Saturday, January 20, 2007

the grab bag #3

I'm just grabbing lines and more that I have come across having some relevance to my notions.

Regarding the MSM - and marketing (one of my biggest peeves!), I came across these lines on Discover Vancouver Forum (by way of RE Talks) - in reference to a recent Bollywood screening. An (apparently) East Indian girl wrote about how "white" people outnumbered "EI" people, and wondered why. Bollywood and White Folks was the thread.

El Duce Posted - 1/20/2007 4:57:16 PM
It's trendy right now, and we live in the biggest bandwagon town on the planet. There's been a lot of mainstream press on Bollywood in the last year or so.

Trendy. Like dot com and NorTel stocks, beanie babies, granite, and investment properties.

I think there is a "bubble" of people looking for new experiences.

This nugget from The Republic goes well with my
about RE opportunities on the Moon.
I am looking at it as a business investment, but the ultimate dream is to go and live there, without the baggage of the past. I’d like to open the first Israeli restaurant.

Tsiki Nasftaly, Israeli computer programmer, who bought a square kl of land on the moon slated for future settlement
And you thought I was guffin'.

And this, also from The Republic, regarding the expansion of the aquarium at Stanley Park. It catches a few things of interest to me - including a lack of public consultation, and the main industry in Vancouver - tourism. No mention of baristas and burger flippers (not to mention condo flippers), but I think they got a few things right.
I wonder if Kirk and Company asked Vancouverites if they'd favour their taxes going to subsidize a tourist-related service that was too expensive for many of them to attend.

Public subsidies, private profits

With an international reputation, about 750,000 paying customers in 2005, and an income of around $24 million, the Aquarium is an essential part of Vancouver's tourism-industrial complex. As Vancouver has evolved into a resort city, its primary industry is tourism. The only rival to the tourism complex is the real estate development industry, and in many ways they are related (many of the largest real estate investments are simultaneously investments in tourist related projects, e.g., the new "Shangri-La" investment downtown, among many others). There are massive public subsidies to the tourism industry in the form of government grants to the Canada line, designed to transfer tourists from the airport to downtown; the Convention Centre, designed to attract large business groups to Vancouver; and, of course, the underwriting of the 2010 Games.
I have not gone into my rant about the Olympics, and I don't think there is much point. I'm preaching to the choir here, so to speak.

And from Mohican's blog - something that we are all thinking, I think.
dingus said...
Great post, great blog. A great evolution from the housing blogs for those that have been around and around on the discussions there on the lack of value in that market and are trying to figure out what to do with funds they have if they don't have a mortgage to pay down.
I can only make so many crappy jokes, I'm not into whining, so I've been thinking of where to go from here. I can't even begin to imagine what will transpire. Over the last year, it seems like all bets are off (except the one that freako won over at VHB).

I have a growing feeling that things are going to unwind quickly. I thought that a year and a half ago, but I am reminded of hunters' anecdotes of making heart shots, and the prey continuing to run - not realizing that it was already demised. A chicken without it's head is another analogy.

Beware the Ides of March?

Finally, looking at Rob Chipman's numbers, it is starting to look much more like a buyers' market. But we can guess and guess and guess until spring. We will have a better idea then.


Uncertain Buyer said...

Great Post,

Vancouver is very trendy right now. I am finding the Okanagan is the same way.

Just like the Canucks, people will turn their backs on Real Estate when it starts losing.

bc_cele said...


did you happen to catch the post about how little nurses make? There was an interesting article posted on the thread about how much doctors do or don't make sob story. I think that this article shows that CREA isn't the only incredible spin machine on the planet.

One part of the article states that the median billing to OHIP is 160K and after expenses a doctor only pulls in 98K. Ok, I've done books for several doctors and none of these numbers seemed remotely close to the mark. So I found the stats on the OMA website. 2004 stats. Seems that they were only talking about GP/family practitioners because the specialists sure are making a lot more.

Another thing to bear in mind is that many of the family practitioners don't bill OHIP because they are employed by hospitals or private employers. Also, the average billing for any GP/family practitioner rises to 200K for all those that bill >50K. The reason that many of the billings are so low is that a)having a billing number doesn't mean you use it b) there are a lot of semi-retired physicians that work only part-time c) there are doctors who only work part of the time in a billing situation and the rest in a non-billing situation.

The truest stats are those you really have to pull together. The one statement was that doctors make ~$75/hr AFTER expenses. The average full-time doctor puts in 54.7 hours a week. Assuming 48 weeks a year, that works out to an income of just shy of 200K a year. and this is exactly what I found when I was an accountant.

Talk about political spin.

bc_cele said...

Seems the OMA ref didn't come through.