Here is our update on the Edmonton real estate market. (Previous week’s numbers are in brackets). For the past 7 days:
New listings: 437 (435, 484, 493)
# Sales: 248 (303, 314, 239)
Ratio: 57% (70%, 65%, 48%)
# Price changes: 279 (297, 337, 291)
# Expired/Off Market Listings: 172 (183, 193, 386)
Net loss/gain in listings this week: 17 (-51, -23, -132)
Active single family home listings: 3147 (3105, 3114, 3125)
Active condo listings: 2091 (2090, 2085, 2097)
Homes 4-week running average: $390k ($392, $398k, $404K)
Condos 4-week running average: $237k ($234k, $237k, $241K)
The REALTORS® Association of Edmonton is reporting 1,349 sales so far this month for the Greater Edmonton area – about average for this time of year.
Edmonton real estate prices
Edmonton real estate listings and sales
Canadian and U.S. retailers are certainly seeing opportunity in Edmonton – 3.2 million square feet of commercial space will be added to the greater Edmonton area over the next year. The commercial vacancy rate is at a historic low of 2.4%.
Driving the furious pace of construction is a ravenous appetite for space from Canadian and U.S. retailers and restaurant chains looking to expand in one of North America’s healthiest economies. Alberta’s retail sales were 25% higher than the national per capita average in 2011, according to Colliers 1st-quarter retail market report.
Have a great weekend! Go team Canada!
About Sara MacLennan
Sara MacLennan is the Director of Marketing at Liv Real Estate and a licensed Real Estate Associate. The bulk of Sara’s experience and wealth of expertise lies in on-line technology and marketing both for agents and consumers. Sara is the former National Director for Interactive Marketing for Coldwell Banker Canada where she was responsible for an extensive training program traveling to offices across the country training agents and brokers on marketing and technology. Find Sara on Twitter @edmontonblogger.
Client Testimonial for Nathan Mol 
Client Testimonial for Travis Dochuk
Client Testimonial for Beverley Hasinoff
Client Testimonial for Beverley Hasinoff
Client Testimonial for Richard Widynowski
Client Testimonial for Bill Bhamra
Client Testimonial for Mira Wannous
Client Testimonial for Beverley Hasinoff
Client Testimonial for Richard Widynowski
Client Testimonial for Justin Tazi
Client Testimonial for Sheldon Johnston
Client Testimonial for Bill Bhamra
Client Testimonial for Tracy Vipond
Client Testimonial for Justin Tazi
Client Testimonial for Nathan Mol 
Client Testimonial for Bill Bhamra
The total sales may be around the same as last year, but the price drops are not. Last year, prices for single family were still slightly increasing and in this years month of July prices have dropped 3.5%. Have pretty well given up any gains for this year.
Another article out yesterday from Canadian Business that says nationally house prices will drop 20-25% over the next 6-9 months. If we keep up with the rate of 3.5% per month, that just may happen. Not that I put a lot of faith in what these articles state, but time will tell. I still maintain they are looking more to the Toronto and Vancouver markets.
You are doing your best Garth Turner impression by taking one months worth of data and extrapolating it over the year.
Average price for SFD June 2011 – $389,696
Average price for SFD June 2012 – $404,241
Seems like an increase to me.
The days are getting shorter too… I sure hope we don’t keep losing sunlight at the rate we are or else next summer we’ll be living in darkness!
Around a 3.7% increase year-over-year.
In statistics, seasonal measures are used because of its component are more less constant from year to year. For that reason, and using your own data we can see that prices for the last week of July have increased in 0.25% (390/389) in one year when we compare 2012 and 2011. Nevertheless, when we see the numbers of the Homes 4-week running average in 2011, we see an increase. The same numbers for the Homes 4-week running average in 2012, we see a decline. I don’t know where the 3.7% increase comes from, but it will be useful to know where the numbers are coming from.
It is a fact that more people are coming to Edmonton as it is shown in the last Edmonton census, but they come without big savings, and to look for a good job to have the opportunity to buy a house. That situation usually means that they need at least 3-4 years of savings before jumping in the housing market to buy.
Data used from this website:
Edmonton Real Estate Blog Weekly Update – July 29, 2011
Homes 4-week running average: $389 ($385k, $387k, $387k)
Edmonton Real Estate Market Weekly Update – July 27/12
Homes 4-week running average: $390k ($392, $398k, $404K)
Look at the price per sqf. It has not changed over the last few months.
Avg selling price doesn’t tell you all. I think at the peak bigger houses were being sold and now only smaller.
I agree with you that average prices doesn’t tell you all; however, the price per sqf is a worst indicator.
Average can show you a trend because they measure the whole picture. I can tell you that I don’t like averages, but it is the indicator that everybody use to show increase/decline prices. Since that indicator is used, and it is used mostly by realtors, it is the one I use.
Price per sqf is related to location, and you can’t compare price per sqf without differentiating zones. Prices per sqf and its average can be compared within zone and not zone to zone. You can compare sqf within North West Edmonton or South West Edmonton, but not between them. Just to follow the price per sqf in whole Edmonton is not useful.
I agree the bigger houses are being sold, and the market demand now is for houses $600 K or less.
This is a link I posted last week.
link to cbc.ca
Worth reading.
I read it. However, there is no agreement on what indicator should be used, which is even worst. People are looking new indicators when the convential ones are not given the information they want.
The average price gives you the “big picture”. I agree is not the best, but it gives you the big picture, and that is what we need. FYI, I am an economist that work with indicators for the last 19 years.
When the graph was going the other way, the evidence of a price rise was not questioned. Now that the graph has turned, the evidence is suddenly unreliable?
Don’t worry, this is not the “big fall”, which won’t arrive in Edmonton until next Spring, after Calgary prices have fallen.
I agree with you, and the prices are declining whether they like it or not. I don’t think there will be a big fall like in the USA, but a conservative 20% as it has been described by some analysts. In my opinion, the problem here is that some houses are overvalued . I don’t understand how new houses are equal ( or sometimes lower) in price then old houses that were built 10 or 15 years ago.
In addition, those new houses have a better construction material and insulation, and the old ones are in need of a serious renovation. I have been visiting old and new houses, and it doesn’t make sense the price of the old ones. I am looking only T6R postal code, and this situation is very common. I don’t know about the rest of the areas in Edmonton.
You might certainly find problems with new homes also. But they sure look nice.
The other factor in re-sale homes keeping there evaluations could possibly be location. Its nice to be a part of an established neighborhood, close to what Edmonton has to offer.
I think Edmonton will maintain SFH prices for the foreseeable future , due to in-migration, low interest rates ( which will stay low for quite a while ). We will be right where we are now by next May.
Edmonton is still affordable comparitively, and there are jobs here. Well paying jobs that can afford 2000/month mortgages!
Ah classic economist. Base your opinion on ideals rather then whats actually happening. Harper is an economist as well, yet he denied a recession coming.
If you saw the quality of new homes and how terribly built they are, and how 80% of new home owners were not satisfied with their purchase, it would make more sense to you.
Its all about location. As the city expands, those older houses rise in price because of the proximity to everything. If you live on the outskirts of Edmonton, and it takes you 30-40 minutes to get anywhere, your gonna start to want to move closer. Plus people like mature neighborhoods with older trees, etc.
Conservative 20%? I dont think so. My guess is the average price will be up 20% in about 5 years time. The average price for all residential in 2011 was $325,000. How much do you wanna bet that it will be higher in 2012?
80% of new home owners not satisfied with their home? Where did that stat come from? I just built a new home and I’m very satisfied with it, so I guess I’m one of the 20%. Actually I’ve spoken with a lot of neighbors on my block, we are in a newer neighborhood, and we’re all generally satisfied with quality of the homes we’re in. Everyone I’ve spoken to in my neighborhood started out looking at older homes, but in the end we all decided against older houses because they cost just the same, if not more, as a new house and the amount of work to repair is unpredictable. Even though the neighborhood is farther north, the drive out to southside or downtown is not bad at all. Lets be honest, driving in Edmonton right now shouldn’t be a problem because it’s only maybe 35 minutes from one end to the other. It’s not like we’re Vancouver or Toronto where travelling takes hours. I’ve heard tonnes of horror traffic stories in those cities.
There was an article in the journal that came out that had all the results of the new home survey. During the boom, 80% of the respondents were not satisfied, me included.
They regulated the inspection industry which was a good thing because all these houses were getting passed that shouldnt have. If you noticed during that time there were lots of banners stretched across houses/garages that said things like “this is what a real summerwood home looks like, come to talk to us about it”. I saw those signs all the time.
The number of dissatisfied people went down after that, but only to something like 70%. Its best to buy a home that is like 10 years old after someone has lived in it and fixed all the issues from the original build.
During the boom a lot of crazy things happened, but it’s unfair to judge our current situation with what happened during the boom as the boom was a special case. I know houses were poorly made during the boom because I had some friends with 0 experience in home building who were picked up to do trades work and they told me a lot guys they worked with also had no idea what they were doing. The situation now is a lot better, the quality of work returned to normal I think.
I do not agree with you should buy a 10 years old house because you think people lived in it and fixed the problems. The assumption that people fixed the problems correctly will potentially cause you more problems.
Buying an older home comes with it’s own problems. The standard 10 years ago is definitely not as good as it is now. Karl, you’re saying that older houses are built better, then why would there be any problems to fix from previous owners? You’re kind of contradicting yourself there. I would never believe in the potential patch work that previous owners have put into fixing a house. If a house requires fixing, I would prefer to be the one to fix it. At least I have that piece of mind knowing that I did it properly. I’ve seen a lot of bad/quick fixes that will eventually cost you way more.
The only reason why it seems like older homes have less complains is because there are less news coverages on housing issues. Nowadays with the amount of media available, everytime there’s a problem people go running to the media to get attention. 20 years ago, if there was a problem in our new house, my parents would just fix it and leave it at that.
80% being not happy with their houses built at the peak indicates that:
1) People had unrealistic expectation, when the price went up so fast. For example, when they paid $400k in 2006 to build. By their mind set was likely still 04/05. If they compared a $400k in 2006 to a $400k in 2004, they would be seriously disappointed.
2) The issue is with 2006/07, not with new houses in general. I took possession of my new houses this year. People like me are generally satisfied. As compared to 06/07, we paid less, get more sqft and better quality overall. An entire community of stucco houses was not heard of in 2006. But now, here it is and very affordable.
3) Location is not only judged by distance to the downtown core. For instance, Alberta Avenue is in the downtown area and has mature trees. But it’s not considered a good area. A lot of new communities, such as Upper Windermere and Cameron Heights offer lots that are backing onto ponds and pre-existing wooded areas. They are right next to the Windermere Currents shopping center and fairly close to WEM and the industrial strip (for work). I would say they are superior in location than many older neighborhoods. Again, if distance to the downtown core is your thing, there is alwasy the affordable Alberta Avenue district.
Better construction in new homes?
Ha ha! You’re funny! Or maybe just gullible.
what constitutes better construction?
how do you measure? can you even compare the old construction and new construction? if i light a new house and an old house on fire, do we time them to see who burns faster?
If you think old houses are better constructed without any basis of comparison, then i think “you’re funny! or maybe just ” ignorant. People progress, technology progress, homebuilding is no different. If homebuilding gets worst as time goes on, we’ll be living in stick houses pretty soon.
Because I’ve lived in new and I’ve lived in old houses.
I’ve seen what goes on in the construction of new houses. Shortcuts are taken, things are done improperly.
Yes, technology progresses. But from what I’ve seen, people do not.
Unless you can be there watching them every day, a new house will not be built the way it is supposed to be.
But I’m likely preaching to the choir here. So go ahead and buy a new house and find out for yourself.
Again, you do not specify as to what you’re comparing when you talk about better or worst. You’re making a general statement that old houses are better than new houses, but in terms of what?
Craftsmenship may not be as good now as they were many years back, but in many cases it does not have to be because many things are automated. Hammering a nail in the wood straight may be an important skill back then, but today we have nail guns which work just as well.
I’ve lived in old houses and I just bought a new house and I’m happy with both. I have many friends who bought old and new. So I hear all about them. Most of them who bought old houses did it because of location, more mature neighborhoods work for them. Not a single one of them bought the old house for the reason of “better construction”.
As for shortcuts and things done improperly, I think you’re just unlucky. There are bad trades back then and there are bad trades today. No matter when the house is built, it’s important for the home owners to keep a close eye, this is a given. You’ve seen what goes on in new construction but have you seen what goes on in old constructions? Have you been there every step of the way whenever a fix or renovation is done to the old house? The answer is most likely NO!. So how can you be so sure of anything. At least with new houses, you have the OPTION of watching them closely. But with old houses, you’re just taking a chance if you ask me.
The bottom line is, “better construction” is too general as a comparision so lets be more specific then maybe we can have a real argument instead of just bias generalizations.
That’s interesting Ed. Based on what?
That would be a long story to tell. One cannot be sure about the timing, or the sequence of events. I see a future plunge (early 2013?) in the Toronto condo market (a bubble that is ready to burst) as the signal for smart money on the prairies to exit in haste. The plunge will no doubt start after some kind of internal or external economic event – there are plenty of possible candidates (oil, Europe, China, interest rates, unemployment).
I believe that this reaction will be evident first in Calgary, and that there will be a knee-jerk (lesser) price correction in Edmonton as a result of strong awareness between the two markets, a general feeling among boomers that you should “sell now, or miss out forever on moving somewhere warm”, and economic necessity (unemployment, interest rates).
You will be saying the big fall is coming next year for the rest of your life.
O ye of little faith!
I think price/sq ft is a very accurate indicator of prices and trends. I don’t agree that the smaller the zone, the more accurate it will be. Just the opposite. The most important factor when looking at price/sq ft is the STYLE of the house. My guess, and Sheldon could confirm this, is that the % of bungalows, 2-storeys, etc remains fairly consistent from month to month. Therefore, the results will be more accurate the larger the sample size, hence, using the entire city.
One size does not fit all, however. You cannot use the price/sq ft for the entire city to determine the price of your individual house. This is why it’s critical to hire a knowledgeable realtor who can interpret the statistics for your style of house in your particular community.
The overall price/sq ft for the entire city is a very good indicator of the trend, not the price of your unique property.
Well the knowledgeable realtor that lives two houses down from mine and has been in the business for many many years, just dropped his selling price by 24K within one week of listing it. So now he is asking for his newer – by one year, larger house by 100 sq. ft. 15K less than what we received for ours in June.
So, let’s hear the expert opinions on this. Tested the market? knows prices are dropping quickly?
Far too anecdotal. Larger sample size please.
If your realtor neighbour dropped his price by 24K within a week of listing, it was priced incorrectly to begin with which makes your assertion that he’s knowledgeable seem wrong. Also if I was looking to get top dollar, I wouldn’t be listing it at the end of July. However, it is refreshing to see that during the normal drop off in prices and sales after peaking in Apr-June, it brings out the market is crashing crowd. Kind of like crocuses in the spring.
The Edmonton real estate market certainly didn’t drop 24k in week. Your Realtor neighbor was simply not good at it. Doing something for many years, doesn’t automatically make you good at it. Plenty of housewives cooked for the family for 30 years and still not good at it.
More likely his basement flooded after the rains and he wants to dump it quick before anyone finds out.
Houses are a emotional asset. As long as most can afford the payments they will continue to buy. In theory real estate is over valued, but, as consumers we love credit. And credit is god (for now).
the neighbor realtor may be an experienced “marketing” person – overprice the property then reduce it to a normal level so that people will perceive this “reduction” as a sign of desperation and attempt to buy at a “sale” price when in fact it is the correct market price to begin with…
The asking prices do tend to drift down slightly, rather than up. I keep track of a few places of interest. Example, 4711-115 St, 24 July at 434.5K, now at 429.9K. To some extent realtors are expected to price a bit too high, since nobody expects to pay the asking price.
Asking price is nothing. There is a Riverbend property on Whitemud Road (read road, not drive) currently listing for $15M. Three years ago, it was listed for $18M. Guess how much of an average listing price drop that caused.
3 years ago it was LISTED for $18M. But did it sell? No?
Well, perhaps it was listed too high. Maybe $15M is still too high. Maybe they’re just not realistic. Maybe they don’t really want to sell but are just testing the market to see if there is any interest.
Maybe the house is only worth $5M to begin with.
I agree with you that it’s over priced. Thus my point that it’s a waste of time trying to analyze average asking price.
As for the particular property, the lot is quite large (5+ arces, if I remember correctly). The typical rich family don’t really need that much land. A 0.7 acre river lot in Windermere Ridge is currently listed at $1.3M. That’s sufficient for most. If I can afford a $15M lot (the building is virtually worthless in comparison), I will move to Vancouver the next day.