A closer look at the Saskatoon real estate statistics for December 2008
The Saskatoon Region Association of Realtors recently reported December sales and prices for the entire residential category including single-family homes (houses), condominiums, semi-detached properties, duplexes, mobile homes and vacant lots. Unit sales totaled 162 properties across all of these property types, and an average sale price of $266,411. Let’s have a look at how houses (single-family detached homes) and condominiums did in comparison to the entire residential category.
Month end expired contracts pushed total active residential listings down at the end of December settling at 1,127 properties, and reaching their lowest levels since April of 2008. Still, the total inventory of Saskatoon homes was sharply higher than last December when available properties fell to just 346. Single-family homes took a sharp dive falling from 882 units at the end of November to close the year at 684. Available Saskatoon condos followed a similar trend falling from 493 to 381 in one month’s time.
House sales slowed as they always do in December losing 23 units compared to November, and falling short of December 2007 sales which topped 140 mark. 109 Saskatoon houses changed hands last month. Condos bucked the typical trend and showed an increase of 6 units from November with a total of 44 reported sales through the month of December, off 12 units from the previous December. If you’re looking for the silver lining, December sales of condos and houses did manage to exceed numbers recorded in all previous years. All things considered, this strikes me as a fairly remarkable change from our more recent months. It will be interesting to see if lower interest rates, and softer prices motivate buyers to enter the market as we move towards spring.
Indeed prices were softer in December as Saskatoon houses took a significant beating and showed losses in all four of the value measures we’ve been tracking over the past two years. The average sale price took the biggest thump losing well over $25,000 as it fell from $302,508 to just $274,521 and reaching it’s lowest level since December 2007 when the average house price was recorded at $267,342. The median sale price dropped $21,000 to $264,000 on a month-over-month basis and was actually slightly lower than last year’s number of $264,900. The three-month average fell close to $14K compared to last month landing at $295,956, down about $35,000 from it’s peak of $331,630 in June, but remaining up by almost as much when compared with the same month last year.
Click the image for a larger view.
It’s certainly worth mentioning that the houses sold in November were larger than those sold in December. In November, Saskatoon home buyers purchased an average of 1,252 square feet, compared to 1,186 square feet in December. Using our average price per square foot number for the month, about half of the massive slide in the average selling price could be attributed to this factor. Two of the five major trading areas managed an increase in the price per square foot on houses that traded. On the heels of an unusually large slide in November, area 4 rose from $162 per square foot last month to $173 in December while area 1 saw a marginal increase from $254 to $257. Area 3 took the largest slide, losing about $23 per square foot to finish at $221. Across all Saskatoon real estate trading areas, the average price per square foot for a Saskatoon house dipped $11 from $242 in November to $231 in December.
Click the image for a larger view.
Saskatoon condos produced surprises this month beyond stronger unit sales showing price gains in three of our four value measures. The average sale price increased $14,000 compared to the previous month and finished at $236,896, or about $2,600 higher than the same month last year. The median fell short of last year’s number finishing at $219,500, but was up about $5,500 from November. The three-month average slipped from $230,812 last month to settle at $229,082, or about $7,000 lower than it was in December of last year. A small handful of well appointed luxury type condos in areas 2 and 3 take at least some of the credit for the gains.
The price per square foot number for Saskatoon condominiums saw an overall increase of $2 over the previous month, rising to $219 in December. Still, it sits about $15 lower than it was in December 2007 and at its second lowest point since May of 2007.
The gap between the price of a Saskatoon house and a condo closed considerably through the month of December, at least on a price per square foot basis as house prices came down and condos edged slightly higher. Higher end sales pushed the average price per square foot in area 3 up by more than 25% to $259, and area 2 saw gains of about half as much rising from $217 last month to $243 in December. Area 1 continued to slide falling from $216 to $201. Area 4 remained stable as a result of no condo sales for the fifth consecutive month. Area 5 shows a large slide from a bizarre previous high of $255, falling through the floor to just $179. I should point out that area 5’s number is based on just two sales so a large change is not at all surprising.
I’m always happy to answer your Saskatoon real estate questions. All of my contact info is here. Please feel free to call or email.
Norm Fisher
Royal LePage Saskatoon Real Estate
35 comments so far. We'd love to hear your thoughts.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:28 AM
All fits with a general downward trend, with inventory still very high at a traditional slow time, it would seem we could expect another spike of inventory, with slow demand against a back ground of over building, empty speculation properties and global commodity recession.
All seem to point out that prices should be well below this time last year, as the local housing market, and global commodity market, are both in worse shape than last December (2008) when prices were similar.
I’m calling for at least another year until prices bottom out, especially since Saskatoon seems to deny the effect the recession is having on them, and are just slowly accepting the weak housing market fundamentals.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:29 AM
$302 to $274 is a big drop in one month
the graphs look really negative
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:29 AM
Ranks of jobless swell in Canada
http://tinyurl.com/9vav3s
“Deepening economic gloom cost Canada 34,400 jobs last month –12,200 more than economists had been forecasting – with the big hit coming to full-time positions, especially in construction, Statistics Canada said Friday.”
The national unemployment rate was 6.6 per cent in December. Here’s what happened provincially (previous month in brackets):
Saskatchewan 4.2 (3.7)
Unemployment rate still higher than Alberta, but lower compared to other provinces.
http://tinyurl.com/7vmubb
I expect January’s numbers to be worse, as people who were hired in retail to deal with the holiday season will be laid off. I hope I’m wrong. Anecdotally, I’ve noticed a big uptick in referrals to my private practice… not sure what that’s about.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Saskatchewan 4.2 (3.7)
low is good, but unemployment up .5% is still up
won’t consider those most recent lay offs either
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Norm,
thanks for the stats, great as always.
I would consider myself as one of the biggest bears on here but I do see SOME things improving for buyers. I have mentioned quite a few doom and gloom posts, so we will just go with some positives for today.
Interest rates are low and I expect to be even lower this spring. Prices are improving( lower) with builders giving some nice incentives. People are not rushed into buying (like 2007) How many people bought sight unseen with no inspection? I think that is worse than overpaying for a good property. And there are many great places to choose from.
I really liked what one buyer posted a few days ago. Something along the lines of ” we bought what we liked and what we could afford” . This is the way it should be. I think and hope we will see more buyers in this category this year than last.
As we will feel the effects from the Canadian recession, Saskatoons numbers are better for employment than last month (.1), Regina stayed the same while the province lost (.5, seasonal?)I do expect the numbers to get worse in the coming months, though, but so far, ok. Especially with some high paying layoffs.
Jobless rates
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090109.wjobscitiesprovinces0109/BNStory/Business
As for house prices, we will start seeing yoy declines in sales and prices. Average price between 260k-285k until June, unless there is the domino effect of a crashing economy ( autos, or retailer bankruptcies) Inventory, credit, confidence, the economy, interest rates will all have an impact good or bad on Saskatoon RE for 2009.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:35 AM
George,
“As for house prices, we will start seeing yoy declines in sales and prices. Average price between 260k-285k until June”
I still think YOY decline in average price may happen this month or next. I’m a bit less optimistic than you about the average, but not by much.
Here’s something for the stock monkeys:
Is The Stock Market Cheap?
http://tinyurl.com/8ozqu6
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Thanks for the stats Norm – I thoroughly enjoy being able to out statistic anyone I visit with on real estate numbers lol. I’m a real stats junkie, so your site provides me with a great “fix” at least once a week!
Everywhere I go, I seem to meet someone who built a house on spec last year and can’t sell it. I refer a lot of them here, as I find most still need a little dose of reality. Please keep those numbers coming!! We all appreciate it very much!
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:36 AM
“In November, Saskatoon home buyers purchased an average of 1,252 square feet, compared to 1,186 square feet in December. Using our average price per square foot number for the month, about half of the massive slide in the average selling price could be attributed to this factor.”
While this is true, it may not paint a whole picture. when I look at the SFH graph, I see pretty much a straight line for the three data points for Sep, Oct, Dec … with Nov as the outlier. This would be borne out by the $-per-sqft-SFH graph, which shows a consistent and almost unrelenting downward trend since the high in May ’08.
Projecting that forward (which is always dangerous and seldom accurate, but fun to do nonetheless) shows us back to ~$200/sqft for SFH by April ’09 … putting things back where they were in April ’07.
Where’s that prediction board, Norm?
And speaking of data: looking at the
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Crikey said: “I still think YOY decline in average price may happen this month or next.”
Looking at my own stats, I was a bit surprised to see that SFH are ALREADY down YOY by ~$5.5k
Dec ’07: $280,132 Dec ’08: $274,508
What’s confusing is that it looks like condos are pretty much flat YOY, gaining ~$2.5k …
Dec ’07: $234,212 Dec ’08: $236,896
So why are the overall YOY numbers still up by > $10k?
Dec ’07: $255,885 Dec ’08: $266,411
Norm, what’s keeping this overall average number up so much more than the contributory factors would seem to indicate is mathematically possible?
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Bookrat,
“While this is true, it may not paint a whole picture.”
Of course it doesn’t paint the whole picture. That’s why I said that other stuff.
That said, larger homes still do bring more money than smaller homes. No question about that.
“Looking at my own stats, I was a bit surprised to see that SFH are ALREADY down YOY by ~$5.5k
Dec ’07: $280,132 Dec ’08: $274,508″
I’m not sure where you collected that December ’07 number.
“Where’s that prediction board, Norm?
”
I’m sorry, but I am very busy right now. My days are running late into the evening and I must look after the client’s business before I blog.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Ringo,
Lol. I can see you now. “Well, actually…”
Thanks again.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:41 AM
“I’m not sure where you collected that December ’07 number.”
I’m not either, now that you mention it; I mean, I’m sure that I pulled the data from this site, but it’s entirely possible that I fed in an incorrect number or two when collecting it. (Done *that* before.)
Having said that, though… is it possible that some data has changed? I ask because your Dec ’07 wrap-up (http://tinyurl.com/9q4fqx) says that the monthly average for SFH was $267,341, but the January wrap-up (http://tinyurl.com/9lwn9z) says, “[SF] Houses … continued to see fairly significant increases … compared to $272,791 in December.” Why the discrepancy?
Either one is lower than Dec 08, though, so I apologize for and take back my YOY decline comment.
But my general question still stands. Going from your MLS stats page (http://www.teamfisher.com/MLS__Stats/page_1723681.html) the average price went up $10.6k from Dec 07 ($255.8) to Dec 08 ($266.4). Even taking the lower of the two SFH averages listed above for Dec 07 that’s still only +7k for houses, and +2.5k for condos. What’s pushing the overall average to >10k for everything YOY?
Niggling questions, I know… I just like math to make sense.
I’m glad to hear that you’re busy, and I hope it translates into significant sales for you. Seems only fitting for Saskatoon’s Best Realtor!
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Bookrat,
“Having said that, though… is it possible that some data has changed?”
Yes, and that was the first thought that I had, however I can see from my Closer Look post for December 2007that I originally reported the average selling price of “house” at $271,791 (Jan 12, 2008) and later revised it to $267,342 (Jan 6, 2008). Generally if I have to update something I will leave the original numbers there as well. Note the “Note” at the beginning of that post which says, “Note: The graphics in this post were updated on January 6, 2008 to reflect the final sale numbers as reported by agents for December, 2007. The graphics show the final figures while the commentary reflects the statistics as they had been reported as of the date of the original post.”
Here’s how things have changed and why I’ve been updating these monthly posts.
You may recall that in February-March of last year, the SRAR updated their MLS system and moved to something which was actually designed and built during this century. Prior to the time, the stats were crunched slightly differently. If I’m correct in my recollection of the specifics the old system (WINids) pulled “sales” based on the contract date which was reported when the sale was finally processed on the MLS. This meant that if I sold a house in December, but I didn’t report the sale until January 10 the December stats would change after I submitted the sale. That’s why, at that time, I would wait until at least the middle of the month to do my monthly reports hoping that they would be complete as possible. Inevitably, someone would submit something even after that which would impact the stats. Our new system (Matrix) pulls the stats based on the date which the sale is actually reported to the MLS. So if a house goes under contract on December 20, firms up on the 31st, and gets reported to the MLS on January 1 it is counted in the January stats. The big advantage to that is your stats don’t change after the end of the month, at least not often. The possibility remains that a firm sale falls through after it has been reported. If a firm sale falls through on a client’s home I can request that the previously reported “sale” be removed from the system.
“But my general question still stands. Going from your MLS stats page (http://www.teamfisher.com/MLS__Stats/page_1723681.html) the average price went up $10.6k from Dec 07 ($255.8) to Dec 08 ($266.4). Even taking the lower of the two SFH averages listed above for Dec 07 that’s still only +7k for houses, and +2.5k for condos. What’s pushing the overall average to >10k for everything YOY?”
Okay man, but we have been through this several times. Please write it down with your stats.
The MLS Stats page which you are referring to has SRAR’s monthly numbers which are for the entire residential category. Sales include single-family homes, condos, lots, semi-detached homes, duplexes and mobiles. The “Closer Look” posts were intended to take a “Closer Look” at single-family homes and condos separate and apart for each other and all other residential property types.
Hope that helps.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Some interesting offhand observations:
1. The medium selling price has lost close to -$55,000 (-17.2%) from the peak in 2008 (SFH) and close to -$25,000 (-10.2%) from the peak in 2008 (condos). We’re ending 2008 with a loss, not a gain.
2. The media, real estate boards, etc. stating that price gains are still up slightly (negligible) from 2007 is very selective and an attempt to put a positive spin on an obvious housing collapse, since it ignores the fact that any and all price gains in 2008 have been completely and irrevocably lost. This is akin to saying the DOW didn’t lose as much this year since it was actually lower in 2007 anyway. An investment is an investment (regardless), is it not?
3. Anyone that bought during the peak in 2008 (April-June) is now underwater; there is scant mention made (anywhere) of the challenges first time homeowners who financed with a 40-year variable rate mortgage (2008) are going to have when attempting to refinance in several years. What institution is going to provide 100% refinancing on a home that has lost in excess of 10-15% of value without additional collateral? And where is this going to come from?
4. Starting inventory (SFH and condos) in 2008 is well over three times that in 2007, and this is completely unprecedented. I find it baffling that everyone continues to think this market is going to play out in a rational manner and comparable to years past, when recent history has clearly demonstrated the exact opposite.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Jason,
“I find it baffling that everyone continues to think this market is going to play out in a rational manner and comparable to years past”
Are you getting that impression from “everyone” here?
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:43 AM
“Okay man, but we have been through this several times. Please write it down with your stats.
”
LOL — sorry, Norm. I wrote that very poorly. I remember this part that you re-stated — that the overall numbers include more than just SFH and condos — really I do! What I was trying to ask can be better re-stated as this:
Given that 1) SFH and condos make up the bulk of the listings, and 2) these two categories are up only 7k and 2.5k YOY, whereas 3) overall average is up > 10k YOY, then it stands to reason that 4) something in those other categories must have had some significant gains to drag everything up so much. What I was curious about was which of those other categories (which I know you don’t usually discuss) had done so well YOY that they could shift the average up like that?
Now that I have my question stated properly (I hope), I will also say that an answer of “Too busy to check” or “Not really on-topic for this blog” will be accepted if that’s how things are.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Bookrat,
I hear ya.
Duplexes and semi-detached homes are averaging $259K in December 07 and $297K in December ’08. 2007 sales also show two cheap area 4 vacant lots, one at $25K and the other at $40K. No such sales in ’08. Remove the two lots and you’re near $257,500. The others make up the rest of the difference.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:43 AM
j said “I find it baffling that everyone continues to think this market is going to play out in a rational manner and comparable to years past, when recent history has clearly demonstrated the exact opposite”
everyone is the newspapers which during a story on a $40,000 plus price drop, still insert that it’s all good, because that’s more than last year.
fair comment since we hear all the sping that ignores that housing is down and as j said, a lot of people who bought in 2008 are screwed and lost a lot of money in value. i saw places reduced $700,000 to $600,000. that’s a lot. or the condos that are now like $50,000 less. doesn’t even consider that bang for buck, prices are actually lower than 2007, when the average was down, but like norm’s price per square foot graph shows, buyers were getting better stuff way before prices started falling
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:43 AM
fair comment since we hear all the spin that ignores that housing is down and as j said, a lot of people who bought in 2008 are screwed and lost a lot of money in value.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Dan,
What does this mean?
“but like norm’s price per square foot graph shows, buyers were getting better stuff way before prices started falling”
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Just that averages peaked 6 months ago, but your price per square foot graph shows that bang for buck, the market peaked even earlier, with buyers paying less for what they were getting.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:44 AM
looks like what a given place was going for peaked in March http://www.normfisher.ca/images/teamblog/house_ppsf_1208.jpg
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:45 AM
Dan, you may be making a similar mistake to one I have made before when looking at that graph. The ‘all areas’ line is the orange one in the middle, *not* the blue one at the top. While Area 1 (the blue one) had a definite peak in March, All Areas stayed high and relatively unchanged March-June, only really starting its downward trend in July.
Norm, given the number of lines on that chart, it might help if you could make the ‘all areas’ line stand out a little more. Some idea: fade the others just a little (e.g. to 75%), larger dots or thicker line for all areas, put All Areas in black, use dashed lines for area 1-5 vs. solid line for All Areas, etc. Just some thoughts.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:45 AM
Thanks Bookrat,
The “all areas” lines are definitely prominent now. Appreciate the feedback.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:48 AM
still looks like “all areas” price per square foot reached its peak in march
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:49 AM
http://www.normfisher.ca/images/teamblog/houseandcondo_ppsf_1208.jpg
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:49 AM
just called myself nick, must be too tired, off to bed, i stand behind what the march peak though
maybe lasted for a while, but peaked in march
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:50 AM
and not like i’m creepy or thinking about any of you in that way just too much time reading comments instead of sleep
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Dan,
I understand. I usually start to think I’m someone else as soon as I get tired. No biggie.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Hi All, this is my first post but I have been reading for a while.
I am currently looking to buy a home and noticed a number of these new builds that a partially attached . . . especially in Exhibition, Buena Vista and Varsity View. Many of them look pretty spiffy.
So I would like to through out two questions:
1. Why are the partially attached?
2. What are your (all contributors here) thoughts on these types of homes?
Thanks in advance.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:53 AM
not a fan of partially attached, take up less space but resell lower in my experience (Norm?) not sure why the extra few feet to separate into separate narrower houses can’t be done
really, duplex has a worse rep than condo
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:53 AM
snappy,
Sometimes there is some savings in construction cost with a semi-detached as they often share a common wall. Taxes can be lower as well. These are the only real benefits I can think of. On the other hand, you are very close to your neighbour and have no control over how they care for their property. With a condo, the whole group determines minimum standards of upkeep. The people in the other side of your semi could live like hillbillies and as long as they kept their grass under a foot tall and a minimum number of wrecked cars in the yard there probably wouldn’t be much you could do. I think if I were going to live in one, I’d want to own both sides. That said, the scenarios I’ve suggested are probably unrealistic and I think a lot of people coexist beside a great neighbour without issues. Good luck.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Norm, living in Regina, I have to say, Saskatoon sure seems to have a lot of duplexes. I particularly notice in areas like Lakeshore Saskatoon, that high end homes virtually co-exist with hill-billy-esque duplexes across the street.
Regina has much nicer areas, where an affordable home can be had, with no low end housing in sight. Maybe an affordable housing issue, but I enjoy that there is not one duplex I have seen in my current Regina area. Another benefit of Regina, strict architectural controls. And since housing is cheaper, the same price to get you into an average Saskatoon area, gets high end east side or south end Regina.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:54 AM
“strict architectural controls”
lol . . . we could use some of that in Saskatoon.
I was speaking more to the semi-detach homes that look like a single-family. The reason that I’m considering this option is because I want a new home in an established neighborhood but don’t want to pay 600k +. I’m not too interested in Saskatoon’s new developments (Willowgrove, Stonebridge ect.) they look so desolate right now.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Snappy, Regina’s south end is a nice established area, some of the province’s best schools, near university, good shopping and restaurants, 5 minutes from down town … and I find it classier, safer and newer than most “established” areas of Saskatoon.