Can't thoil the run up.

[Maybe Later]

I learned a new word from Gail Vaz Oxlade some time back: Thoil. I understand it to mean you can afford something but can't stomach the thought of paying that much. Essentially, you don't see value in the purchase.

I live in a Western Canadian market that was probably undervalued when we moved back from the States in 2005 and has run up considerably in the past few years. We are thinking of moving to a new house in the same city for life reasons and have started looking around. Since it's been a relatively short period (6 years), it's hard to reconcile what we paid to build in 2006 with what it would cost to buy/build now, even if our house has increased in value (so have our incomes, but with kids we've increased costs also).

Has anyone else had similar experiences? I love our home, but I'm not sure I would want to pay market value for it. Did you end up coming to see value in the higher prices or did you just shake your head the whole time?

[MoneyGal]

For what it's worth, I would never buy my (Toronto) house at the current valuation. It's an old house and requires ongoing maintenance. HOWEVER, I love living here and I'm glad I'm not trying to get into this market now.

[Jungle]

I think anyone who is a responsible spender looks at the situation with some concern.

We are upsizing this year, so I tend to think of the equity we have built up from increasing prices and paying off over half the mortgage. I also think buying and holding for a long time will smooth out prices if or when we get a housing crash. We need to move when we are ready and understand not to time the market. The biggest risk would be not being able to pay the mortgage, like a job loss, but there are so many options to overcome that. However during a housing downturn, you may not be able to sell if you have low equity.

Moneygal, I know your area and prices have tripeld over the last decade. So even in the place we are in now, which is north on a subway line, I would NOT pay the price it's worth right now.

[Spudd]

Our area is nuts. We just looked at a bungalow today, likely built in the 50's, which is on the market for 800k. Yes, it's been renovated inside and it looks nice in the pics. But 800k??

[Jungle]

Yup. The revine facing bungalow at the end of the street for my in-laws sold for 1.2 Million last summer. A... bung...alow.

[Sherlock]

People need to spread out more, into cities with cheaper houses. There's lots of cities with very reasonable housing costs all over Canada, where 200k will buy you a 2000 sq ft, 4 bedroom, double garage detached newer house.

[KaeJS]

People need to spread out more, into cities with cheaper houses. There's lots of cities with very reasonable housing costs all over Canada, where 200k will buy you a 2000 sq ft, 4 bedroom, double garage detached newer house.

Exactlyyyyyyy.

The only way to be rich in the city is to be selling to the people living there.

[Maybe Later]

... I tend to think of the equity we have built up from increasing prices and paying off over half the mortgage. I also think buying and holding for a long time will smooth out prices if or when we get a housing crash. We need to move when we are ready and understand not to time the market. The biggest risk would be not being able to pay the mortgage, like a job loss, but there are so many options to overcome that. However during a housing downturn, you may not be able to sell if you have low equity.

I completely agree. We are upsizing the house (from three to four bedrooms) and downsizing the yard (from an acreage to the city). Probably will go from just over 50% equity to just under, assuming the market doesn't change significantly before we list. Still, I shake my head at the 75% increase in our property "value" in the past six years. I would not want to be entering the market now.

It also doesn't help that my TV is often on HGTV (the four most expensive letters in the English language according to David Chilton) and I would love to buy into my neighborhood of choice and take everything back to the studs. That, or custom build again from scratch. I don't think I can justify either, but I'm sure it will need a long look.

[the-royal-mail]

I agree 100% with Sherlock about spreading out more. In 2012 it is absolutely absurd that office workers who peck away on computers all day need to be jamming into crowded downtown areas of huge cities. Business needs to be discouraged from doing this via taxation (ie. a congestion tax) which would then encourage them to locate offices in smaller centers in the country that could really use the employment and related spinoff. Office workers should also be able to work at home with teleconferncing and the like. Again, no need for all those people to flood into tiny spaces. Spread out.

[NotMe]

Just a slightly different opinion on things: I find living in the city the best way to live in terms of a real sense of community, integrated living with businesses and residences, and access to public transit (subways) very helpful. Yes I agree that there is some capacity for "teleworkers" (remember that?) but in reality, it's much easier to run a meeting when people are there in the room than when they're on the phone. Not all businesses can afford to have proper live meeting licenses, videoconferencing, etc and to be honest sometimes when you just want someone's opinion on something it's easier just to go up and ask them than call them and play voicemail tag.