News   Jul 10, 2024
U of T's Rotman Commerce Design by Danish Architects 3XN Unveiled
 896     0 
News   Jul 10, 2024
News Roundup for July 10, 2024
 505     0 
News   Jul 10, 2024
Slice of Town
 732     0 

Baby, we got a bubble!?

Migos said:
Going to be a lot of bag holders in a few years when these buildings can't fetch premium rents and maintenance fees and special assessments skyrocket. That's without even considering how unlivable some layouts are and the general lack of quality.
Click to expand...

People will pay a premium to live near the subway. It's also close to the business district and the hospitals. Should not have trouble with this one. If the location is right, you shouldn't have trouble finding a tenant.

The reality is lets say condos have special assessments and all kinds of problems. Where will people go? They have to live somewhere. As long as houses are unaffordable and rental buildings remain scarce I think landlords will be able to get their money. Will we see obscene prices for crap units? No. But the good units in prime location will always be popular. Look at Bay and College. Those places do not stay on the market for long. Excellent location.
 
TheKingEast said:
People will pay a premium to live near the subway. It's also close to the business district and the hospitals. Should not have trouble with this one. If the location is right, you shouldn't have trouble finding a tenant.

The reality is lets say condos have special assessments and all kinds of problems. Where will people go? They have to live somewhere. As long as houses are unaffordable and rental buildings remain scarce I think landlords will be able to get their money. Will we see obscene prices for crap units? No. But the good units in prime location will always be popular. Look at Bay and College. Those places do not stay on the market for long. Excellent location.
Click to expand...

People who can afford it will live in the newest wave of condos with all the shiny finishings.

Landlords of older units will have to rent for less and won't have the advantage of extra square footage like the current crop of "old" buildings. Their carrying costs will also increase simultaneously as their rental income declines. Then people will start to offload them becausethey're poor investments.
 
Migos said:
People who can afford it will live in the newest wave of condos with all the shiny finishings.

Landlords of older units will have to rent for less and won't have the advantage of extra square footage like the current crop of "old" buildings. Their carrying costs will also increase simultaneously as their rental income declines. Then people will start to offload them becausethey're poor investments.
Click to expand...

I think you're getting mixed up with Landlord/Investors who are just entering the market as opposed to the ones that bought 5-7,10 years ago. They are all making healthy profit margins regardless if they have to rent it out cheaper. Newest wave of condos aren't all what there upped to be. Take example Pinnacle on Adelaide. What a disaster that building turned out to be. Clients are pissed off, horrible property management. Amenities aren't all spectacular. Units falling apart already. Very interesting how the Entertainment District will be in the coming years to come. I can see few building succeeding greatly and others failing miserably. 101 Peter is having a tough time unloading rental units there. As it seems the no parking situation takes a big toll.
 
RZ12 said:
I think you're getting mixed up with Landlord/Investors who are just entering the market as opposed to the ones that bought 5-7,10 years ago. They are all making healthy profit margins regardless if they have to rent it out cheaper. Newest wave of condos aren't all what there upped to be. Take example Pinnacle on Adelaide. What a disaster that building turned out to be. Clients are pissed off, horrible property management. Amenities aren't all spectacular. Units falling apart already. Very interesting how the Entertainment District will be in the coming years to come. I can see few building succeeding greatly and others failing miserably. 101 Peter is having a tough time unloading rental units there. As it seems the no parking situation takes a big toll.
Click to expand...

I find a big problem is the units are tiny and in many cases unliveable. That particular building has 2 bed/2bath units crammed into 700ish sqft. No room for a couch and dining table. Too cramped.
 
RZ12 said:
Take example Pinnacle on Adelaide. What a disaster that building turned out to be. Clients are pissed off, horrible property management. Amenities aren't all spectacular. Units falling apart already. Very interesting how the Entertainment District will be in the coming years to come. I can see few building succeeding greatly and others failing miserably. 101 Peter is having a tough time unloading rental units there. As it seems the no parking situation takes a big toll.
Click to expand...

TheKingEast said:
I find a big problem is the units are tiny and in many cases unliveable. That particular building has 2 bed/2bath units crammed into 700ish sqft. No room for a couch and dining table. Too cramped.
Click to expand...

As I've said many times, most of these newer units were never built to be homes. Just commodities to be flipped for quick profit. What a sad waste. Greed literally sucks the good out of everything.
 
TheKingEast said:
I find a big problem is the units are tiny and in many cases unliveable. That particular building has 2 bed/2bath units crammed into 700ish sqft. No room for a couch and dining table. Too cramped.
Click to expand...

I looked at Nelson 21. I didn't think the building looked bad. I think the signs on the elevators saying "we would like to remind tenants not to throw cigarette butts off the balcony" did much worse on my impression.

The nail in the coffin was the tiny apartment 1 bedroom apartment that looked like it couldn't even fit a normal couch nor a convenient place to put a TV. That combined with the fact that there's hardly any parking or storage and it's really a no-brainer why this building is going to become a rental slum in a few years. Even professionals that do want to be close to the subway and downtown would rather spend money on a bigger place. This is only going to attract one type of crowd. Young professionals that stay for maybe a year or two.
 
$600K
2 bed/2bath 700+ square feet. Unliveable unit just like I was talking about.

http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?PropertyId=15265494

add the maintenance fee and the payments are up there with a $1M house.

This is an assignment as well so those closing costs will likely be astronomical.

I hope our economy picks up because when we start seeing major job losses, these units will be the hardest to get rid of/rent out.
 
TheKingEast said:
$600K
2 bed/2bath 700+ square feet. Unliveable unit just like I was talking about.

http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?PropertyId=15265494

add the maintenance fee and the payments are up there with a $1M house.

This is an assignment as well so those closing costs will likely be astronomical.

I hope our economy picks up because when we start seeing major job losses, these units will be the hardest to get rid of/rent out.
Click to expand...

Whole building , every unit in it, the living room seems to be an after thought. East and South Views are stunning. But you're paying for location even though you're right beside that sketchy Scientology centre. I got goosebumps showing a loft suite facing it on the lower floor.
 
Which project is this?
Also, how long has it been ready and is it registered?
If 25% are up for lease and it is brand new and just registered, is that surprising?
 
Thanks.
I thought it might be this project but they referred to 100 Peter Street.
Does anyone know if it has just been registered or just allowed to come onto the MLS
What would be interesting is to see how fast the 100 condos get absorbed.

My bad... I see it was 101 Peter Street.
Sorry...misread it guys.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top