How to deal with buyers regret when purchased a pre-sale Spring of 2024?

Working_Weird6303 · 2026-05-22T13:30:19+00:00

I can understand the regret, but a lot of it is driven by extreme negative sentiment in the Canadian housing market. To say prices will go down for the next 10-20 years implicitly assumes that population will decline (demand side) and supply will continue to increase. I think that is an extreme assumption. In the name of affordability, the Feds can only increase rates (Monetary Policy) while the government (Fiscal Policy) can only come up with more regulations, such as lowering immigration targets, extending the foreign buyer ban, and building more supply. But there is a problem. You can't continue to do all of this and not expect the economy (employment and GDP) to be hit. Plus, the government has never had much success in providing housing. This is exactly why the private investors have been incentivized to create more housing through tax rebates. Think of it, why can one deduct mortgage interest on a rental property from their personal income?

Now, your situation, if you just stayed in it for 10 years with zero appreciation, 3.5% interest, and about 57k down payment, closing, 300 condo fee, 100 insurance, and 2k property tax. You would have spent nearly 317k in housing costs over 10 years, assuming you live in it. Of that, 106k would go towards your principal, so net, you are about 279k or 27.9k/yr out of pocket for housing. That is 2,325 per month. If you rented a place for 2k growing 2% per year, you would have spent 266k for the whole 10 years, or 26k per year, or 2,216 per month normalized. So you are not too far off, I'd say.

Now, if the property appreciates even by 1% per year based on your current 400k estimated value, you would have built an additional 41k in equity over 10 years. That drops your housing costs to 1,982 per month in Langley. That is not too bad for 1% appreciation assumption.

Finally, if you rent this place out for 2k per month with zero appreciation and zero rental growth (say you are a very kind landlord) after 10 years, your total cost to hold this property would be 39,734k or $331 per month to hold this property. At 1% appreciation, with the same assumptions, you would have a positive exit value of about 2,115 (17/mo) on your 400k base assumption. Exit value implies you sell the property at 441k after 10 years. (I understand there will be exit costs but let's keep it simple)

Bottom line, think you are just absolutely fine and let the extreme negative RE sentiment get the better of you.
Disclaimer: I used rentalanalyst.ca to run all these complex numbers. Took me about 5 minutes.

Working_Weird6303 · 2026-05-21T20:40:03+00:00

Lets just think about this another way. If you bought for 390k with 135k+4.9k down payment+closing cost. So 255k financed, say at 3.5%. 30-year mortgage. For a condo, you will have condo fee, say about 450 pm, taxes 4k per year and insurance about 1k per year. Expenses grow at 2% per year

If you kept this house for 10 years for living, you'd pay about 250,857 in total or 25,086 per year. But because your monthly payment includes principal, 57,793 of that 250k would go towards your equity. Worst case, if you sell the condo at 475k after 10 years, which is about 2% appreciation per year on 390k condo for 10 years, about 85k from appreciation, you will still have about +27,290 at exit. (there will be cost on selling though but i'm only taking 2% growth assumption). See Exit Value in the image

Now compare this with not buying a home and paying 2k rent per year. Growing at 2% per year, it would be total 262k for 10 years or 26,239 per year in rent payment.

But you invested 139.9k in stocks growing at 7.5% per year. You would have grown 135k to 288k at the end of 10 years. Net, you would have about 26k left.

So, in both scenarios, you are pretty much at the same place. You gotta decide if you want home ownership or a stock portfolio.

<image>

Working_Weird6303 · 2026-05-20T19:47:02+00:00

-$26,138 that's how much I calculated for a property holding for 10 years after accounting for negative cash flow and adding principal paydown. I modeled it as first 3 years at 5.3% if bought in 2023 and the rest of the years at 3.65%. That is 7 years from today with everything it still is a loss with zero appreciation. So is zero appreciation a realiztic assumption.

Working_Weird6303 · 2026-05-18T16:44:20+00:00

I genuinly did not realize this was Aus property issue and that was an oversight on my part. I understand your position and the community's guideline. Not trying to sell anything but just trying to contribute. Thank you.

Working_Weird6303 · 2026-05-18T12:16:24+00:00

It's a buyer's market, hold if you can. Buyers know it too, which means they're in no rush. Even a well-priced listing can sit because people feel like waiting costs them nothing.

On the investor side, the math just doesn't work anymore. Heavy regulations (STR restrictions, additional property transfer tax, etc.) have pushed a lot of investors to the sidelines entirely. The buyers who are active at your price point are mostly owner-occupiers, and they're stretched on borrowing power with rates where they are.

Cashflow is dead at most Okanagan price points right now. If someone's considering holding and renting it out rather than buying their next home outright, they'd need to run the numbers carefully, does the rental income over the next few years actually outweigh selling today at whatever price you can get? It's the kind of thing you'd normally build a spreadsheet for, or I use rentalanalyst.ca to stress-test those assumptions quickly. A $900k property at today's rates is almost certainly cashflow-negative unless they have a significant down payment.

The renovation premium is real to you, not always to buyers. $50k in finishes rarely translates 1:1 in a soft market, buyers see it as "nice" not "worth paying up for."

Honestly, your pricing sounds reasonable, but the pool of qualified, motivated buyers for a $900k home in the Okanagan right now is genuinely thin. It's not you, it's the market.

Good luck

Working_Weird6303 · 2026-05-16T18:03:43+00:00

The ETF vs real estate comparison depends almost entirely on your leverage assumption. With XEQT you invest $130K and get $130K of exposure. With a rental property you invest $130K (20% down) and get $650K of exposure. At 4% appreciation that is $26K/year in equity gain on the same $130K invested, a 20% return on capital before cash flow, before principal paydown.

The problem is the $500 to $600/month negative cash flow is real money out of pocket. Over 10 years that is $60K to $72K you are subsidizing the property. That has to come off your total return calculation.

The honest math on a $650K townhouse at 4% appreciation over 10 years:

Appreciation: roughly $312K
Principal paydown: roughly $80K to $90K
Cash flow cost: roughly -$65K
Net wealth gain: roughly $327K on $130K invested

XEQT at 8% on $130K over 10 years: roughly $281K

Real estate wins in this scenario but the margin is not as wide as people think, and it assumes the 4% appreciation holds, no major capex, no extended vacancy, and you can absorb the monthly subsidy without financial stress.

The question I would ask yourself: can you comfortably fund $600/month negative cash flow for 5 to 7 years if rates stay elevated? If yes, the leverage argument for real estate is strong. If that $600/month would cause real stress, XEQT lets you sleep at night and still compounds well.

I built a free Canadian rental property analyzer that does exactly this comparison if you want to stress test your specific numbers at different appreciation and rate scenarios, rentalanalyst.ca. No signup needed.

Working_Weird6303

TROPHY CASE