Aura at College Park Condos (Canderel Stoneridge) - Real Estate -

wow, people are still optimistic about the pricing in Aura. :eek:

It's definitely harder to rent out any 2+ Bdrm than a 1Bdrm or 1Bdrm+Den anywhere. Unless maybe if the landlord can provide hotel service, then maybe you'll get the rent that you mentioned.
 
Keep in mind, Aura will not be complete for another 4 years so the above example really stretches out for nine years.

And also keep in mind, even if the first few years are "cash negative", 90% of real estate profits over time derive from capital appreciation, not income. In 25 years, your $500k property will be worth $1.7M (5% compounded annually (3% inflation + 2% real growth)) and your mortgage is still $450K (assuming you've refinanced the principle payments to, perhaps, purchase other property's). The above example would be better suited to a 25 year holding period which would better exhibit the real attraction to long term real estate investment.

In addition, if you believe the rate of inflation could substantially increase over the next decade, let's say beginning in two years from now (after fiscal+monetary stimulus really kick in), then hard assets (such as real estate) will significantly outperform both equities and fixed income.

The next two years could prove an excellent time to invest in real estate. Especially in projects with such a long occupancy date like Aura.

My two cents... (and no, I am not a RE agent)
 
Keep in mind, Aura will not be complete for another 4 years so the above example really stretches out for nine years.

And also keep in mind, even if the first few years are "cash negative", 90% of real estate profits over time derive from capital appreciation, not income. In 25 years, your $500k property will be worth $1.7M (5% compounded annually (3% inflation + 2% real growth)) and your mortgage is still $450K (assuming you've refinanced the principle payments to, perhaps, purchase other property's). The above example would be better suited to a 25 year holding period which would better exhibit the real attraction to long term real estate investment.

In addition, if you believe the rate of inflation could substantially increase over the next decade, let's say beginning in two years from now (after fiscal+monetary stimulus really kick in), then hard assets (such as real estate) will significantly outperform both equities and fixed income.

The next two years could prove an excellent time to invest in real estate. Especially in projects with such a long occupancy date like Aura.

My two cents... (and no, I am not a RE agent)



Hmmm ... just like the 25 year period from 1989 to 2004 ??!!??
Great profits there /// sarcasm.

If the rate of inflation increases substantially, what do you think the BoC will do to stem that ... increase the rate, which will depress RE values, etc.
 
Keep in mind, Aura will not be complete for another 4 years so the above example really stretches out for nine years.

And also keep in mind, even if the first few years are "cash negative", 90% of real estate profits over time derive from capital appreciation, not income. In 25 years, your $500k property will be worth $1.7M (5% compounded annually (3% inflation + 2% real growth)) and your mortgage is still $450K (assuming you've refinanced the principle payments to, perhaps, purchase other property's). The above example would be better suited to a 25 year holding period which would better exhibit the real attraction to long term real estate investment.

In addition, if you believe the rate of inflation could substantially increase over the next decade, let's say beginning in two years from now (after fiscal+monetary stimulus really kick in), then hard assets (such as real estate) will significantly outperform both equities and fixed income.

The next two years could prove an excellent time to invest in real estate. Especially in projects with such a long occupancy date like Aura.

My two cents... (and no, I am not a RE agent)


3164462626_35c353d9f1_o.jpg

Hmmm ... just like the 25 year period from 1989 to 2004 ??!!??
Great profits there /// sarcasm.

If the rate of inflation increases substantially, what do you think the BoC will do to stem that ... increase the interest rate, which will depress RE values, etc.
 
If the rate of inflation increases substantially, what do you think the BoC will do to stem that ... increase the interest rate, which will depress RE values, etc.

In a period of "low growth" "high inflation", the BoC will under compensate by keeping interest rates lower (vs inflation) then they normally would. Thus, the inflation rate could actually be higher then the BoC target rate (and very good for property).

In addition, the massive Gov't debts globally will only fall (relative to nominal GDP) if inflation is allowed to increase above previously tolerated levels. Governments won't admit it publicly, but the only way out of the current debt crisis is sustained inflation of 6%+ over the next decade.

Regarding 1989-2004, you can "cherry pick" any past period to be either really good or really bad. What's more important is predicting the next 25 years.
 
He's right though. Think about it. You actually think that RE prices will go up to $2000/sq ft in 25 years? If you bought around $600/sq ft for 500k. You expect to sell for 1.7M that's over 2x the price increase. Also the building will get old and maintenance fees will cost an arm and a leg. Newer and better ones will be built in the next 25 years. There's still a lot of parking lots and old buildings around. Also I think you haven't factored in recession. We maybe be heading for that. Or a few years of no or low inflation and low growth. Japan's inflation has practically been nil over the last 10 years.

His duration of years is incorrect. The span should be looked between 1983-2008 for 25 years. It's around 225k -> 350k

Seems we have hit a recession. I guess you should recalculate your numbers to show the negative.

http://ca.news.finance.yahoo.com/s/...ops-interest-rate-historic-cent-declares.html

Bank of Canada chops interest rate to historic one per cent, declares recession

By Julian Beltrame,, The Canadian Press--

OTTAWA - The Bank of Canada slashed its key interest rate to the lowest level in history Tuesday, pronouncing the country's economy has fallen into recession and needs help to recover.

The central bank cut the trend-setting overnight rate one-half point to one per cent - below the 1.12 per cent that had served as the bank's policy rate floor in 1958 - while drastically revising downward its view of economic performance this year.

The decrease was in line with the expectations of economists, who have been calling for bold action on the parts of the central bank and the federal government in light of the quick and sharp downturn last fall that followed the destruction of savings in global stock markets.

Shortly after the central bank cut its rate, the big banks, led by Bank of Montreal (TSX: BMO.TO), TD Bank (TSX: TD.TO), Royal Bank (TSX: RBC.TO) and CIBC (TSX: CM.TO), also cut their prime lending rates by the same amount to three per cent, effective Wednesday.

The prime determines the rates on everything from consumer loans and lines of credit to some mortgages and other loans.

But given the money freeze in global money markets that has increased the cost of funds for Canada's chartered banks, economists viewed the action as a necessary, if insufficient, response.

Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney made clear that the economy needs all the help it can get.

While he had previously declared the economy in recession in public comments, on Tuesday he showed just how badly and quickly conditions had worsened by reversing the bank's October forecast of 0.6 per cent growth for 2009 into a 1.2-per-cent retreat.

"The outlook for the global economy has deteriorated since the bank's December interest rate announcement, with the intensifying financial crisis spilling over into real economic activity," he wrote in a one-page release.

"Heightened uncertainty is undermining business and household confidence worldwide and further eroding domestic demand."

In Canada, Carney said: "Exports are down sharply and domestic demand is shrinking as a result of declines in real income, household wealth and consumer and business confidence."

As if to confirm Carney's bleak assessment, Statistics Canada reported that manufacturing sales fell 6.4 per cent November to the lowest level in four years and fourth straight monthly decline. The petroleum and coal industry led the losses with a 18.5 per cent decline.

Both the Toronto Stock Exchange and the Canadian dollar took it on the chin Tuesday with significant losses.

It was Carney's relatively rosy outlook for the economy 2009 that surprised many private-sector economists.

He forecast growth will bounce back to a rate of 3.8 per cent in 2010, saying there were faint indications that previous and current aggressive actions of central bankers and governments to inject liquidity and stimulus are yielding results.

"I think they are overly optimistic on the speed of the rebound," said Scotia Capital economist Derek Holt. "What is happening now is one of the strongest contractions in the supply of money in 70 or 80 years."

Global Insight managing director Dale Orr added that the ball is now in the federal government's court, saying next Tuesday's budget should contain significant temporary stimulus that can be implemented quickly.

At one per cent, the Canadian central bank is coming to the end of its ability to affect interest rates.

Since December 2007, when the initial signs of economic weakness appeared, Carney has chopped the overnight rate by 3.5 percentage points, as well as injected $35 billion in liquidity into money markets through asset swaps.

Next up is fiscal stimulus in the budget. Senior government officials have said Finance Minister Jim Flaherty will inject up to $30 billion - or two per cent of gross domestic product - into the economy in infrastructure spending on construction and tax cuts.

But Carney said the key test remains the availability of credit. The world economy won't begin to recover until the global financial system, which has been rocked by scandal and scandalous lending practices, stabilizes, he said.

Canada's money markets are also considerably tighter than last fall, as some non-bank lenders have closed up shop. Although the chartered banks quickly followed Tuesday's rate cut, long-term loans remain relatively expensive and difficult to obtain.

Holt is urging the government to intervene through a number of instruments, including back-stopping car leasing and possibly even purchasing toxic non-mortgage assets, to free up lending.

But not all agree. "I don't think they go there until the Bank of Canada goes down to zero or near-zero interest rate," said Douglas Porter, deputy chief economist with BMO Capital Markets.

Many economists see the central bank lowering its rate to 0.5 per cent as early as March 3.

One problem Carney won't have to worry about for some time is high inflation.

The central bank now says prices will actually tumble into negative territory for two quarters this year as the contrast between last summer's sky-high gasoline prices and this year's much lower levels pushes the inflation rate down.

The bank and most economists do not view this as deflation - an alarming condition last seen in Japan in the 1990s - because it is not expected to be prolonged and is concentrated mostly on energy prices.

Overall, inflation will average 1.1 per cent this year and now won't return to the bank's two-per-cent target until 2011, the central bank said.
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind, Aura will not be complete for another 4 years so the above example really stretches out for nine years.

And also keep in mind, even if the first few years are "cash negative", 90% of real estate profits over time derive from capital appreciation, not income..

My two cents... (and no, I am not a RE agent)

johnzz, what do you mean by 90% of real estate profits are from cap. apprec. i would love to know how to do this.
 
johnzz, what do you mean by 90% of real estate profits are from cap. apprec. i would love to know how to do this.

Ok. You asked for it... :)

First off, let me explain that we’re discussing central Toronto real estate. If I purchased an 8-plex apartment in Wawa, for example, the income portion (vs capital appreciation) would probably make up a larger share of the total profits over time.

Now, back to the question above, it’s quite simple. When discussing real estate (generally speaking), all variables grow with inflation over time except the mortgage amount. For example, over time the following will increase roughly 3% per year on average: rent, condo fees, taxes, insurance, maintenance and (most important of all) the home value. Over a 25 year period, your $500k home growing at 3%/yr will produce a much larger gain then your income. Your yearly income probably starts out flat (maybe even slightly negative) and then slowly grows over time as your increased rent (3%/yr) begins to exceed your fixed interest expense. Clearly, $500k growing at 3% will produce a much larger gain then the annual rent of $25k growing at 3%.

My spread sheet model has estimated the capital appreciation component to represent roughly 90% of total gains (and rental income 10%) for the average Toronto property over a 25 year period. Other less desirable cities may not have home values match inflation over time, but they should yield a higher rental income to help compensate, therefore producing a 50%/50% split rather then Toronto’s 90%/10%. The absolute $ gain though will still be much higher in Toronto vs less desirable cities (no offence Wawa).

In the above example here, I’m only assuming Toronto home prices increase with inflation (and no more). If you believe (as I do) that well located central Toronto real estate will actually grow at least 1%-2% above inflation over the next 25 years, the returns will indeed be good. You may disagree and claim that Toronto real estate will not increase more then inflation. Perhaps, but I would counter with two main points. First, the long term fundamentals are just too damn good. Of course the next three years will be slow but let me point out: Toronto is a great city, a financial centre, a medical/research centre, an educational centre, the upcoming demographic shift of baby boomers moving to city centre (and away from suburbia), population increases (2 million +), restricted land use policies, increased transport congestion in suburbs, and continued foreign immigration (to mention but a few). My second main point is that the average GTA property has already increased in value 2.49% above inflation between 1966 and 2008. According to Stats Canada data (source Bloomberg), Canadian CPI has averaged 4.6% over the last 42 years. According to the Toronto Real Estate Board, the average yearly compounded growth of a home in the GTA has been 7.09%. Here’s the raw data:

Average GTA House Price
Year Price % Increase
1966 $21,360 0.00%
1967 $24,078 12.72%
1968 $26,732 11.02%
1969 $28,929 8.22%
1970 $29,492 1.95%
1971 $30,426 3.17%
1972 $32,513 6.86%
1973 $40,605 24.89%
1974 $52,806 30.05%
1975 $57,581 9.04%
1976 $61,389 6.61%
1977 $64,559 5.16%
1978 $67,333 4.30%
1979 $70,830 5.19%
1980 $75,694 6.87%
1981 $90,203 19.17%
1982 $95,496 5.87%
1983 $101,626 6.42%
1984 $102,318 0.68%
1985 $109,094 6.62%
1986 $138,925 27.34% +
1987 $189,105 36.12% +
1988 $229,635 21.43% +
1989 $273,698 19.19% +
1990 $255,020 -6.82% -
1991 $234,313 -8.12% -
1992 $214,971 -8.25% -
1993 $206,490 -3.95% -
1994 $208,921 1.18%
1995 $203,028 -2.82% -
1996 $198,150 -2.40% -

1997 $211,307 6.64%
1998 $216,815 2.61%
1999 $228,372 5.33%
2000 $243,255 6.52%
2001 $251,508 3.39%
2002 $275,231 9.43%
2003 $293,067 6.48%
2004 $315,231 7.56%
2005 $335,907 6.56%
2006 $351,941 4.77%
2007 $376,236 6.90%
2008 $379,347 0.83%

Side note: It’s best to look at the raw “unadjusted†data. Previous posts have included price graphs of Toronto home prices “adjusted†for inflation. This is a pointless (and distorting) exercise. To compare apples with apples, you would also have to adjust the mortgage amount over time to fall 4% a year. Suddenly a flat gain in your home value looks good if the mortgage amount decreases each year (without even making a principle payment!).

Of course, past performs doesn’t guarantee the future, but it helps to form an opinion. Also note the abnormal period between 1986 and 1996 in the above table. You had 4 years of outstanding gains and then 6 years of outstanding losses. But the average annual compounded return over this 10 year period was still +6.2%.

I firmly believe the most important (and least understood) concept pertaining to real estate, is “Compound Interestâ€. You’ve all heard the term but few people actually appreciate how powerful it is over time. As long as you have constant growth every year, you will experience exponential growth which is perhaps the most powerful force in our world. Some might say “well you can’t have continuous growth foreverâ€. Well, few people understand that, in our current financial system, you can. Most central bankers in the world (FOMC, ECB BoC, BoJ, etc…) have explicit (or implicit) goals to maintain inflation between 1% and 3% per year forever. This is easy to do as we now have a “fiat†(paper) monetary system. Most systems withdrew from the gold standard (money supply based on amount of gold in the vault) after Richard Nixon in 1971. It is now extremely easy for central bankers to maintain a positive inflationary environment as they just print more money (or type a few keys on a keyboard). The next few years will prove to be difficult for central bankers (no question) but don’t you worry, central bankers will prevail (I wouldn’t bet against them!). Basically, the way most financial systems work today, inflation acts as a form of stealth tax on the masses. Your living standards are continuously eroded by inflation (a dollar today will be worth about 1 cent next century). The reason governments support this system is that it’s a great way to secretly reduce national debts. These huge gov’t debts continuously decrease in relation to the overall economy, thus becoming more manageable and easier to pay off.

This is the beauty of real estate investment. Provided you invest in the right area at the right price, don’t over leverage (never invest with just 5% down), and are prepared to wait, you will handsomely out perform most any other asset class. You’re basically taking advantage of the system in the same manner as governments. Let it work for you and not against you!

There are three main barriers to entry which explain why most people choose not to invest in real estate:

1) Large lump sum- At least 20%-25% is required to ride out the bumpy years. You can easily lose a lot of money if forced to sell in a down market

2) Time- The two main ingredients to compound interest are growth and time. Growth is easy, you’ll get that from Mark Carney. Time is the tricky one. You need to wait at least 15 years to begin bearing fruit and to fully maximum your investment 40+ years are required. I suspect most people on this board are under 40. You basically have to pre-commit to a long holding period (as long as your life to date) and begin investing as early as possible. This is not easy.

3) Hands-on- Real estate is not something you can just purchase and through in the drawer. It requires continual maintenance and management. Unfortunately, most people do not want this added burden.

One final note on behavioural psychology. When things are going well, we humans assume things will continue in this fashion forever. When things go wrong, again we assume things will continue badly forever. It’s easy to read the papers and follow the heard but miss the broader picture. Nobody said building true wealth was easy.

I’m just a real estate investor pointing out what’s been obvious to me for years. I’m only responding to this thread as I’ve also purchased from Aura. I almost never purchase “off-plan†from developers (resale is generally cheaper and more profitable); however, in the case of Aura, I think it’s worth it. It’s like I’ve purchased a property in 4 years from now at today’s prices (which are not over-inflated). It also has many unique attributes such as great views and a great retail podium in a vibrant area of Toronto. To say that people have overpaid may turn out true. But whether you’ve paid $500K or $400K, it’s not really material when the unit is worth $3.5 million in 40 years (5% annual compounded growth).
 
johnzz,

that's a great post. you make some convincing arguments. i do my business a little different, i hope some of these comments are useful to you.

i got my start in re investing in a wawa like town so perhaps this has influenced my investment style. i think you're right that most small towns do not enjoy the same cap apprec as in the city, but they also do not have the same declines. income there is paramount.

in toronto, we have (along with everyone else) enjoyed an amazing bull run in re values. rising tides all ships rise. everybody who bought looked like a genious. a home became an investment, it was money in the bank. but i think those times are gone. an investment strategy that relies upon market appreciation is way too risky now. when you buy on income you're more insulated.

in my experience (downtown core, res/commercial) the rents have been very stagnant since 2000. in some of my res. units the rents have actually declined. i blame this on a couple of factors: easy credit; low downpayments; condo landlords; hype of being an owner. while property values have enjoyed good times, rents have not matched the increase. so while the asset value increases the income on the asset stays the same. so if i did sell in summer of 08, perhaps the majority of the "profit" would have been from cap apprec. but i would have needed to time the market. it hard to reconcile a buy and hold strategy with a time the market strategy.

i'm not saying cap apprec. is not good. i'm saying it's not as reliable. sometimes you win sometimes you lose and i think we're in for some losing times. you don't want to be stuck with cash negative property that is declining in value.

i've never seen a condo that had a sufficient cap rate to consider buying it as an investment. i think generally multiunits are a safer bet. in the next couple of years i would think multi unit residential is the safest. i think you're bang on about being hands on with re. it's the only way to do it in the beginning.

that's my two cents, but probably worth much less in these times. good luck with your investment.
 
Well I must say Johnzzz that is one of the better rebuttals. :D

But I have to agree with cabbagetowner with respect to income covering expenses.

At a time when RE values at Aura goes for $600+ PSF, and rental income coming in short of ~$1000/m to cover expenses for about 15 years (and that assumes interest rates remain the same come re-financing) ... that's too much risk IMO.
 
slightly offtopic, but have any purchasers been able to lock in today's mortgage rate for when Aura actually gets built?

I know of some ppl that bought preconstruction projects, and banks were able to hold the interest rate for when they move in. but don't recall the banks holding it for as long as 2-3+years
 
Ka1

slightly offtopic, but have any purchasers been able to lock in today's mortgage rate for when Aura actually gets built?

I know of some ppl that bought preconstruction projects, and banks were able to hold the interest rate for when they move in. but don't recall the banks holding it for as long as 2-3+years

Banks generally hold rates for only 2/3 years. AURA will take more than 3 years, from the date of signing, to complete. However, I did apply and got approval of a mortgage -- with no obligations on either party. Bank was concerned about certain items that I was able to rectify. I will have to make sure Bank's those concerns are not there when I 'activate' my mortgage near the date of ownership change.
 
Locking in mortgage rates

slightly offtopic, but have any purchasers been able to lock in today's mortgage rate for when Aura actually gets built?

I know of some ppl that bought preconstruction projects, and banks were able to hold the interest rate for when they move in. but don't recall the banks holding it for as long as 2-3+years

I asked my bank (RBC) if they would lock in a rate for a long period on a condo that was under construction. They said in some cases they would - for 2 years.
 
Aura

If the word out there is that it will take 4 1/2 years to complete then occupancy wouldn't be until around early to mid 2014, no?

One more piece of information for you, dt.

There will be 2 condominium corporations -- one for floors upto 55 and the other one for floors 56 and up (Executive and Penthouse floors).
 

Back
Top