are to for the government to lower developer’s costs. Government shouldn’t throw more money at housing like this.
There’s nothing to say that lower development costs mean lower selling prices, since developers sell for the highest price a buyer will pay, not what it cost them to build.
If developer costs did go down, it would likely show up as increasing land costs as developers could afford to pay more for land for future projects.
Let’s not assume “affordable” equals “bargain‑basement.” The renter might be making more money than the homeowner beside them — that chose to drop a massive down payment. In housing policy, “affordable” usually means a modest discount off market rent, nothing dramatic.
So no, you won’t find drug deals in the hallways. More likely you’ll bump into an insurance rep or financial advisor trying to sell you something.
Frank , agree getting screwed.
I wonder how thrilled the owners of condos in these towers would be about the new neighbors they are going to be getting. There goes the neighborhood. And the value of your property.
Tend to agree with this. And where are we getting all this money? Just means piling on more debt – this at a time when we already need to be doing that for so many more legit reasons like rebuilding our military, social safety net etc., and we’re moving into CUSMA renegotiation which could potentially land us in a world of hurt.
Let the market sort this one out. But that isn’t in vogue. Just look at financial markets where for decades now we have had the “fed put”, next to actual huge bail-outs. Hard to argue with that approach during an actual crisis like COVID or the great financial crisis, but in practice, it just devolves into politicians just deficit-spending endlessly. Strange world.
in practice, it functions as a bailout, even if the governments avoid using that word. But it also lines up neatly with the governments’ broader housing initiatives: get “affordable” rental units delivered quickly, without waiting years for new purpose‑built rentals to be planned, financed, and constructed.
Instead of offering generous incentives for future PBR projects that won’t be ready until the 2030s, governments are stepping in to stabilize struggling developments right now. From their perspective it prevents hundreds of units from stalling in insolvency limbo and possibly lift the dark cloud hovering over all new condominium complexes.
So yes, it’s a bailout. But it’s also a shortcut to meeting housing‑supply targets.
Insolvency simply means the developer is restructuring. They still retain control of the project and continue operating while making a proposal to creditors. It’s a financial reset, not a collapse.
Receivership, if it ever occurs, is a different step entirely. A lender‑appointed receiver doesn’t dump units on the open market. Their job is to step into the developer’s role and orderly liquidate assets to repay creditors — usually at market value, not bargain pricing.
If the receiver can’t resolve the situation, only then does the project move toward foreclosure. Even at that stage, units often get sold in bulk to institutional buyers, not individual members of the public.
The entire process is long, structured, and heavily supervised. But it also casts a shadow over all condo developments — not just the ones in financial trouble — because buyers, lenders, and the media tend to conflate these very different stages.
Looks to be the savings are in the soft costs . Havnt done the math but is this reflected in the sq ft price , sfh vs mm
There is a very long list of reasons why missing middle makes far more economic sense versus SFH for the builder/developer. For example, with the COV
i. New services require soil sample testing (approx $10k). SFH = $10k . Sixplex = $10k (you are spreading the $10k over 6 units).
ii. Exempt Unit Count: Projects involving the demolition of pre-1960 homes to build multi-family housing (3 or more units) are exempt from the Demolition Waste and Deconstruction Bylaw
Etc., very long list.
It pretty hard to make money building SFH when you have to pay 10k just to test the city soil so you have the privelage of then paying for all the new services. Then you have to hand de-construct the old home, etc.
We might see some new SFHs in new subdivisions but government has introduced policies that you won’t see spec homes in the core anymore. It will only be the occassional custom SFH from here on out.
This is an incredibly horrible idea. So many other levers they can pull before this non-sense. How about start with waiving the GST for all new build buyers (not just first-time buyers), etc.
Beyond this being a horrible idea here is the reality of how governments work at all levels. It is simply the human nature of it not being ones hard earned money.
BC Housing (province) bought the hotel on Douglas for $26 million. Chard Development (who they’ve partnered with) bought the adjacent property, the Whitespot, for $8 million later in an appreciating market. Both the hotel and the Whitespot are torn down. Estimated value of the old hotel between $12 and $14 million in my opinion.
Federal government recently paid $23 million and overpaid by approximately $4 to $5 million for a building in foreclosure on the Island Highway in View Royal, I made a video on it -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuKgpZy3O1s How do you overpay by 4 to $5 million above market value on something in foreclosure?
I would be willing to bet my life savings whatever transactions the government pulls off it is going to be above market value so we as tax payers are getting screwed. How about some common sense like cut red tape, speed up permitting, etc., why we bailing out millionaires?
I love how people online were shocked a couple of weeks ago when Carney said most of the EVs arriving so far from China were.
Literally the minute he announced the deal with China my first thought was wtf, so we are bringing in Teslas? and people are shocked two months later that it is Teslas 🙂 Critical thinking skills in this country are so bad.
I found the people most excited that we’re not setting clocks back
Uhh, 2,200 unsold condos is already affordable housing. Government shouldn’t buy them, let the receiver take them and put them out for auction. Allowing the market to correct is a better solution. Remember one of may reasons the developments are over priced is because of artificial affordable housing mandates (the costs off the affordable units is added to the market units upping the overall price) and amenities that really has nothing to do with the development.
Do you have the details of the transaction?
The Vancouver Model
Convert 2,200 unsold condominiums to affordable housing by having the BC and Federal government purchase them at ultra low government interest rates.
BC is facing a glut of empty condos with some developers edging towards insolvency.
-Can the condo market be saved?
-Should it be saved?
Vicre , yep true that , but missing middle is far from a condo development. This is the bottom rung of multi family . Your just don’t have economics of size and no supplier is going give u much of a break on materials . I wouldn’t say the price on finished product is that hugely affordable
building up is almost always cheaper than building out….
I’m not sure about the rest of what groots talking about but I will agree that if your only building 4 units your not going get any real big discounts on supplies ( ie fridges , flooring etc ) or on labour. How much more profitable selling 4 unit to building a sfh I couldn’t say
Lol, another horrible take.
> You have brand new homes on the island under 800k. Under $1 million in Greater Victoria and for under $1.3 you can have new home with a suite
https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/29703794/3587-temperate-pl-colwood-royal-bay
A new SFH with a suite for $1.275. That’s great!
If zoning was sti SFH exclusive, we would see a lot of these. Instead, developers will build multiplex instead and inexpensive SFH like this will become rare. .
June 22, 2026
Month Jun Jun
Year 2026 2025
New Unconditional Sales 509 760
New Listings 1,104 1,545
Active Listings 4,070 3,778
Sales continue to be slow and steady. Projecting low 700s for the month at this point. Looks like inventory has peaked for the year +/-/
Developers know that putting multiple units on a single lot doesn’t dramatically reduce construction costs compared to building one equivalently sized single‑family home. What it does do is increase the total gross selling price of the project.
So when a developer is deciding whether to build a single‑family home or a four‑unit strata on speculation, the multi‑family option usually wins because it produces far higher total revenue from the same piece of land.
At the same time, developers will still take on a contract to build a single‑family home for an individual client. In that scenario, the homeowner carries the market risk, and the builder earns a predictable margin, making it an attractive low‑risk alternative to speculative multi‑unit development.
So the apparent equivalence between single‑family and multi‑family construction in the marketplace is often an illusion—it’s really a reflection of two different business models operating side by side: speculative development and contract building.
No. You have brand new homes on the island under 800k. Under $1 million in Greater Victoria and for under $1.3 you can have new home with a suite -> https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/29703794/3587-temperate-pl-colwood-royal-bay
For a variety of reasons it has become more attractive to build more density in terms of missing middle and purpose built rentals. There are more missing middle projects being built in the core than new SFHs for sale and I am not talking unit count here. Literally more spec projects than spec new homes.
Single family home construction is down because very few people can afford a 2.5 mil+ home. To justify such a large purchase, the buyers should have a 5-10 mil. net worth. That’s a very small segment of our population. The cost of the land is too high to begin with. Putting multiple units on one lot doesn’t seem to lower the cost significantly.
My neighbor’s son at my cottage moved to Vancouver, he was framing houses and doing finishing work also. That dried up and now he’s doing major renovations for a contractor. They are working on a house in Vancouver for over a year to the tune of around 1 mil. He has no problem finding work for his skill set.
https://www.bchousing.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/New-Homes-Registry-Report-May-2026.pdf
YTD
SFHs down
Strata units down
Purpose-built rentals down
Rolling into July and August as things really slow down, it will be interesting to see if listings are pulled off market for hopes of coming back for a September uptick, or if the sellers decide to stick it out with more downward price adjustments. It really sounds like the US fed fought off the need to increase interest rates last meeting and they won’t be able to avoid 2 increases this fall before Xmas. The BoC will likely have to follow the FED… So, if what you want is languishing there with similar inventory staying on market, be patient and let it come to you. Also, asked the realtors to kick in part of their commissions into the deal to make things work, they are missing Audi payments and more and more are picking up shifts at Cactus Club, so have them help more in getting a deal done.
Ya no real deals to be had , that strategic talk is just gibberish
Most middle class comment ever lol, go for a drive around broadmead, Cordova bay, uplands, 10 mile point and you and count how many landscaping company trucks are parked on the side of the street.
Possibly, but usually that is because the house was overpriced from the start and turned people off and eventually the seller accepts something less than market due to lack of viewings/offers. For decent houses in nice neighborhoods priced to market to begin with, these “deals” are rare…
However, there are likely opportunities to be mined there as well in estate sales or other must sell opportunities. Yes, there will be fewer deals than in the less desirable, but it’s a good time for people to be patient and pick their targets and find some value even in the desirable locations (no need to compete to buy, let them compete to sell).
Don’t forget the shite neighborhoods in the core also like glanford, Tillicum, view royal/deep esquimalt,
The narrative is that inventory is higher this year and the market should be weaker. maybe for crap neighborhoods and or crap houses but decent houses in diserable ones are not showing much weaknesses.
Well yeah, that’s why people should never chase the buy anything, anywhere approach in real estate just to get in the market. Only buy what you actually want and where you want it. I know scores of people trapped in Happy Valley and Sooke that got suckered into the false property ladder concept think it would be their step to a desirable location and property.
Mostly that there hasn’t been enough gains in real estate in the last 5 years for someone that purchased during that period to sell unless they are in a “must sell” position.
Lol it’s more expensive than most major urban areas. You can find the same thing around the world.
Lol You mean Cordova bay? Didn’t know small lots are diserable lmao.
Thursty will soon be at your door delivering Uber eats and plugging his Only Fans handle in the HHV comments. That said, sounds like numbers hack is hanging around the Centre for Policy Alternatives and the Broadbent Institute a bit too much to be taken seriously.
Victoria a major urban area of Canada??? LOL!
Meh, I guess a lot of folks should just work harder. I think making money has never been easier than it is today . Lots of opportunity for people that are motivated
let them eat cake?
Just saying, there are some interesting parallels…
The wealth gap in the modern-day United States has officially reached a mathematical concentration that closely mirrors pre-revolutionary France.
According to data compiled by the Federal Reserve, the richest 1% of Americans now control nearly a third (31.9%) of the country’s total wealth. When expanding this to the top 10% of households, they control an overwhelming 87.2% of all U.S. wealth, leaving the entire bottom half (50%) of the American population with a mere 1.1% to 2.5%.
By comparison, economic historians estimate that the French nobility and clergy (the top 2% of the population) controlled roughly 35% of all land and national wealth prior to 1789.
The Income Inequality Gini Coefficient: ~0.59 (extreme concentration) in France and Estimated Gini Coefficient: ~0.48 to 0.85 (depending on income vs. asset wealth) in the modern day USA.
Food for thought.
We are in good company.
Having fun with all my new research tools.
This is what happens when governments print lots and lots of money. The rich get much much richer and the poor….? ask the French in 1789-1799.
For a household earning Victoria’s median income of $86,400 to comfortably qualify for a single-family home (SFH), the median house price would need to drop to approximately $425,000. This means local real estate prices would have to crash by roughly 64% from the current median price of $1,175,000 to align with local wages.
Compared to other Cities in Canada
Vancouver$1,960,000 $90,000$450,000 77%
Greater Toronto (GTA)$1,340,000$92,000$460,000 66%
Ottawa-Gatineau$710,000$102,000$510,000 28%
Greater Montreal$675,000$84,000$420,000 38%
Compared to other? Cities in Europe
Paris, France Apartment / Condo €42,000 €675,000 75%
London, United Kingdom Terraced / Townhouse £30,700 £530,000 76%
Munich, Germany Apartment / Condo €54,000€700,000 69%
Amsterdam, Netherlands Multi-Family / Condo €44,000€560,000 68%
Geneva, Switzerland Apartment / Condo CHF 88,000CHF 1,100,000 68%
Compared to other Cities in the USA
San Jose / Silicon Valley$1,450,000$148,000$592,000 59%
San Francisco, CA$1,310,000$136,000$544,000 58%
Los Angeles, CA$925,000$83,000$332,000 64%
New York City Metro$715,000$89,000$356,000 50%
Miami, FL$620,000$68,000$272,000 56%
Interesting….
Approximately 43.2% of all homeowners in Greater Victoria are completely mortgage-free. This ranks Victoria fourth overall in Canada for major urban areas with the highest percentage of mortgage-free properties.
Only Thunder Bay, Ontario Mortgage-Free Rate: 47.0%, Peterborough, Ontario Mortgage-Free Rate: 45.2% and St. Catharines–Niagara, Ontario Mortgage-Free Rate: 43.5%, rank higher.
Quite interesting. Looking @ the Core Saanich and Oak Bay. Saanich = 47.2% and OB? 57.9% are mortgage free, where 1/3 of the population is retired. BTW Saanich East by itself?? 52% to 54% are all paid for!
Generally, people only need to sell if they are seeing Jesus!
Drove through there to look at the place. Lots of new builds and mcmansions. I think it’s a good value buy, certainly on the principle that you should buy the worst house on the best street. I mean obviously setting up for a bidding war, but I guess obtainable at maybe just under $1.2M. I was surprised the house itself is not as bad as I would have expected. The $1.4M assessment seems out to lunch though.
“desirable neighborhood in Victoria”
I’ve never heard of Claremont being referred to as a desirable community more like a car dependent distance suburb. Most people do not want to look after a big lot.
$300k under assessed https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/29890524/4405-moonlight-lane-saanich-gordon-head
@Leo, this is really a good price. Looked at the home and the “flow” and ad-hoc upgrades would turn off some buyers. Think there was 4 – 5 different types of flooring around the house. hard wood/laminate/vinyl.
Blast from the Past
https://macleans.ca/economy/money-economy/the-best-place-to-live-in-b-c-and-the-territories/
5034 Cambria wood sold for 1.5 in early 2024 and it looked to have new renos.
Perhaps, but you have to also understand that 1.6 million for a decent house on a big lot in a diserable neighborhood in Victoria is a compelling value proposition when compared to what’s available in the rest of the developed world.
.
Not sure why you would bring those into the equation. The point is that the current sold price is higher than last year’s, not whether or not the seller made a profit after transaction costs.
Metro Vancouver now has 4,376 completed condominiums sitting empty as several developers edge toward insolvency. Both the federal and provincial governments are preparing to purchase some of these vacant units and convert them into affordable housing.
Government intervention in the housing market always carries unpredictable downstream consequences. But allowing the condo sector to unravel entirely could create even deeper, longer‑lasting damage.
How this program is implemented will be critical. I guess we will need an AI app.
So, they only lost a bit on commission, land transfer tax, and carrying costs. The market weakness is more relative than anything else. The softer market has been playing out the last two years, the inventory is finally catching up. It would likely be a different narrative if Cambria sold 3-4 years ago and was compared to it’s selling price today. Agreed, less desirable places and locations will be hammered first and for more, but as inventory builds, it will drag on the desirable properties eventually.
866 Cambria wood just sold for 45k more than the sale price from a year ago. Still no weakness in diserable neighborhoods.
For most investors, buying all the units in a new missing‑middle home simply isn’t financially feasible. The numbers don’t pencil: land is expensive, construction costs are high, and small buildings don’t benefit from economies of scale.
The current MLI Select program does improve feasibility by lowering debt service and extending amortization, but it doesn’t come close to the impact of the old MURB program.
MURBs offered powerful tax incentives that transformed marginal rental projects into highly profitable investments. Even buildings that barely cash‑flowed could generate strong after‑tax returns because investors could deduct CCA and soft costs against other income.
That’s why MURBs produced tens of thousands of rental units — and why doctors, dentists, lawyers, and other high‑income professionals invested in them so heavily.
Time will tell how desirable these multi-plexes are when new owners eventually want to relocate and put their unit up for sale. I’m sure there will be horror stories about defective construction, problems with their immediate neighbors, etc.. It’s a situation I would avoid. People do strange things, oblivious to how their actions affect those around them. There’s that old saying: Good fences make for good neighbors.
True, but not everyone has the time, skillset, or funds available to fix up a shite SFH.
Of course, the best investment (budget constraint to missing middle) will be a 2 bed 1 bath on large lot in the best possible location such as Oak Bay or Fairfield, but that also means living in a 2 bed 1 bath for the next 5 – 10 – 20 years. If your budget can stretch beyond missing middle then SFH with a suite is hands down the best investment long term.
Looks like numbers of new missing middle starts in Victoria is close to flat YOY and well below the existing stock of missing middle units.
With 1800 total housing so far in 2026, that’s up 30%. But missing middle is only up 6% at 200 units. Which is only 11% of housing starts being missing middle. Compare that to the existing “missing middle” housing stock (from 2021 census) which is more than double that at 25% as detailed here https://househuntvictoria.ca/2026/06/05/may-market-cracks-4000-listings/#comment-135963
The point being.,, the “elephant in the room” when it comes to housing starts in Victoria in 2026 is apartment/condos at 83% of all starts.
Both SFH (6% of starts) and missing middle (11%) are tiny compared to demand (70% of buyers) so both of these dwelling types are scarce for new construction.
From the Victoria builders association numbers https://www.vrba.ca/news/housing-starts-up-and-down-in-greater-victoria/
“According to CMHC, year- to-date, (Jan to May 2026) Greater Victoria has posted 1,789 new homes, a 30% increase from the 1,379 last year (Jan to May 2025).
Year to date, CMHC’s report shows 98 single family homes, 198 row/townhomes/duplexes, etc, and 1,493 apt/condos.
A continued bright spot is row/townhomes/duplex (missing middle) housing up 6% from last year due to Bill 44 – provincial rezoning municipalities to accommodate missing middle housing”
New always has a draw , but even a shite sfh will be a better investment than missing middle will ever be .
That sounds about right to me, Marko. I think it’s probably not even a difficult decision for a lot of families choosing between an old 3 bed, 1 bath “starter home”, and a new 3-4 bed, 3-4 bath missing middle home. Sure, you don’t “get the land”, but you also don’t get the problems that come with it. With most younger couples, both work full time and don’t have a massive bankroll for renovations. Are they going to choose a potential problem house that will siphon away their limited time and cash? Doubtful. They will choose something new and turnkey that meets their needs.
Missing‑middle housing isn’t increasing overall sales volume yet — it’s mostly redirecting buyers who would have purchased starter homes. That shift weakens demand for entry‑level detached houses, which pushes land values down. Developers benefit first, since lower land costs make more projects financially viable. And over time, those reduced land costs work their way through the development pipeline, eventually showing up as more attainable pricing for missing‑middle homes.
At this time 99% of missing middle is being sold to owner-occupiers. What investor is going to buy a rental property in a small strata? Not to mention there simply aren’t investors in the marketplace and the few that exist are targeting much better opportunities such as very depressed downtown concrete condos. Missing middle isn’t depressed or cheap by any means. The only missing middle units that I’ve come across that are rented are developers keeping an unit. One developer sold 7 out of 8 units in a project and she kept the 8th one as a rental.
I recently had a young couple buy a missing middle townhome. The process started off looking at SFHs under $1 million and after the first inspection on a SFH we had an accepted offer they walked and bought a brand new townhome. Two young professional with a toddler that decided they didn’t want to deal with the maintenances/repairs on a SFHs available in their price range.
I know it is very difficult for people on SOS FB page to believe it but there is a market for missing middle and the sales don’t lie, and certainly no investors are driving the sales.
I wonder how useful these statistics are in terms of whether to expect that missing middle will be predominantly owner-occupied. We don’t have a lot of it (hence why it is called the “missing” middle), and it doesn’t fit neatly into the established categories.
Historically, 90% of SFH are owner occupied. And only 30% of condos/apartments are owner occupied. Of the other dwelling types, only duplex (75% owner occupied) has a higher owner occupancy rate than the current 67% overall rate.
Given that less than 20% of new construction is SFH or duplexes, that means the other dwelling types are ones with historical ownership rates below the current 67%.
So unless that behaviour changes and families fall in love with “units” and buy to occupy, homeownership rate should fall.
Almost all of the house hunters on HHV are looking for SFH and a few would settle for townhomes. Almost none looking for “units” to buy and occupy.
That’s low.
Even right now with the massive shift towards purpose built rental YTD in BC we have 7,300 SFHs+strata units built vs 9,200 purpose built rentals so the decline in home ownership is going to very very slow when you factor in existing stock.
…> Is a decline from 69% to 66.5 % over ten years really free fall?
No that’s just a 3.6 % fall, and not free fall. But that’s not the free fall they’re referring to in the article. As made clear in the article, It is the “free fall” in ownership among the youngest age group (25-29), which fell by 17%, from 44% to 36.5%.
Is a decline from 69% to 66.5 % over ten years really free fall?
Questionable.
66.5 is in the same ballpark as US, NZ, AUS, UK. A bit lower than the EU average
For a $520,000 purchase, the CMHC premium of about $20,000 ends up costing roughly another $12,500 in interest over the life of a 25‑year mortgage. That means you’re paying more than $32,000 in total for insurance that protects the bank, not you. If the lender takes a loss, CMHC reimburses them — but if the sale of the home doesn’t cover the full loan balance, you’re still responsible for the remaining debt.
When you take out a CMHC‑insured mortgage in Canada, the insurance premium gets added to your loan and paid off over the full amortization period. If you refinance later and your equity has grown past 20%, you don’t get any of that unused premium back. In the U.S., the unused portion of mortgage insurance is refunded, but Canada doesn’t offer that.
Sucks to have bad genes
Lol what?
A guy I talked to at the gym told me he retired in a group of 30 people from Boeing, in 6 months 5 were dead, mostly in their 60’s. They probably died on a golf course.
Lol, ya I’m going to the end , enjoy work and not really doing it for the money . Gotta keep moving
For most first‑time buyers in BC, the numbers just don’t add up anymore. Unless you’re earning well above average, have almost no expenses, or can lean on family support, buying simply isn’t realistic for most.
Put 5% down on a $520,000 place and CMHC fees inflate the mortgage so much that your monthly payment ends up way higher than renting the same home. No surprise, then, that the Bank of Mom and Dad helped 31% of first‑time buyers and even 13% of move‑up buyers in BC last year.
This is the “real life” market the first time buyers are dealing with today. The system rewards large down payments — and punishes small ones.
Sounds like you fcked up…..
Lol maybe you should try something that works in real life?
If everyone had a public service type of employment with benefits and a fat pension, they wouldn’t need many other investments other than the usual RRSP. Self employed individuals have few other options than the shock market and real estate. The smartest thing a business owner can do is buy their own commercial property and avoid paying ever increasing (and under no rental controls) rents. I speak from experience, and the experience of my friend in Niagara. We will both have an asset of over 1 mil to cash out when we’re ready. We don’t have the luxury of a fat pension deposited into our bank account every month. There is one difference, upon death the pension usually disappears, but the equity we accumulated stays. Unfortunately, we’re still “working” into our 70’s, which in some respects isn’t a bad thing.
.
70% of dwellings in Greater Victoria have only 1 or 2 people living in them. greater Victoria has the highest number of dwellings per person in Canada. (47 dwellings per 100 people). Compared to Canada overall at 40 dwellings per 100 people. (2021 census data)
Regardless of how many dwellings we build, “density advocates” will say we don’t have enough housing and we need to build more. Apparently having the highest density of dwellings per capita in Canada isn’t good enough.
Homes are unaffordable to many because they are seen as “the” investment and savings vehicle to fund retirement. People are happy to throw money into housing with the expectation that it will grow in value. This is a global phenomenon, asset inflation from growing disposable incomes and wealth. That’s why homes are expensive, and will likely stay that way.
This is nothing new though . In 2021 census, 25% of dwellings in Greater Victoria were already “between condominium living and detached homes”. Specifically, greater Victoria stock in the census showed duplex 4%, townhouse 6%, other unit in a duplex 15%. What is new is the prices of the new units have gone way up, and they are cramming them onto small lots without green space or parking.
https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=e&SearchText=Victoria&DGUIDlist=2021S0503935&GENDERlist=1,2,3&STATISTIClist=1,4&HEADERlist=0
Last year, Saanich East saw a median condominium price of $527,500 and a median single‑family home price of $1,290,000. The lack of housing options between these two points represents a structural gap in the market.
Allowing three to six units on a single‑family lot creates homes that naturally fall between these price ranges, adding much‑needed small‑scale missing middle supply.
Importantly, missing middle housing is defined by its function, not its form. Its role is to introduce gentle density and attainable ownership opportunities that bridge the divide between condominium living and detached homes.
Note: Attainable is not the same as affordable. The picture becomes more complex when other tenure models—such as purpose‑built rentals, leaseholds, cooperatives enter the mix.
Yes, side by side duplex or townhomes would qualify as semi-detached or row house. But not if there’s any units above/below
Using stat can definitions….
—-Semi-detached needs to be a side by side duplex.
—- Row housing needs to be 3 or more side by side, nothing above/below.
— a missing middle building with units above/below is “apartment or flat in a duplex” with owner-occupied rates of 48%, about half the rate of SFH.
https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/ref/98-500/001/98-500-x2021001-eng.cfm
“Statistics Canada defines a row house as one of three or more dwellings joined side by side, such as a townhouse or garden home. To qualify for this category, the units must not have any other dwellings positioned directly above or below them”
Wouldn’t missing middle more likely fall under semi-detached or row house?
Interesting article from an advocacy group for family and missing middle housing. (From University of Ottawa).
They point out that “homeownership rates are in free fall”, and we aren’t building family suitable housing. Namely SFH and semi-detached.
So why it’s super awesome for real estate agents on the forum to post details when any missing middle unit sells… How about they tell us if this will be owner/family occupied, or just another unsecure “mom-n-pop landlord” rental.
From statCan… Currently 90% of SFH in Canada are owner-occupied. But for “units” in an apartment of less than 5 stories, only 24% are owned.
https://www.missingmiddleinitiative.ca/p/canada-built-more-housing-but-less
Because the original article was using a 20 per cent down payment to avoid CMHC fees.
Uhhh what? what does it have to be 20% down on a $520k condo, please explain.
The idea was raised that a prospective buyer could save the down payment for a condo in Langford within three to five years. With the average condo price around $520,000, that means a down payment close to $100,000 — which works out to saving roughly $35,000 per year after tax if the goal is three years.
Is that possible? Yes, it’s possible — but only for a small group of people.
A few years ago, I met a newly graduated nurse who managed to do exactly that. She was living in a van for a couple of years and banking nearly everything she earned. Someone living with their parents could do the same if they didn’t have to pay market rent.
But these are exceptional situations. Saving $100,000 in three years requires either unusually low living expenses or unusually high income. There are pathways to make it happen, but they’re not the norm for most people trying to enter the housing market. For most people paying regular rent and regular bills, it simply isn’t practical — even though it remains technically possible.
Wonder how many young people would want to work for what Frank thinks he should pay them. Only the stupid ones, lol. So here’s Frank thinking they’re all stupid…
Did the reported offer to purchase include GST? While the previous sales reported did not include GST?
The additional 5 per cent GST on $874,900 could be the difference.
A few other missing middle sales today too. Market is slow on the whole, but missing middle seems to selling well given how slow the overall market. Funny how on the SOS FB page everyone is saying who would every buy and live in these missing middle projects but clearly there is demand for the product.
More variety in terms of product hitting the market every day too -> https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/29907099/4-525-paradise-st-esquimalt-old-esquimalt
People who understand that math don’t typically get into a negative cashflow position and don’t complain about those things.
40k over ask for #4 921 dale, that private fenced backyard driving value.
I find it interesting that no one every brings up things that are so much cheaper than they were 10 – 20 – 30 years ago.
I just ordered brand new prescription eye glasess with thinner index lenses as I have a high prescription and develivered to my door it was $92. I remember when my family came to Canada 30+ years ago prescription eye glasses were already $200+ back then.
Last year I spent $3,327 on car expenses and this year I’ll be under $2,000 including insurance and electricity (won’t need new tires this years and not going with comphrensive/collission).
In 2014 driving a Honda Civic my expenses were $10,075.29 (big chunk being the gas).
The entire property tax, insurance costs, strata fee increases, etc., outpacing wage growth/rents is a very popular narrative, but the numbers don’t really add up.
I have a rental property with a mortgage balance of $12,xxx that will be paid off next year (I’ve been using the positive cash flow to pay down principal quicker).
Rent increase during ownership – 69.56%
Strata fees increases – 90.9%
Too lazy too look up insurance but year probably up 100%.
So yes % wise those costs are outpacing rents; however, here is the thing.
Rent has gone from $1,150 to $1,950
Strata fees have gone up from $143 to $273
So even with strata fees and everything outpacing rents the cash flow has dramatically increased over the years.
Most people are in the black from early to mid 2021 and q4 2022. In hindsight there were some smoking deals to be had in q4 2022.
All the increases in carrying costs are in the present and the future. The sticker price was in the past. You can’t time travel to 2021-2022 and change the sticker price. The people who bought in 2021-2022 won’t see any benefit from the lower sticker price.
After a strong start to the month sales pace has cooled down just a bit. I don’t think the agreement in the middle east and lower bond yields will do much to move the numbers in June as conditions are typically 7 to 8 business days, but might we see a bit of a pick up in July?
Month Jun Jun
Year 2026 2025
New Unconditional Sales 343 760
New Listings 788 1,545
Active Listings 4,075 3,778
Revised projection for the month 750 sales
Rental housing has always been an investment.
Correct, but the bank of mom and dad could step in and increase the down payment, plus wage raises will give purchasing power a lift at least 6-7% or more in the next 3-4 years.
And, who fault is that?
Federal government do everything in their power to get housing build, and the local government gate keepers do everything in their power to slow/stop the process.
Plenty of westshore condos that fit this category.
Central banks target 2% inflation to keep the economy stable. Housing works the same way: economists look for a “natural vacancy rate” so rents don’t explode. And just like 0% inflation or 0% unemployment is a crisis, 0% vacancy means the rental market is broken.
That healthy range is 5–7%, according to housing economists like Wheaton, Glaeser, and Arnott. Below that, rents surge and mobility collapses.
We didn’t stay anywhere near that. For decades we underbuilt purpose‑built rentals, assuming investors buying condos would fill the gap. They didn’t. Condos added units, but not the stable, mid‑market supply cities actually need.
Now we’re paying for it. Population growth outran construction, vacancy rates cratered, and the market overheated.
And here’s the shift investors won’t love:
The wild‑west condo speculation era depended on permanent scarcity. As vacancy rates normalize and real rental supply finally gets built, that model gets shaky. The days of automatic appreciation and guaranteed renters are fading.
We’re watching a slow de‑financialization of housing—a decoupling of land and capital. Housing is drifting back toward what it was always supposed to be: shelter first, investment second.
Isn’t Ottawa targeting 380,000/year PRs for the next three years? The population growth stall/small decline recently is temporary.
The long run trends in Victoria housing go back decades. The immigration impact was there but people are way overstating it. That was a few years of above-trend immigration. We aren’t going back there but it doesn’t change a lot long run.
I bet if those few years of above-average immigration had never happened, house prices would be within 3% of current values, and rents within 10%.
Right now, homeowners aren’t feeling the pain of a traditional wealth wipeout; they are feeling a cash-flow crunch. When interest rates, property taxes, and insurance premiums continue to climb, they actively cancel out the benefits of lower sticker prices.
A price correction is a short term inconvience. You may have sold at a lower price but you are also buying at a lower price. A sunk cost.
Rising carrying costs don’t go away, they are long term pain that strips away purchasing power .
Human episodic memory retention is roughly 3 years, so it is likely that general populous will forget the pain today and jump right back into the housing market in the next 3-4 years.
The reason that people will continue to buy real estate after the pain wear out in the next few years is, because tax is a form of punishment. We are taxed on every aspect of investment except for primary resident, therefore people will continue to use real estate as a wealth storage unless policies are put inplace to stop it.
It used to be that a single person, saving diligently without CMHC insurance or “The Bank of Mom and Dad,” could realistically pull together a down payment in 3 to 5 years. Today? That timeline has stretched to 13 to 15 years.
We are not likely to see back-to-back double-digit price inflation bring investors back until that 13-to-15-year savings timeline actually reduces.
You are banking on immigration then.
This is exactly why I am not selling my rental properties. Give it 5 to 10 years, we will be in the same mess we were a few years ago. SFH construction in BC is at all time record lows and dropping, strata starts are now dropping too and eventually the purpose built rentals will also slow as well. Given how slow approvals and construction is you can’t just turn on the tap when demand comes back. A larger concrete strata project is a 5+ year timeline idea to keys to end user.
Seems like a very quick way to get people to stop renting places or building rentals in the first place. In a few years (or sooner) you will hear the screams about the lack buding and the lack of investment in housing. The command economy fools don’t seem to understand that Air BNB bans, secondary homes penalties, high development fees, slow approvals, below market mandates, mandated amenities and so on results in far fewer homes being built with fewer available for the people they are pretending to represent with their advocacy and ignorant policies.
Ohhh and I should probably add what clown council is up to now.
“Explore the tools available for the City to adopt a bylaw, or modify an existing bylaw, that restricts landlords from prohibiting cooling equipment, and/or requires existing rental units to have a heat pump, or other cooling equipment or passive means, that prevents at least one room of the unit from exceeding the standard recommendation of 26 C (79 F);”
The scary part for landlords with older buildings is and/or requires existing rental units to have a heat pump. Good luck to everyone with a 1900’s to 80’s rental building with existing wiring and electrical service.
They are also looking into landlords not restricting pets and also looking into vacancy control.
@ koala
I’m with Marko on repair and maintenance front, especially if it’s full of long term existing tenants with low rent.
You say it’s newly renovated, is it actually or is it a splash and dash?
Is it a 60’s or 70’s building where the economic life of the plumbing is 30 years but they have put some new shut off valves under the sink?
The last 70’s building I gutted had rotting cast sewage pipes leaking into the asbestos walls slowly and you would not have known without ripping it apart.
I actually also just bought another 8 units in the core where a flood had affected a few units.
I don’t think we will buy/build anymore rentals in town, unless they are completely vacant.
if only we could take away their smart phones at the gym…
I think young adults today are both very polite and very educated . But unfortunately we avoid hiring young people as we would rather fill positions with older folks , we find
It’s a better fit
Being in university education I’m regularly impressed with the quality of our students in general. They are smart and perceptive and resourceful, despite having to handle a lot of shit. Remote schooling during COVID, social media companies trying to destroy their attention span, AI flipping the entire world of work on its ass. The kids are handling it pretty well I’d say.
thank you Marko. That’s pretty much where I’m coming from as well.
I’ve had two investor clients recently pick up downtown condos at really good value (like back to 2016 prices). If I was all in on the markets and up 40% in the last 12 months definitely something I would consider taking a bit off the table and buying in a depressed real estate market.
Hi Marko, thank you for your input. The property I am looking at is old but very well completely renovated. Would obviously get an inspection to check for more potential serious issues. I already have a largish portfolio and am looking at using it to collateralize a rental investment property. Wanting to diversify my holdings a bit. But still, I appreciate your insight. When I used to check HHV obsessively several times a day (before I bought my home :)) yours was one of the opinions I always valued.
Unless you are buying something brand new your typical 5 unit investment property is going to be a huge headache in terms of repairs/maintenance. Throw in dealing with tenants and laws favoring tenants, etc., and recent stock market performance I think a lot of people are looking at it why just not collect dividends doing nothing versus holding a rental property. Add in highest vacancy in the last 26 years in Victoria.
Personally I am not selling my rentals, but lots of reasons for people to be selling.
> You obviously haven’t tried to hire a young adult to work for you. they’re useless. Dumb as a post,
I’ve hired well over 50 young adults to work for my businesses over the years. And no, I haven’t found them to be “dumb” as you say.
What type of job are you hiring them for? Helping you build your DIY deck? If so, no offense, but maybe you’re not attracting the cream of the crop.
Patrick- You obviously haven’t tried to hire a young adult to work for you, they’re useless. Dumb as a post, no attention span, lazy, when they do find a job, they quit before lunch. Your love affair with worthless statistics is admirable.
Koala, ya shitty return for a game that’s stacked against u . The only upside would be a change of government and reversal of rules . B.C real estate has never boomed under the ndp . If you’re still wanting to buy 5 units I would be more than happy to sell u some .
That’s wrong, as shown by the most recent standardized testing of 81 countries. Testing 15 year old students.
Canada students score near the top of the 81 countries tested in the standardized reading, science and maths tests. (Pisa tests, done every 3 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment
Canada is 8th (out of 81) and only gets beaten by an handful of Asian countries.
Frank, I think you owe our 15 year old clever Canadian students an apology for calling them stupid.
Results attached….
Hello. I haven’t looked at the blog in a little while but would like your insights. I am considering buying a 5 unit investment property here in Victoria, centrally located. My sense is that investors are selling more than buying. First, is my impression correct? If so, any insight as to why? Is it considered generally speaking an unfavourable environment to buy a multi family investment property these days in Victoria? Thank you to all who share their knowledge with me!
More than there are supply which is why the price is where it is.
Full 25% less than the original asking price of $2.4 million. Nice ocean view as well.
How many people make $250,000+ a year, 1%. That’s what it would take to buy a 1 mil+ property in Victoria. If they are single, they probably would want to lead a lifestyle that would not include the chores of owning a house. Owning comes with responsibilities that many people are not willing to commit to.
The problem with Frank’s statement isn’t correlation or causation; it’s that the statement is not logically sound because his premises contain fallacious arguments. You can’t debate correlation or causation unless the premises are sound.
Saying single people do not need and cannot afford a SFH is a sweeping generalization. That’s false as there are single people that need and can afford SFH.
Clearly one of those things is correlational while the other is causative…
Meh, 5009 Georgia Park terrace just transacted at 1.8 so I wouldn’t call this a smoking deal.
Definitely worth taking a look at that property.
$300k under assessed https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/29890524/4405-moonlight-lane-saanich-gordon-head
Our education system is doing an outstanding job keeping Canadians stupid.
It is a fascinating paradox: higher education and wealth are heavily correlated with lower fertility rates and delayed childbearing. More so than higher home prices.
So by the same logic we should get rid of higher education.
The fact that fewer people are forming families is another factor. Single people do not need and cannot afford a SFH .
Why homes stopped being for families…
Not a bad video but oversimplified and never addresses the elephant in the room which is how society has conflated a finite resource – rea estate and an almost limitless resource such as capital as one and the same through equity and debt financing. We have turned a basic human need for shelter into a financialized speculative asset.
And governments are caught in a massive conflict of interest, as their actions reveal that they aren’t actually trying to make housing affordable—they are trying to make it attainable through more debt while keeping the bubble intact.
financing.https://www.msn.com/en-ca/video/other/why-homes-stopped-being-for-families-and-became-investments/vi-AA23CYXf?ocid=socialshare
Yeah I think you’re right. Too bad. Would have been a spectacular experiment.
It’s misleading, it isn’t garage, It’s storage.
It’s shown on the floor plan as an actual garage that is excluded from the square footage calculation, so either the floor plan or the person you talked to is wrong.
I asked someone who was involved in the construction and it isn’t an actual garage, it’s really storage space. So it’s actually the same concept.
Hah agreed on the house in the middle.
If you have access to the floor plan, 913 has garages rather than finished living space.
I don’t see a garages there actually.
Same builder/developer (who lives across on the same street), smart move to try two different concepts. The real loser in these two developments is the poor house in the middle :(.
The dueling Dale street missing middle buildings will be an interesting litmus test in terms of what buyers value. The units at 921 Dale and the newly listed units 913 Dale are very similar in terms of layout and square footage, with the primary difference being that 921 has living space on the lower floor whereas 913 has a garage.
Over the last few years,, our family has been focused on being debt free and reducing risk as much as possible. We are a simple family. Trump had a lot to do with it, but it goes back further than that. Where the world is today is no surprise. By the way, when I say family, I mean our children as well. I don’t think the world is out of the woods yet. It’s still time to hunker down in my opinion.
Those aren’t mutually exclusive, you can have plenty of fun in your 20s while working a well paying job and not spending every dime you have.
Maybe not 60’s but you can definitely do everything in your 50s that you could do in your 20s provided you take care of yourself and keep in good shape.
While focusing on accumulation from the youngest possible age is financially advantageous (greatest time for wealth to compound) you need to remember to do some crazy shit in your 20s. There are adventures you can have in your 20s that are simply impossible in your 50s or 60s no matter how much money you save. You are only young once.
I would say 40 is when one should really think about trying to enjoy life instead of focusing solely on accumulation. Obviously this is for those who started accumulating in their mid 20s or earlier.
Nothing like getting your first mortgage at 40. Best to get going when you’re younger.
Most people don’t care, at some point when you get older it’s about spending money and enjoying life as opposed to scrutinize every dollar and save for whatever it is you are saving for. The timeline for the accumulation phase of your life shouldn’t be indefinite, or else it’s a pretty sad life.
Not for nice houses in nice neighborhoods, plus you can be asked to leave by the landlord at anytime and you probably wouldn’t want to do any upgrades such as saunas, landscaping, outdoor kitchen etc.
Missing middle loop looks to be pretty quick. I see last week a number of builders that had sales in their missing middle projects have already gone out and secured missing middle teardowns for their subsequent projects.
Interestingly enough the ones that sold end-product in subpar locations, imo, picked up teardowns in subpar locations and the ones that sold product in premium locations picked up tear downs in premium locations.
The next market run up I could see huge pressure on SFHs as there will be both builders and owner-occupiers competing for something that will become more scarce.
Problem is leverage. I’ve up lifetime about 350% RRSPs, and 400% TSFA. That being said, when you factor in leverage on my rentals it’s pretty close even with the last 5 years condos having dropped in price and the financial markets having gone crazy.
I made a video about this a few months ago “Investing in The Stock Market vs Rental Condo | Long Term Returns Compared | Real Estate Victoria BC
” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAnaLt-0ha4&t
However, that was vs rental properties. When it comes to principal residence you have to add the principal residence tax exemption in favor of buying (I guess you could argue most couples don’t have their TSFA maxed out). Throw in a suite into a principal residence SFH and I really can’t see going wrong with such a purchase right now for several reasons
i/ Real estate market has been flat for 5 years, this won’t last forever
ii/ Insane returns in the financial markets, this won’t last forever either. My fav ETF YDY.TO is up 45% last 12 months, up 20% since the New Year plus dividends, that is simply insane.
iii/ SFH are going to become a scarce real estate product going forward
There are nice places to rent too. If you had a sizable down payment over the last 6 years and had it in the stock market instead of the local housing market, it’s not hard to see how that would come out ahead. There’s properties that are listed right now for barely above what the seller paid 10 years ago. Adjusting for inflation, that’s pretty alarming. Or pretty relieving if you’re the renter.
Becomes there are lots of people with good incomes and prefer the idea of owning and living in a nice house in a nice neighborhood?
Month Jun Jun
Year 2026 2025
New Unconditional Sales: 183 760
New Listings: 447 1,545
Active Listings: 4,046 3,778
Sales pace similar to last year and looks like we might break 4,100 active listings by the end of the month.
I’m continually amazed at the resistance of house prices. At current prices I’m still making out like a bandit renting compared to owning so i don’t know why more people aren’t doing that. As high as rents are here in victoria they still seem to be reasonably fairly prices compared to ownership costs.
I think they all came on in the last couple of weeks.
Yeah lots of listings in Broadmead and not a lot of movement on most of them.
Some weakness in broadmead, 1032 valewood sold 150k under ask and 340k under assessment.
I just listed a property, so you can be sure the market will tank further in Q3.
Pretty typical of Victoria too, when we’ve had corrections in the past, the bulk of the price declines happened in the first 18 months
Yes, it is remarkable how stable prices have been over the last 3 years. Supporting the conclusion that the market is balanced (and boring!).
The question is when the BoC raise rates because the Iran War is not going to go way at anytime soon and so as high gas price.