Toronto U Condominiums | 183.79m | 56s | Pemberton | a—A

Agreed! I think U is desperate. Imagine, 320 sq ft for 220K. "Urban Design" studio. ITS ONE ROOM!!!! ONE ROOM.... omg. The math does not work. Who will buy this? I should add that these developers need to take a lesson out of Empire's Fly. That project sold when they adjusted prices to suit the market. U is such a disappointment....the plans are krap, and the prices are outrageous.

LOL!!!! i'm guessing we'll start to see more of these ridiculous ads as builders get more desperate. this is a total joke.
 
Agreed! I think U is desperate. Imagine, 320 sq ft for 220K. "Urban Design" studio. ITS ONE ROOM!!!! ONE ROOM.... omg. The math does not work. Who will buy this? I should add that these developers need to take a lesson out of Empire's Fly. That project sold when they adjusted prices to suit the market. U is such a disappointment....the plans are krap, and the prices are outrageous.

but but but....it comes with cool "urban" furniture.

:rolleyes:

I think that price is outrageous.
 
No wonder it is so difficult to buy a home. You think they would realize that other developers are offering much larger suites for similar prices. They cant be that naive that people would buy that;
 
No wonder it is so difficult to buy a home. You think they would realize that other developers are offering much larger suites for similar prices. They cant be that naive that people would buy that;

My dad was also tracking this project for a long time, and visited the sales office last week. He said they had their "sales script" pretty well refined, and implied that they were actually raising the prices...

Now literally, across the street in Polo 1, you can get a one bdr plus den, no parking for about 270.
 
Agreed! I think U is desperate. Imagine, 320 sq ft for 220K. "Urban Design" studio. ITS ONE ROOM!!!! ONE ROOM.... omg. The math does not work. Who will buy this? I should add that these developers need to take a lesson out of Empire's Fly. That project sold when they adjusted prices to suit the market. U is such a disappointment....the plans are krap, and the prices are outrageous.


Pemberton and U aren't desperate ... they are just hoping for a greater fool than the last person who bought at that price.

320 SF for $220K equals ~ $700 PSF ...
come on ... it's a bargain, you'll get that and more in 25 years ! :rolleyes:
 
But wouldn't high prices for small floorplans indicate that U is actually doing better than other projects across the city? Especially when Mike has noted several times (on deaf ears, it seems) that U is one of the only projects actually making sales at this time.
 
Now literally, across the street in Polo 1, you can get a one bdr plus den, no parking for about 270.

I have to respond to this kind of 'comparison'. The Polo 1 is a very old condo and has a very different price point and market value to a new condo. I've seen this kind of comparison in other threads like "L tower/London are so expensive...especially when you can get a condo at 25 Esplanade for almost half!". All condos that happen to be close to each other do not automatically have to have the same price. Age of building, amenities, quality of finishes, size of unit, ceiling height, etc. all play a part. My condo is right next to where the new Four Seasons condos will be, are you suggesting that the buyers there are getting ripped off because at $1500 psf because they could buy in my building for $668-700? I bought in 18 Yorkville, because I love the feel of the building and the location, but there is also a VERY old condo directly across the street from me that appears it was built in the 70s and units there are half the price, but they are run down and look like rentals. Should they also be the benchmark for every new building in Yorkville? Do people actually think that the cheapest oldest building in any given neighbourhood should set the price point for every new luxury building that gets built in the area? Crazy. Every building is a different 'product' with a different price point that will appeal to a different audience.
 
I have to respond to this kind of 'comparison'. The Polo 1 is a very old condo and has a very different price point and market value to a new condo. I've seen this kind of comparison in other threads like "L tower/London are so expensive...especially when you can get a condo at 25 Esplanade for almost half!". All condos that happen to be close to each other do not automatically have to have the same price. Age of building, amenities, quality of finishes, size of unit, ceiling height, etc. all play a part. My condo is right next to where the new Four Seasons condos will be, are you suggesting that the buyers there are getting ripped off because at $1500 psf because they could buy in my building for $668-700? I bought in 18 Yorkville, because I love the feel of the building and the location, but there is also a VERY old condo directly across the street from me that appears it was built in the 70s and units there are half the price, but they are run down and look like rentals. Should they also be the benchmark for every new building in Yorkville? Do people actually think that the cheapest oldest building in any given neighbourhood should set the price point for every new luxury building that gets built in the area? Crazy. Every building is a different 'product' with a different price point that will appeal to a different audience.

I know that building across the street, it was a conversion from office to apartments in the mid. 90's ('93-94'ish). It's not a condo, unless it was converted again.

New vs. older resale is driven simply by what the market will support and by what people are looking for when buying a home. Older condos can be seen as problematic because like any built structure as it ages things need to be repaired or replaced. A good condo corp. will have a very healthy reserve fund to pay for "expected" major common area repairs/renewals as they are needed but if they don't each owner gets nailed with a Special Assessment to pay for said repairs (surprise, here's a 32K bill to pay for garage infrastructure repairs that needs to be done 10 years before we expected!). However there are still other areas that will age which can make a resale less attractive to some buyers such as older elevator systems, aging plumbing, outdated or problem wiring, old soundproofing standards and on & on. Age obviously affects market resale but it can still be a very attractive alternative to many people given the price point. "New" gets you that nice clean smell, New Home Warranty on the structure and modern gizmos but can also present it's own set of problems in the first couple of years. Most of us have heard a new home horror story from a friend or family member, or spent a bit of time in the Real Estate thread here. U seems to be really pushing the envelope in terms of price, Bay Street may be seen as some by as a prestigious address, however there are plenty of other projects available, new and resale with better living spaces and priced at more reasonable market rates. That said, if they can sell them more power to them. If the market can support those prices then I look forward to seeing them being built.
The true luxury market (properties such as Four Seasons, Trump, Shangri-La, Ritz etc.) are a whole different matter.
 
I have to respond to this kind of 'comparison'. The Polo 1 is a very old condo and has a very different price point and market value to a new condo. I've seen this kind of comparison in other threads like "L tower/London are so expensive...especially when you can get a condo at 25 Esplanade for almost half!". All condos that happen to be close to each other do not automatically have to have the same price. Age of building, amenities, quality of finishes, size of unit, ceiling height, etc. all play a part. My condo is right next to where the new Four Seasons condos will be, are you suggesting that the buyers there are getting ripped off because at $1500 psf because they could buy in my building for $668-700? I bought in 18 Yorkville, because I love the feel of the building and the location, but there is also a VERY old condo directly across the street from me that appears it was built in the 70s and units there are half the price, but they are run down and look like rentals. Should they also be the benchmark for every new building in Yorkville? Do people actually think that the cheapest oldest building in any given neighbourhood should set the price point for every new luxury building that gets built in the area? Crazy. Every building is a different 'product' with a different price point that will appeal to a different audience.


Yes, you are correct. Polo one was built in 88, in the last boom. The thing is that you can still get 1500 rent for a one bedroom in Polo, but newer similar product also commands similar rent. Read the reports on one bedroom rentals in Toronto. Rents have been between 1500 and 1600 for quite some time. Do you think that someone who purchases a Jr One Bdrm at U for 320k can break even at 1700? NO! You would have to put down about 120 cash. And 320 is the price WITHOUT PARKING.

So from a cash flow point of view, looking purely at the investment, and not the intangibles that come with ownership to occupy, U is not a great bet. Granted, the location is superb, unique and highly desirable. Bottom line is that U is for the own-to-occupy crowd who can afford the premium. No problem with that!
 
I think Pemberton like Tridel has deep pockets and is willing to hold out longer than smaller developers before dropping prices. This is just my opinion though.
 
Yes, you are correct. Polo one was built in 88, in the last boom. The thing is that you can still get 1500 rent for a one bedroom in Polo, but newer similar product also commands similar rent. Read the reports on one bedroom rentals in Toronto. Rents have been between 1500 and 1600 for quite some time. Do you think that someone who purchases a Jr One Bdrm at U for 320k can break even at 1700? NO! You would have to put down about 120 cash. And 320 is the price WITHOUT PARKING.

So from a cash flow point of view, looking purely at the investment, and not the intangibles that come with ownership to occupy, U is not a great bet. Granted, the location is superb, unique and highly desirable. Bottom line is that U is for the own-to-occupy crowd who can afford the premium. No problem with that!

In terms of investment/rental purposes I do see your point. I think it is pretty impossible to have positive cashflow for rental investment properties at these prices in new condos.
 
U condo and Uptown

I think Pemberton like Tridel has deep pockets and is willing to hold out longer than smaller developers before dropping prices. This is just my opinion though.

I agree. Look at Pemberton's Uptowns at Bloor. It's had commanded $600 psf when it was released in 2005, as I remembered. The price is significantly higher than many other new condos in downtown. Look at it now, it has pretty much sold out, only a few extra large 2-bed room left.

I think Pemberton wants to copy Uptown strategy to U Condo. As an added benefit, the cost of construction is going to be lower than Uptowns, and the materials used will be less expensive too.

I believe the Jr. one bed room will be sold out soon despite the high price. On the other hand, I could not figure out which group of purchaser Pemberton wants to target with its newly released Urban design I and III. Who would want to own a 300 or 400 studio? Rich student, single or young couple? I wouldn't tender my offer to Pemberton.
 
I agree. Look at Pemberton's Uptowns at Bloor. It's had commanded $600 psf when it was released in 2005, as I remembered. The price is significantly higher than many other new condos in downtown. Look at it now, it has pretty much sold out, only a few extra large 2-bed room left.

I think Pemberton wants to copy Uptown strategy to U Condo. As an added benefit, the cost of construction is going to be lower than Uptowns, and the materials used will be less expensive too.

I believe the Jr. one bed room will be sold out soon despite the high price. On the other hand, I could not figure out which group of purchaser Pemberton wants to target with its newly released Urban design I and III. Who would want to own a 300 or 400 studio? Rich student, single or young couple? I wouldn't tender my offer to Pemberton.

I am struggling with the same question. What is the demographic that they are going after. Rich students have smart parents, usually. And there is something creepy about living in a studio that is literally on the U of T campus. Its like, ok, so I got a single room in rez this year. (I'm a U of T alum, btw)
 
I agree. Look at Pemberton's Uptowns at Bloor. It's had commanded $600 psf when it was released in 2005, as I remembered. The price is significantly higher than many other new condos in downtown. Look at it now, it has pretty much sold out, only a few extra large 2-bed room left.

I think Pemberton wants to copy Uptown strategy to U Condo. As an added benefit, the cost of construction is going to be lower than Uptowns, and the materials used will be less expensive too.

I believe the Jr. one bed room will be sold out soon despite the high price. On the other hand, I could not figure out which group of purchaser Pemberton wants to target with its newly released Urban design I and III. Who would want to own a 300 or 400 studio? Rich student, single or young couple? I wouldn't tender my offer to Pemberton.

yeah but those were different times... back than people were buying without even looking at unit dimensions...

I drove by the sales center on Saturday and saw quite a few people inside... soooo... i guess there are people who actually think Pemberton lowered the price and that they are getting a good deal... :)))
 

Back
Top