I agree with Jen and Peter. Probably not much chance that your “last chance” will pass. I still think that rising rates will have a greater impact on affordability in the next year couple of years but they may even stay low longer than we’ve been expecting.

I just found this story while perusing Bloomberg:

India Seeks Lowest Potash Price in Four Years http://bit.ly/bTkzRt

“Global prices of the fertilizer, used to boost yields of rice, fruit and vegetables, have plunged from as high as $1,000 at ton in 2008 as supply outpaced demand and grain prices retreated. India needs to secure lower import prices to cut fertilizer subsidies of 500 billion rupees ($11 billion) and rein in a budget deficit at a 16-year high.

“We expect international prices to fall in line,” Rakesh Kapur, joint managing director of the Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd., said in an interview in New Delhi on Feb. 19. “If suppliers have to cater to this market, they will have to tune themselves accordingly.”

Doesn’t sound like the makings of a boom to me anytime soon, cyn_d.

I can’t see how the new potash agreement will affect housing prices at all. The most recent Canpotex deal was to India at 1/3 of the price per tonne it was going for at the peak (only $370 vs. over $1000), and it was only for 600K tonnes.

As to what’s going to happen to the price of potash after that, I can’t really say.

Please keep in mind that the driver of the “mini-boom” in real estate throughout Canada was largely the result extraordinary liquidity measures provided by the government, resulting in freakishly low interest rates. This, combined with CMHC guaranteed low-down, long-amortizing mortgages are making debt temporarily very cheap.

I don’t think you are going to miss anything. I am one of the more optimistic people I know on the market and I honestly can’t see anything more than 5-10% increases max. Having said that, despite it not being reflected in the stats, the prices for entry level housing has increased over the past 12 months, probably by 10%+.

We’re so disciplined at saving for a downpayment and if we miss it “again”, I’m not sure I’ll emotionally survive…

On another note, I was digging a little deeper in my WordPress dashboard today, looking for something else when I came across a setting which allowed me to “add the comment count” to the teasers on the front page. I have activated that feature.

Thanks for the clarification. I think I understand where you’re coming from.

“Now with the new year you have lopped off not one year but two from the charts; they only go back to 2006 now.”

My primary purpose here is to provide a resource for active buyers and sellers, and Saskatoon home owners to get some current and up to date information about our market. As a self-confessed “numbers junkie” I can appreciate that you would like to have access to as much data as possible and it’s nice when that stuff can be easy to access, but for most people, a long history of data is confusing, and in some cases seen as irrelevant. When I looked at the charts at the end of 2009 I thought, “man, that’s getting messy” and I assumed that 2010 numbers would most likely come in following the lines of 2004-2006 and create a larger mess that would be difficult for most to interpret. So that was the primary reason for going to a chart that contains five years of data. As I said, I will be leaving all of the other stuff in the archives for those who wish to view it. For that purpose, each of these reports makes reference to “last year,” or “last insert month here” and includes a link so you can pretty easily walk through the previous years data with just a single click, and I will do my best to maintain some kind of a link system that makes that easy.

“When I tried to dig deeper and look for the numerical stats page — the Statistical History of MLS Sales and Listings (http://www.mysaskatoonhome.com/MLS__Stats/page_1723681.html) — I literally could not find it.”

It is there, at the link you posted. Perhaps Point2 was having some issues at the time you tried to access it. This page resides on a different site, and on a different web server. While I do reference it from time to time the data is not stored in the same place, so that’s certainly possible.

“It is referenced in your “Data Collection and Calculation for our statistical reports” page (http://www.teamfisher.com/data-collection-and-calculation-for-our-statistical-reports/) but not hotlinked therein.”

Excellent point. Links to the various reports now exist there. Thank you.

“I finally found a link to it in one of the Monthly Roundups”

I have included a link back there on the opening paragraph of each monthly “from SRAR” report and will do my best to remember that going forward.

“So I apologize”

No problems Bookrat.

“I stand by what I said about SRAR’s stats page, though… that page HAS changed”

Please note that SRAR’s page contains 5 years of data. Residential statistics are accessible through the “Five year comparison” link and when clicked it opens a report titled “SRAR Statistics 5 Year Average.” That’s probably why they are only keeping a 5-year history there.

Peter: I agree that it’s not a factor in and of itself … I was just saying that the trend seemed to be going towards higher inventory very early this year, as opposed to other years in the past.

I guess part of my continued frustration is that things just don’t make logical sense. For years we had just a couple of months of inventory, and prices were YOY stable, slowly growing at about the same pace as inflation. And then all at once things explode and RE goes crazy and inventory swings first one way (too low) and then the other (too high). Now things are relatively stable again… but prices are 80-120% higher than at the previous stable level. Why? Even as it was happening (and I, having bought in 2003, was benefitting from it) it didn’t seem fair or right or just or sensible. Serves me right, I guess, for expecting the herd of humanity to be any of those things.

I guess Saskatoon is still better off than many metropolitan areas, which are still seeing significant YOY price increases. Doesn’t make sense to me, and when that happens I try and figure out a pattern. Sadly, the only one I can find is “People are basically venal and myopic, with short memories.” Not exactly an uplifting feeling.

Norm: I guess what caught my eye initially was that I was looking at some end-of-year charts (e.g. http://www.teamfisher.com/saskatoon-home-sales-remain-active-in-november-2009-srar/) and saw data back to 2004. Now with the new year you have lopped off not one year but two from the charts; they only go back to 2006 now.

When I tried to dig deeper and look for the numerical stats page — the Statistical History of MLS Sales and Listings (http://www.mysaskatoonhome.com/MLS__Stats/page_1723681.html) — I literally could not find it. It is referenced in your “Data Collection and Calculation for our statistical reports” page (http://www.teamfisher.com/data-collection-and-calculation-for-our-statistical-reports/) but not hotlinked therein. Nowhere on any of the main tabs is it linked either. (At least, not that I could see — if I missed it, please correct me and tell me how I get directly to it.

I finally found a link to it in one of the Monthly Roundups… but by that time I was getting frustrated, and when I scanned down and saw only 2006 information I jumped to incorrect conclusions. I forgot that the 2004 data had never been broken out on its own — only as a comparison to the ‘previous two years’ in the 2006 data.

So I apologize for my indirect slander on you, and hereby do notify one and all that the data DOES still exist on Norm’s site. (Although there doesn’t seem to be a way to easily get directly there that I could find. Norm, did I miss something?)

I stand by what I said about SRAR’s stats page, though… that page HAS changed. You can prove it by looking in the Internet Archive (http://web.archive.org/web/20080401234040/http://www.srar.ca/Srarstats.php3) and the 2004/2005 stats are clearly visible there, while that is no longer true. As to the why, I will not publicly speculate.

3.5 months of supply is hardly ‘bearish’. In the US, when things were crashing, there were markets with YEARS of supply. 3.5 is probably more of a sellers market than a buyers market if anything but perhaps Norm can weigh in on that. Keep in mind as well that february is one of the slower months of the year. Come April, we should be seeing 325+ sales as I am sure you are aware.

“so what’s your point?”

You characterized the recent growth in inventory as “concerning.” I was simply pointing out that while there has been an expansion of the inventory in real numbers, the corresponding increase in demand has actually shrunk the supply. I think it’s a perfectly clear and valid “point” and I hadn’t intended to invalidate your point. Just attempting to have a discussion.

I cannot speak for SRAR, but I have not deleted or altered and charts or graphs on this website, to the best of my recollection. Displaying my graphs at 600 ppi makes them challenging to read for some so my practice has been to lob off a year of old data when a new year starts but the old information is all present in the archives.

“I could impute all sorts of sinister reasons…”

By implication, I think you just did.

Regarding inventory: while 3.5 MOI is definitely better than the bloated 6 MOI we had at this time in 2009, and a lot healthier than the insane 0.75 to 1.0 MOI we had in 2007/2008, it’s still higher than it used to be at this time of year: 2004-2006 all showed about 2.6-3.0 MOI at this time of year.

I guess I’m asking: so what’s your point? I’m sure you’ve got one… I’m just missing it. Mine is that adding 250 houses to inventory between Dec 31 and Feb 28 does not seem inflationary; it’s great if you’re a bear, not so much if you’re a bull.

Side note
Funny thing I noticed when looking for historical information: as recently as October of last year (the last time I remember checking) the SRAR statistics page showed monthly data back to 2004. You referenced it yourself in your old graphs. Now both your graphs and their charts start at 2006. I could impute all sorts of sinister reasons to this deletion of data, but instead I’ll simply ask you outright: why the change? (On your part, and if you know it, on theirs too.)

Good questions. In fact, last week there were four sales over $500K including one at $739,000. With just 51 sales, that’s a pretty strong number and those units definitely skewed the averages some. We’ll most likely see it come back to earth this week, as that seems to be what typically happens. Here’s a look at the actual sale prices from each of the last two weeks if you’re interested.

Inventory? Well, with any luck it will continue to climb, at least through spring. It looks like we are probably headed for 260ish units sales this month. As sales increase, inventory needs to increase more to maintain balance. If we finish the month with 900 actives, active inventory will have shrunk from a 4.1 month supply at the end of January to a 3.5 month supply by the end of February.

(Norm, just curious – what was the mix like for these last couple of weeks? The medians are high as well as the means, so that tells me that it’s not just one huge $2m sale or anything… but did we see several higher-end properties go or was it just that everything that sold was worth more?)

Unlike the weekly sales figures, which have been bouncing around like Happy Fun Ball (Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball), you can almost slap a ruler down on the weekly inventory figures. Since finishing last year just a hair north of 600 listings, they have climbed steadily almost 30% in just two months and are back over 800 again. I know that the 800 benchmark doesn’t seem like much when you compare it on the chart against the mountainous inventories of the last two years, but prior to 2008 an inventory of 800 was considered a yearly peak — something that only happened in the boom of summer. To see inventories climbing steadily again during a time of year when they are traditionally flat (and at a time when YOY sales numbers have seen increases over the last month too) is a concerning.

Even if the bulk of that inventory is above the ‘sweet spot’, it cannot help but have an effect as it languishes on the market and sellers realize that they aren’t getting any bites at the higher price and are forced to come down if they want (need) to sell. This has the downward effect on similarly-spec’d houses as people look at comparables…

… or it would in a sane world anyway. Since we’re living in cloud-cuckoo land, I have no idea what’s going to happen. But it’s still fun to make predictions!

There are not many more overbids than what we might expect from one week to the next. Flip back through last year and you’ll find numbers between 2-4 almost every week, and some higher. 5%ish is probably pretty normal. I think that there are definitely more competing offers but not that many are going over list. Still, prices are creeping up in the $200K-$400K range for the real premium stuff.

Sarah,

It’s hard to find reliable info on government debt, especially Manitoba. I did a search on Wikipedia for provincial debt, and the suggestion of “provincial diet” was delivered. I can’t confirm what their debt actually is but I looked at a 2010 pre-budget report that projected a deficit of $580M, about 55% of Saskatchewan’s projected $1,047M.

I am more of an interior BC fan, where many “bargains” can be had. If you consider the same price as Saskatoon a bargain.

It will be interesting to see how Saskatoon sustains population growth with local potash producers seeming to have settled for prices and demand about a third of what they were a couple years ago.

We are glad to have you!

Larry,

Yikes! I have often wondered how people do it. I guess, if one didn’t get in years ago that they live in the ‘burbs. Crazy though, when the lousy stuff hits a million.

Whoo, you’re a bit late, Larry. It’s been happening for years now.

I’ve said before, and I maintain, that my family’s quality of life is far better here that it was there. Admittedly, I am missing the mountains of cherry blossoms right about now….

Methinks you may soon be seeing BC people buying in Saskatoon. Should we start a reciprocal campaign on the benefits of snow mobiling and ice fishing???

Manitoba certainly has us beat on housing affordability, but Nick, I love your spin on population. Of course, everything you’ve said is true but you do leave out some of the most important facts. Saskatchewan’s population has seen more growth in the past four years than Manitoba. Nobody cares what the score was ten years ago.

I see that you have given up on your I love Alberta campaign. Thank God you didn’t get around to moving there hey?

“A recently-published survey shows that Winnipeg is Canada’s top-ranked city in terms of
housing affordability”

Affordability, which takes into account income is important, and right now a big impediment to Saskatoon’s growth! Lost in all the “sask a boom” hype is that Manitoba has grown 10% (100,000 people) over the past decade or so … while Saskatchewan just matched its 1987 population. Wonder why?