Saskatoon real estate: Week in review (June 8-12 2009)
Sales of houses and condos slowed this week as Saskatoon real estate agents reported just seventy-three units sold, down from ninety-four last week, and ninety-three for the same week last year. The softer sales week brought an end to a four-week winning streak of year-over-year gains in homes reported sold.
New listing activity also fell substantially in comparison to last week as a total of one hundred and twenty Saskatoon homes were offered for sale on the multiple listing service, down from one hundred and sixty last week, and more than forty percent lower than this week last year when two hundred and four properties were offered for sale.
The inventory of active listings gained a little traction and moved up from 1,478 last week, to finish this week at 1,495, up from 1,326 at this time last year. As of this morning, there are nine hundred and eight single-family detached houses and four hundred and ninety-three condominiums showing an active status on the Saskatoon multiple listings service.
Click the image for a larger version of the graph.
Seventy-one home sellers made a price adjustment this week, while a further twenty canceled their MLS listing only to re-introduce it with a new MLS number, and in most cases, a new price.
Average selling prices took a tumble this week, largely due to a lack of single-family home sales in area one, a district that consistently produces the greatest number of sales, normally at the highest prices. Area one managed to maintain its reputation for the most unit sales, but just barely. Fifteen of the twenty-one sales reported were condominiums causing the area’s average to plummet to just $241,195. Overall, the average price for the week fell nearly thirty thousand dollars from $284,404 last week to $254,737. The six-week average slid approximately $3,500 from last week to $277,189, down from $305,125 for the same week last year. The four-week median dipped just slightly compared to the previous week to finish at $267,450, about $18,000 lower than it was at this time last year.
Click the image for a larger version of the graph.
Strong sales of lower than average priced homes brought the average underbid lower as it slipped below the ten thousand dollar mark for the first time in awhile to settle at $9,486. The average discount, as a percentage of the asking price came it at one of its lower recorded levels, just 3.6 percent. Discounts in the “over $25,000” category slid right off of the chart and nearly three quarters of all Saskatoon home sales recorded were completed within $10,000 of the asking price.
See a Google map displaying the boundaries of Saskatoon real estate “areas” here
Data collection and calculation for our statistical reports
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.
Follow our daily updates on Twitter @Norm_Fisher.
Norm Fisher
Royal LePage Saskatoon Real Estate
51 comments so far. We'd love to hear your thoughts.
June 13th, 2009 at 9:56 AM
Was there limited inventory for single family homes in Area 1 (or in specific price ranges), or was there just some really good deals on condominiums? What was up with the overbidding in Area 3?
June 13th, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Rising rents affecting access to good food: CHEP
http://tinyurl.com/njtw38
June 13th, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Jason,
“Was there limited inventory for single family homes in Area 1″
No. Just the way things shook out this week. Over just five days it’s not unusual to see things that don’t appear to make a lot of sense.
“What was up with the overbidding in Area 3?’
Just one sale, $20K over. 0 days on the market. It was near 1,000 square foot condo in a concrete high rise for $225K so I’d say it may have been perceived to be under priced.
June 13th, 2009 at 4:59 PM
“The four-week median dipped just slightly compared to the previous week to finish at $267,450″
Hey that is only $261,450 higher than Detroit’s median! They are getting pretty hammered there.
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/
June 13th, 2009 at 7:14 PM
Interesting in Detroit. Detroit proper has been depressed for a very long time. Years and years ago already, kids used to burn down old dilapitated abandonded homes just for something to do. Of course this is in the core, comparable to Pleasant Hill here, but still much worse due to the sky high vacancy and abondament rate. Suburbs like Ann Arbor etc. are a different kettle of fish and are much more what we are used to.
June 13th, 2009 at 7:20 PM
Hard to fathom that the median price could actually be just $6,000. Probably pretty hard to justify much when your population drops in half over 40 years.
I wonder how that Saskatoon dude is doing with his Kijiji promo trying to sell houses in Detroit.
June 14th, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Canada seeing negative inflation: economists
First time in 15 years (expected to be confirmed Thursday with StatsCanada)
http://tinyurl.com/lsebzm
June 14th, 2009 at 4:09 PM
I think relating Pleasant Hill with Detroit is unfair for the neighbourhood. I agree Detroit is down in the dumps, but there really is no comparison to it in Saskatoon. Detroit is a beast of it own!
Rick, I give you credit for saying it is worse. However I’ve been to Detroit, and I get no gut wrenching feelings from Pleasant Hill similar to Detroit. To ‘troit Pleasant Hill into a comparable, burn out St Pauls and infest the burnt out shell with druggies and criminals. Leave the eyesore stand and fester for years. Then put a construction detour on 20th St W onto AVE P S to drive people to a jacking zone — that is Detroit! Really though, I can’t fathom how to illustrate anything like Detroit.
I could keep dishing Detroit on how unnerving it is. But Pleasant Hill does not make me uneasy in any similar way.
June 14th, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Right, I had second thoughts about comparing Pleasant Hill with Detroit, it’s just that the vintage of the homes are about the same, and Pleasant Hill is a inner city neighborhood where as Detroit is a inner city city. Regarding the $6,000 median, these houses are only suitable for demolition so what your buying is a lot add demolition costs. I guess we can remember when we could buy a house in small town Saskatchewan for $1. Again my apologies, my intent definitely was not to suggest that Pleasant Hill was directly comparable with Detroit.
June 14th, 2009 at 7:21 PM
Wow after 15 years of an inflationary spiral the world is scared stiff of 1 year of deflation. From my perspective a gallon of gas or a can of coke is no better then it was 15 years ago jussst alot more expensive. I think we would be hard pressed to find anybody in Saskatoon who would concede that gas, groceries and accomodation is cheap, we would probably find even less people who would complain if these expenses went down.
June 15th, 2009 at 8:21 AM
Looks like everyone can breath a sigh of relief and get back to speculating.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/housing-prices-have-recovered-crea/article1182169/
June 15th, 2009 at 9:02 AM
Yeah, I’m breathing a sigh of relief, all right.
“The national average resale price of $319,757 “was up four-tenths of a percentage point from the previous record set in May, 2008,” CREA said.”
There was a whole lot of bubblelicious activity going on in Vancouver and Toronto in May… this has probably has a large pull on the national average price, I would think. I’ll be interested to see the June effect of interest rate increases on these markets.
June 15th, 2009 at 9:40 AM
Housing prices have recovered?
In just over 10 years, house prices have risen 250% to 300% while the average wage has increased 50% at the most. A short peroid correction during a recession which has lowered interest rates to alltime lows has fueled the market. If anything has recovered, it looks like cheap credit. They have been calling bottom in the States for over 40 months and now their average is under 200k and ours is over 300k and we make about the same wage. Hmmm, who will recover first, I wonder?
With that said, I do believe it makes sense for some people to buy now, but not all who are buying right now. Trade up buyers and first time buyers with a good down payment who negotiate a good underbid can definitely make it work to their advantage with the high inventory and low rates. Those who max out at 5% down and are hoping for the housing ATM are in trouble.
June 15th, 2009 at 10:11 AM
This article falls right in line with what you’re saying, George. This is a time to be careful with debt, no doubt about that.
Household debt emerges as greatest risk to Canada’s financial system
http://tinyurl.com/nu4tyr
“While stressing that the possibility of a mass bankruptcy is remote, the ability of Canadians to repay their bank loans has replaced frozen credit markets as the main fear factor among policy makers, the report said.”
June 15th, 2009 at 10:14 AM
For those looking to get a good deal when buying. This is possible.
Office Building Sells at 40% Below Construction Costs http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/06/office-building-sells-at-40-below.html
From a mullet to a shaved head
June 15th, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Things should stabilize
June 15th, 2009 at 11:59 AM
U of S Colleges and Units, must have initial plans submitted to the Provost’s office by June 30th, to cut $10,000,000 from their operating budgets for 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. The cuts for 2009-2010 will be retroactive to May 1, 2009. This can affect all expenditures, including salaries, operating expenses and student funding.
June 15th, 2009 at 12:00 PM
“now their average is under 200k and ours is over 300k and we make about the same wage. ”
George, you are missing some major points that make our houses inherently more expensive. Firstly the indirect cost of universal health care. It should cost more to live in Canada than States because if you have a roof over your head in Canada, you get free health care. That is a premium worth paying for.
Also, most houses in the states don’t have insulation, basements, or sometimes furnaces. That makes construction cheap cheap cheap and if replacement cost is less expensive so should be the sale price. Lets compare apples to apples.
June 15th, 2009 at 12:03 PM
oh one more thing regarding the ‘they make more than us’ comment. They have more disparity of wealth than canada. i.e. more very rich and more very poor. We have a huge middle class which actually makes houses more expensive to construct because labourers start at a a good wage compared to significantly less in the states
June 15th, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Loki,
US per capita was 46k in 2008
Canada per capita 45k in 2008.
I think for the most part wages are comparable. We probably make a bit more for the middle class but I hardly doubt enough to justify the discrepancy between average house prices.
Canada May 2009 319k average house price
US May 2009 175K? average house price
Propping up the average price in Canada are the bigger markets with trade up buyers and few first time buyers. In the States, many of the homes sold are foreclosures and many of these are at the lower end. So maybe I am not comparing apples to apples. But which housing market would appear stronger now? How about in 5 years?
“It should cost more to live in Canada than States because if you have a roof over your head in Canada, you get free health care.”
Sounds like I am paying for it.
June 15th, 2009 at 6:08 PM
George, don’t forget… we also have higher income taxes, property taxes and unlike our cousins to the South, cannot write-off the interest portion of the mortgage.
June 15th, 2009 at 6:26 PM
And before people start arguing this point. I don’t think health care is by any means a “direct cost”. What I mean is that I would pay more to live somewhere with universal health care than somewhere comparable that had none. Thus…my stating “it should cost more”
Thinking of construction alone, it costs more to service a lot in Canada than the States. We have to dig all our water lines below the frost depth. We install more basements, insulation, 2×6 walls, heating systems, gas lines, triple pane windows, insulated doors, insulated garages.
Going back to the wealth disparity. That is a very real thing that shouldn’t be overlooked George. The states has the richest people in the world and some of the poorest. They have a very low minimum wage and a lot of people living below the poverty line (millions more than Canada). All of these people have to live somewhere.
Population below 50% median income:
Canada –>11.4%
USA –> 17%
You can see more people in states are living below the median income and likely they are then living in less expensive housing per capita.
June 15th, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Almost 500 is a lot of condos for sale!
I had been thinking about buying after graduation, but reconsidered when I realized how expensive condominiums are in Saskatoon. As well, most of the affordable supply is quite dated, and not of very good quality, or location. To spend $400,000 for a nice newer down town condominium is just startling. This really is making me consider leaving after graduation! Looking elsewhere, I can live many places in Canada if I look to spend $400,000 on reasonable accomodations!
June 16th, 2009 at 12:57 AM
I see we’re back with creative ways to offer 100% mortgages again…
http://www.scotiabank.com/cda/content/0,1608,CID10969_LIDen,00.html
June 16th, 2009 at 8:10 AM
I can’t believe they are doing that again. “Let’s shoot our self in the foot to get more short term business”~Bank
tisk tisk scotia bank. Shame on you…
June 16th, 2009 at 8:12 AM
Jr,
I don’t know what your definition of “reasonable” is…but I feel $400,000 definitely gets you something reasonable in Saskatoon. Unless the double detached garage, 2000+ sq.ft. 4 bedrooms, and 3 baths, deluxe kitchen with granite counter tops isn’t reasonable.
June 16th, 2009 at 8:28 AM
Jr,
You’ve gone so far over the top that your comment cannot be taken seriously by any “reasonable” person. If a $400,000 downtown condo is your idea of “reasonable accommodation” for a new graduate then, in all likelihood, you have a lifetime of disappointments ahead of you, unless your mommy and daddy are loaded.
June 16th, 2009 at 8:47 AM
L.oki said: “The states has the richest people in the world and some of the poorest.” (emphasis mine)
My jaw dropped when I read that, at the sheer audacity and bald faced (self) deception involved in that statement. Have you ever travelled to India? China? Sierra Leone? Brazil? I am fortunate to have seen some of these places, and had friends who have lived and worked in others and told me their stories. We are on this blog with some of us discussing whether housing should stabilize at $300k or $260k or $200k … and others saying that $400k is ‘reasonable’ for accommodations… while the a huge percentage of people in those places live on $1000 per year for an entire family and consider themselves lucky to have it.
The poorest strata of people in North America still has access to more food, shelter, and material goods than 80% of the rest of the world’s population. If you truly think that the USA has ‘some of the poorest people in the world’ then there really is very little else to say.
(Sorry, Norm. I know this is off-topic. If it needs to go then I understand and accept, but I could not let such blatant mistruths stand unopposed.)
June 16th, 2009 at 8:56 AM
Loki,
I think we can agree to disagree
Jr,
at 400,000 you can buy something pretty decent downtown and there is no property tax for 4 or 5 years, which would run about at least 300 a month. The problem with downtown is that the night life is not what I would consider big city, there is no big draw, like an arena or casino. But maybe for some that is a good thing.
June 16th, 2009 at 9:17 AM
Bookrat, obviously 3rd world countries are poorer. (Although, in rebuttal the UN has written a recent document stating that many people in America are living in 3rd world conditions).
I shouldn’t have assumed some readers would understand we are not comparing average house prices in Ethiopia, what I should have said is “some of the richest and poorest people of any developed democratic nation” and by that I mean a very LARGE gap between the very rich and very poor.
Obviously we are not comparing home prices in communist Cuba or China either.
Thank you for pointing out my error.
June 16th, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Lol.
For around $400K you would have to settle for the fully renovated, 1700 square foot condo at the Terrace which occupies the entire south-east corner offering panoramic river views. This might not seem like a reasonable place to start for everyone, but hey, life ain’t a cake walk.
June 16th, 2009 at 11:13 AM
lol. Norm, maybe the difficult part will be settling with the $45/month condo fees.
June 16th, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Norm, it’s a nice unit, but the $545/month ($45/month = I wish) in condo fees does it in for me. That and the single parking stall. You could buy a nice new house in the ‘burbs for $420k, and do some nice landscaping/improvements for $6,500 a year in savings. Hard to beat that view, though.
June 16th, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Well, I’m not trying to sell you guys a condo. Just making the point that one is not exactly scraping the bottle of the barrel with a $400,000 downtown condo.
June 16th, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Norm, on the contrary, I’m glad you posted it; one doesn’t see a 2-level condominium (in a high-rise) that often… I think that’s a better buy than this one (at less than half the $/sqft), despite being 500 sqft smaller…
http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=7775644
June 16th, 2009 at 1:23 PM
I messed up on the comment with the link. That’s not actually a “penthouse” but the other details are correct..
Here’s the one I was thinking of. Priced at $409,900, it’s on the 22nd floor and has an upgraded kitchen, and wood/ceramic floors. Condo fees are $478 but include all utilities.
The previous high sale price for a Saskatoon condo sale is $790K so they’ll be bustin’ some old records in a big way if they manage to crank one off at 1.1 million. I’m going to bet that it will be a pretty special home, done up quite nicely. The KG looks to be coming together nicely and I think it will be top-notch, for sure.
June 16th, 2009 at 3:01 PM
For $11k more, the other one’s a better buy (completely renovated, two levels and 172 more square feet. Twice the amount of scenic views, I suspect, too.
June 16th, 2009 at 8:01 PM
I was surprised too, but interested in condos, for 275,000, I ended up looking at a 1,000 sq ft from the late 70′s or early 80′s, stains on all the original carpet, lacking cupboard doors etc.
I ended up around 400,000 to find a nice, new, or updated, 2 bedroom condo with underground parking downtown. These same condos were less than 1/2 that price new. To me that isn’t justified. Especially when I can buy a similar sized condo, with underground parking, near rivers and lakes elsewhere in Canada for cheaper.
Buying a condo that doubled in price in a couple years, when there are a lot of big lay offs in Saskatoon just doesn’t make sense to me.
June 16th, 2009 at 8:06 PM
And we can all complain about social inequality, but for some high earning new university grads, in areas that really aren’t hiring much in town anyway, $300,000 is a perfectly reasonable amount to spend on a new condo, without stains on the carpet.
The stuff I looked at in the Terrace was no pent house for $400,000.
For now it’s either rent or move to Alberta.
To me, the pent house going down in price doesn’t mean it’s a good deal, just that prices are out of whack and on the way down.
June 17th, 2009 at 8:06 AM
“when there are a lot of big lay offs in Saskatoon”
Who where when why? Potash Corp had some lay offs. Who else? I have heard of lots of hiring and staff shortages and some stagnation. But very few lay offs. Please bring me up to speed on who is dropping jobs.
June 17th, 2009 at 8:30 AM
I think Statistics Canada is under the impression that more people are actually employed in Saskatchewan compared to last year and if I recall correctly, they thought the same for Saskatoon.
June 17th, 2009 at 8:53 AM
As mentioned previously, with no pick-up from anyone, the U of S has to cut $10,000,000 from its budget in 2009 and again in 2010. This is a fairly significant cut for Saskatoon’s biggest employer. There will be staff cuts and cuts in spending on capital and consumable items, which will affect Saskatoon businesses. Depts will likely cut student hiring for classes, which gives less disposable income for students. The first drafts of how to make these cuts, must be to the Provost’s office by June 30th. The University’s shortfall is tied in with the world’s financial problems.
June 17th, 2009 at 9:23 AM
Sandra, do you know if this is due primarily to a shortfall in operating revenues (declining enrollment, reduced donations, etc.) or as a result of increased operating costs, or a combination thereof? To put the $10M in perspective, what’s the U of S’s overall annual operating budget? I agree that it’s going to have a huge impact. Are they hinting at tuition increases at this juncture?
June 17th, 2009 at 9:25 AM
Sandra, I believe the UofS is also waiting on a large payout from the Feds stimulus plan. Did you hear anything on that? I think BC got their payment already. The UofS requested some ridiculous large lump sum (well exceeding their 20million shortfall). Anyone else got anything on this?
June 17th, 2009 at 9:32 AM
http://www.usask.ca/communications/ocn/09-may-22/1.php
Sandra got her stats wrong. Its 5 mil per year. 10 million over two years.
They are trimming 5 million off their 367million operating budget. That is 1.3%. I heard they were just holding off on hiring some new staff but mainly delaying some maintenance and capital expenditures. I doubt that will be felt too strong (if at all). The operating budget in 2001 was 215.5 million and in 2006 298 million.
A far cry from 367 million or the now reduced 361.
June 17th, 2009 at 9:47 AM
A friend says his job as a prof is in jeapordy because of this university cuts thing. Who knows?
June 17th, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Thanks L.oki, the url is good. I am busy trying to find ways for my Dept. to cut our % of assigned deficit, and hadn’t done any searching on U of S sites for official releases. I have no idea what each College is planning, but Arts and Science, who have a 1.95 million cut to make, are not cutting faculty positions. Only staff and capital/non-capital costs can be considered for cutting. Dept. Heads are working now towards making long-term plans as to how to deal with this. I would be surprised if there are not staff cuts but time will tell.
June 17th, 2009 at 11:52 AM
The $10M over 2 years is to bring operating expenses in-line with *projected* revenues.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:25 PM
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/potash-stock-drops-as-company-cuts-output/article1185529/
Potash output to be cut back.
June 17th, 2009 at 8:14 PM
I noticed the stats canada job numbers as well. Further, there are 1361 jobs on saskjobs.ca as of today for saskatoon. Do we have any numbers on the layoffs which are being mentioned?
June 18th, 2009 at 9:15 AM
just a few at potash corp as far as I am aware