I agree that not all condos for sale in the lower price ranges are in locations that people want–that’s why they are priced lower (supply and demand dynamics around land). Some listings in those prices ranges are actually quite nice, but their small and not near transit and a ways out into suburbia.

My point is more about challenging what is meant when people say a a city or region is unaffordable.

Also, if demand growth is rapidly outpacing supply growth in certain locations, the question then comes as to whether a city can or should do anything to increase supply (re-zoning sights, allowing for extra density, etc.). Thus collecting data or analyzing it like this helps identify this very situation.

The exception is when they break out newer product in certain districts. Then my sense is that it’s fairly accurate (albeit at the point of time when they do their survey, usually around September each year).

It’s different from sale prices of owned homes because people pay rent every month but the rate is set when they lease the place; the sample size for data is therefore very large (CMHC can call a property manager and ask what people are paying in the building). By contrast since people only buy a home a few times in a lifetime (if that), the sample size of data on sale prices is much smaller.

I’d be curious what others think about using average rental rates though.

So the problem isn’t necessarily lack of affordable ownership options period. The problem is lack of _appealing_ affordable options, and each couple or family will have a slightly different definition of “appealing”

To solve the “affordability crisis” it will be important to identify exactly what definition of affordability problem we want to address.

I’d also note that the 50k versus 38k yvr yyz difference is pretty alarming when average incomes (generally higher in yyz) are taken into account.