Archive for March, 2009


The EREB announced their monthly tallies for February today, after a little bounce last month prices again took a tumble.

The big stories would probably be the divergence of condo and townhome prices. Condos had actually defied gravity for a couple months, took a huge fall of 4.9% from January. They are also down over $37,347 (14.1%) from a year ago, and $45,054 (16.6%) the peak.

Townhomes were the exception to the rule, actually having it’s second straight very strong month, up $9,958 (3.3% from January). They are also up $14,400 (4.9%) from last February, though it should be noted that last February’s figure was abnormally low, and townhomes are prone to a bit more pronounced variations because of their smaller sample size (only about 5% of the total marketplace). In any case, their prices are higher then they were at any point last winter.

Edmonton PricesHere is a look at the rest of the picture. I’m continuing the tweak this presentation as I go along, so the appearance of these has evolved a bit month to month. I’ve put the three most pertinent numbers (IMNSHO) up top for your viewing pleasure.

Sales = 1,075
Since February ’07 = -43.0% (-811)
Since last February = -15.5% (-212)
Since last month = +47.3% (+345)

Active Listings = 7,097
Since February ’07 = +234.8% (+4,977)
Since last February = -14.3% (-1,187)
Since last month = +8.0% (+524)

Single Family Homes Median= $335,000
Since peak (May ’07) = -16.3% (-$65,000)
Since last February = -9.4% (-$34,900)
Since six months ago = -5.0% (-$17,500)
Since last month = +1.5% (+$5,000)

Residential = $308,970
Since peak (July ’07) = -12.9% (-$45,748)
Since last February = -8.7% (-$29,377)
Since six months ago = -6.1% (-$20,237)
Since last month = -2.5% (-$8,079)

Single Family Homes = $347,309
Since peak (May ’07) = -18.5% (-$78,719)
Since last February = -9.1% (-$34,656)
Since six months ago = -5.9% (-$21,881)
Since last month = -1.5% (-$5,380)

Condos = $226,857
Since peak (July ’07) = -16.6% (-$45,054)
Since last February = -14.1% (-$37,347)
Since six months ago = -9.6% (-$24,191)
Since last month = -4.9% (-$11,678)

Townhouses = $309,180
Since peak (Oct ’07) = -16.0% (-$58,784)
Since last February = +4.9% (+$14,400)
Since six months ago = -2.0% (-$6,260)
Since last month = +3.3% (+$9,958)

Other then townhome prices, no other surprises here, averages were down significantly year-over-year for everything else (though SFH median did post a small gain in the face of the decline in average SFH price). The pumpers have been left with little more then month-over-month comparisons to make their headlines… which left them with only sales to tout from February.

Though sales did accomplish, or rather avoid, one rather dubious distinction. After decades worst November’s, Decemeber’s and January’s, they did manage to avoid doing it last month. February ’09 was only the second worst February since Y2K, coming in a whole 13 sales above the February ’00 tally.

Edmonton Inventory and SalesCalgary and Edmonton kind of swapped places from a month ago, as last month prices inched up in Edmonton while falling down South. This month the opposite was true, as prices rose slightly in Calgary, while Edmonton sunk. This is of course in month-over-month figures, as year-over-year both were well into the red.

I guess one thing that could be a light at the end of the tunnel for the real estate bulls out there, is that active listings are down 1,187 units from a year ago. Though it’s still well above even the high water mark for pre-boom levels, and with sales being low that still leaves a big glut, and an absorption rate above six.

Coins

This is the first in something of an intermittent series I’m going to do on mortgages. Despite often being a persons single biggest monthly expense, all too often people really do not understand how they work. And since I also get all geeked up doing this sort of stuff… behold.

I sometimes hear people talking about how much faster and cheaper they’re paying off their mortgage by going to accelerated weekly or bi-weekly payments… this isn’t really true. What they’re really doing is just increasing how much they pay in a month.

They basically work by taking what a person typically pays in a month, lets say $2000 (to use a nice round number), and if one wants to pay bi-weekly, they’d just start paying $1000 every two weeks ($2000/2) or $500 every week ($2000/4).

Then, instead of paying $24,000 a year ($2000 x 12), they are paying $26,000 ($1000 x 26 or $500 x 52). So yes, it would be paid off sooner, and they would save a little on interest…. but the same thing can be accomplished just by upping one’s payments to $2167 per month though, which is effectively what they’d be paying anyway.

You’re not really gaining anything by changing the number of payments. To take a look at just how little one saves on interest, lets use $200,000 over 25 years, at 6% example. That could be paid off for $1288.60 per month, or $297.12 per week.

Over the course of one year a person would save a grand total of…. $12.79.

Slightly over a dollar a month. Which, if you’re on a automatic withdrawal, by all means, go weekly, it’ll earn you a free lunch once a year.

But if you’re doing the old school method of mailing in or dropping off a cheque at the bank, it’s really not worth your time…. between postage, time and/or gas you will probably end up going out of pocket.

Another thing to consider is your monthly budgeting. If you’re not carrying a decent balance and depending on your work pay schedule on the months you have to make an extra payment could obviously lead to some headaches.

So, in conclusion, there is little to be gained by going to weekly or bi-weekly payments that can’t be accomplished by merely increasing your monthly payment… which, if you can afford it, is a good idea regardless of your circumstances.