200 years of stability in the Toronto real estate market – with Igor Dragovic

Speaker 1: Welcome to the True Condos Podcast with Andrew la Fleur. The place to get the truth on the Toronto condo market and condo investing in Toronto.

Andrew la Fleur: It’s my pleasure to welcome back to the show, Igor Dragovic. Igor is a senior planner at the City of Toronto in the Planning Department. Igor, welcome back to the show.

Igor Dragovic: Thank you, Andrew. Great to be back here again, of course.

Andrew la Fleur: Yeah. We had you on a couple of years ago and I know you’ve very active on Twitter and social media on housing issues, real estate issues. Of course, you work in the government side of things as well as a planner.

You’ve also worked at the Province before that. The last time we spoke, you were at the Province. Great to talk to you. Great to have you on and have your insights into real estate and the market and what’s happening. Looking forward to chatting today.

Igor Dragovic: For sure. I feel the same way.

Andrew la Fleur: Great. You wrote a blog post. The main reason I wanted to have you on was for this blog post that you wrote recently, which, of course, we’ll include a link to it in the show notes for this episode. Everybody, definitely go check it out. You’ve got some great charts on there.

I always appreciate how you just break down the market in a very simple way with your blog post and your tweets and everything. Really, oftentimes, we over-complicate things and we try to look at so many different angles and what’s happening in the market and why is this happening and why this happened here.

I just find that your posts and with the content that you create is just a nice way of breaking things down in a simple fashion so that you can really get to the fundamentals of the market to really see clearly what is happening and what’s likely going to happen in the future. Kudos to you. Keep it up.

I think it’s great. On this recent blog post called The State of the Resale Housing Market in the GTA, I’ll let you jump in here, but you’ve got some great historical context. Obviously, we’ve come out of a … 2017 was a wild ride of a year with major highs and major lows, but it was really interesting to see how you put that in context.

2017 and the market today in context of the broader market of over decades. Why don’t you talk about that and what were the key takeaways for you as you wrote that blog post and some of the charts you put together?

Igor Dragovic: Sure, no problem. I mean, the first chart, I believe, it was the one that looked at the annual house prices from 1953. You see a pretty, I don’t want to say consistent, but it generally looks like a consistent rise with a few bubbly spots, in and around the early ’70s, late ’80s, that a lot of people in Toronto are quite familiar with. More so, recent, this period, some are questioning whether home prices and values are over-stretched.

What we do see is regardless of these ups-and-downs over the last 60 years, house prices are on average going up-and-up consistently. I mean, if you just look at the trend line, that map from 1953, house prices have increased five-fold. Five times over the last 60 years that they’ve increased.

Even, if say, our house prices fall this year to that, revert to that mean, we still would have increased five times. It’s not like we’re stagnating or things like that. You can see in some of the other charts, the percentage increases.

This year, we’ve increased, still despite all the wild ride, as you mentioned, for 2017, in terms of housing values and failed level things like that, we’re still up about 13% year-over-year increase from 2016 in house prices, average house prices, resale ones across the GTA.

That gives me a little bit of comfort because we’re not at 36% year-over-year, as we’ve seen in 1989, which was the period that followed that wasn’t particularly a great one for real estate in Toronto. It’s almost …

I guess it brings up the question of whether Ontario’s Fair Housing Plan that was introduced in April might have actually done what it was intended to do, which was stabilize the market a little bit because I think we all felt that 30% increase we faced in March 2017, compared to March 2016, was a little too much.

I think that not only did the government realize that but so did a lot of buyers and sellers. We’re in a bit of a market that seems to be a bit more calmer now, in a sense. Not the craziness that we witnessed two months’ prior, but maybe the stability that we’ve seen a few years prior.

Andrew la Fleur: Yeah. You bring up some great points there. I want to just touch on one of them, which was 2017, when the dust had all settled, was the prices were up overall, about 13% over the previous year. Thirteen percent, which is a high number. Historically, it is one of the higher numbers, but as you point out, and as your great charts point out, as they look at the appreciation rates on average over this last 60 years, maybe you can …

People will look at the chart, but maybe you can describe it for them a little bit. Just in terms of the ’70s and the ’80s. There were some wild ups-and-downs in the market. Compared to what was going on then and obviously, everyone always goes back to the crash of 1989. Everyone’s, “Is this the moment where we’re going to repeat that?”, kind of a thing.

When you actually see this chart, you realize, “Wow! It is actually a very different numerical picture than it was in the ’80s.”

Igor Dragovic: Yeah. It’s interesting because the ’80s had … It’s funny, because when you read some of the articles from the ’80s. I think Tamsin McMahon from The Globe and Mail has posted them. It almost sounds like you’re reading an article from today. A lot of people are moving here. It’s a global city. Congestion is so bad. Housing prices are through the roof. Are our kids ever going to be able to afford to live here?

People were writing that in 1989, and we’re here, in 2017, and yeah, everybody’s kids were able to afford a home here. People were able to settle in here. People moved and came and jobs were established. Things were fine, ultimately, but you definitely …

That’s a very fair point that you bring up and I like what you said there because you look at that chart. I’m looking at it right now from about 1965 until 1990, you just see just spikes.

Andrew la Fleur: Some wild ups-and-downs.

Igor Dragovic: Thirty percent, in one year, that was going up. We haven’t had that since that crash of ’89. Since the early ’90s, we’ve gone up. I mean, granted it was a little crazy in 2017, but if you were to take out 2017 out of the equation, you’d see quite a consistent and a reasonable rate of growth.

I don’t know whether it was particularly Vancouver, the BC, the pulse they implemented on the foreign buyers and things like that. Last summer, it sparked everything that happened here because really it’s only been the last … I’d say from maybe the summer of 2016 to April of 2017, that the market got out-of-control and tempered.

Andrew la Fleur: I mean, now that we’ve had a little bit of time to look on what happened in 2017, it was almost the way that I see it, it’s almost like we got drunk as a city, as a market. It’s like we got drunk for a couple of months. People were just doing crazy, stupid things that they normally wouldn’t do in terms of bidding up prices on properties.

Igor Dragovic: Things got out of …

Andrew la Fleur: Yeah. Things got out of control, but now, when you look back, it was actually only a couple of months, really. Like you said, it was definitely less than a year. Really, the critical months were February, March, April of 2017. Just a few months where things really got wonky.

A handful of people overpaid for properties, but I think the market quickly reverted back to the mean, as you said. There’s only really a handful of people out there who may actually suffer from those kinds of decisions that were made in those days, but for 95% of people in the market, we’re sort of back-to-normal, right?

Igor Dragovic: Yeah. I mean, I like the way you put it. It’s funny too, that people were a little drunk for this couple of months’ period, which is absolutely correct. I mean, you look at, say, the last 20, 30 years of housing in Toronto. We’ve had, and I think I wrote about this, and you can see the month-to-month changes in house prices. You see for literally like 20 years, we’ve had prices rarely above 10% annually growing, not even assuming, until maybe 2016, or so.

I mean, you can take out the 2008 and ’09 recession because that’s obviously going to have an impact, but didn’t have as big an impact as what happened in the US and things like that. But, what you notice is that we’ve had a crazy nine or ten months or maybe even shorter than that as you … I don’t deal with all the transactions side so I wouldn’t have a really good sense of that, but you definitely would.

Look at that nine months, and at one point, people were extrapolating that forward-thinking, thinking, this is the new normal. This is how it is. Then, after we reverted back to the mean and the market has stabilized, people started freaking out. They’re like, “Oh my God! Things are actually taking 30, 30-something days to sell. House prices are not growing by 30%. It’s growing by 5%.”

Well, yeah, of course it is, because that’s what’s normal. It was like that in 2012 and 2013 and 2014 and 2015. This year, for a few months, did things get out-of-control and suddenly people think, “This is been new normal,” when, in reality, the new normal is what’s happening a few years’ prior.

Andrew la Fleur: Absolutely.

Igor Dragovic: [crosstalk 00:11:03] made.

Andrew la Fleur: We have such short memories. Now, as I’ve been talking about a lot in the podcast lately, a theme that keeps coming up and you’re alluding to it is this idea that what I’m selling …

The stats are going to start coming out. It’s going to start looking really bad because we’re going to be comparing January, February, March, April of 2018, we’re going to be comparing to 2017, the year that we got drunk. The year that we lost our minds for a very short period of time.

The numbers are going to look really bad on paper for the next few months, but by the time we get to June, July, time period of 2018, when we start comparing ourselves to after the hangover and we’re back-to-normal, it’s going to paint the very different picture.

I think like you said, the psychological effect is certainly going to be interesting to watch and to see how that plays out in the market over the next few months because we have such short memories, as you said too. It’s like, things are so bad. Like you said, in 2012, ’13, ’14, ’15, was anybody saying things were bad? No. I mean, people …

Igor Dragovic: It was going to be crazy, though. At one point, it was the fact that condos are going up like five. Condos were going up 3, 4% a year. If you recall this, remember those days?

Andrew la Fleur: Exactly, exactly. People were freaking out when house prices were going up, 6, 7, 8, 9%. People were, “This is too much.” Now, it’s like prices are going up 5%. What? No! The market is crashing.

Igor Dragovic: Exactly. That’s a very good way to put it.

Andrew la Fleur: It’s funny to watch that. In the industry, we know this inherently, but people on the street and reading headlines, they’re not necessarily picking up on the nuances. It’s certainly going to affect the market and affect how people are thinking about the market. It’ll be interesting to watch, but by the time summer rolls around, I think it’s going to be a very different picture.

Igor Dragovic: We’ll have to see. I mean, spring and summer of 2018 will give us, I think, a better idea of where the market’s heading. I wrote an article on that as well. I think I noted Fall 2017, was supposed to be that, but it wasn’t. That’s okay. I mean, it was still fairly early and how we also have [inaudible 00:13:43] tests as well as stress tests. We’ll see how it all plays out.

We should have a better idea in 2018, in the spring and summer, and what I’m looking at right now, I don’t see things plummeting, really. I don’t see it.

Andrew la Fleur: Yeah. That’s one I have written on my page right here. Is the market plummeting? That was one of the questions to ask you and segue into some of your other posts and research that you’ve done and charts that you’ve got together where you go back and you look at the Toronto population over the last 100 years or so.

Again, going back to the fundamentals of the market and the growth that we’ve seen over 100 years in the market. What is your take? What is your message to people when you take that perceptive? When you look at today’s market in the context in today’s City of Toronto and the context over the last 100 years.

Igor Dragovic: I mean, Toronto, it’s a powerhouse in terms of growth. I don’t think we appreciate how much the city really grows annually and how much we’ve grown. We add about 1,000,000 people to this region every decade. That’s a whole major city that you’re adding to an existing urban glomeration every 10 years.

When you think about that, that’s going to drive a lot of demand for housing. You have to create the jobs for that, the infrastructure, the cars and things like that. When you have this population growth, and if you look at the last 200 years, I think I calculated that it was about 9 or 10 years that we actually, the city witnessed, well, not the city, but Toronto as this metropolitan area, which includes parts of York region, Peel, Halton, and Durham, but when you look at the last 200 years, really that region has only declined in growth for about 9 or 10 years out of the 200.

Andrew la Fleur: Amazing. Amazing stat.

Igor Dragovic: At the time, we’re growing. It doesn’t matter what’s happening, because people are coming here. Yeah, sure, some people leave the Province and go to Alberta. Maybe oil prices or the Canadian dollar influences that, fine. Not a problem. Some people as well leave the Toronto CMA and settle in maybe small communities nearby, whether that’s Kitchener-Waterloo, or Kingston, or Niagara Falls. Retirees, for instance. Fine.

The sheer level of immigration that we get and not only that, but the Federal Government aims to increase that to, I think … You look at how the feds do it. They do it generally 2% of the Canadian population, so we should be letting in about 350,000, 360,000 people a year, which the feds are doing, or planning to do. Even talking about increasing that to 400,000, potentially 500,000 people a year to cover, I guess, to maintain, our population growth.

Andrew la Fleur: Yeah.

Igor Dragovic: Where all those people are going to move? I mean, sure, people will go to Vancouver, some to Montreal, but the vast majority are going to go to the Toronto CMA. I saw an interesting chart that there’s been a declining numbers of people going to the Toronto CMA if you look at over the last 20 years, but it’s still about 50,000 to 80,000.

I’m actually not sure what the immigrant numbers are, but I think it’s about 50,000, to 60,000 or 70,000 immigrants, strictly newcomers coming from outside of the country into the Toronto CMA, settling here.

Andrew la Fleur: Yeah, absolutely. Were you at the … There was an event at Ryerson recently, a housing event, in the past week. Were you at that event?

Igor Dragovic: No, I wasn’t. I think it was the Center for Urban Research one, right?

Andrew la Fleur: That’s right. No, I saw some tweets going out on that. I don’t know if you caught those as well. One of the speakers, I believe somebody’s working the City of Mississauga was quoted as saying, one projection was for 3.5 million people being added to the greater golden horseshoe, so not just Toronto, but the whole golden horseshoe region by 2030. I don’t know, is that … I don’t know if that’s a stat.

Igor Dragovic: I think it might be the 2040 one, but that might have been Ed Sajecki from Mississauga …

Andrew la Fleur: Ed Sajecki. That’s right. Yeah.

Igor Dragovic: … who identified that number, but it’s something crazy. We’re going to add another 3,000,000 and just over 1,000,000 something to the greater golden horseshoe region, which the growth plan covers. That’s where they got that region from, but by 2041, reference.

It’s going to continue growing. That’s what the forecast says. That’s a lot of people. That’s still going to drive demand for a lot. Housing and things like that and jobs and product. The city’s going to be more dense. It’s going to be a bigger city. It’s going to continue to be a growing city. I mean, I try to think up of what could realistically drive people away from Toronto.

Andrew la Fleur: Yes. What could change this trajectory?

Igor Dragovic: Exactly.

Andrew la Fleur: I mean, as you said, we have 200 years of history now. It’s a pretty strong track record, but let’s play the hypothetical. What could potentially change this trend? What could drive people away? What are your thoughts? I mean, what would it take to significantly change this trajectory.

Igor Dragovic: I mean, I don’t know. I think about it a lot, and it’s like you really have to come, I think … It has to come from the federal government to limit immigration, or we have to screw something up politically. I don’t want to say screw something up, but they elect leaders that aren’t as open to immigration, things like that.

Andrew la Fleur: Right.

Igor Dragovic: I don’t want to point to America and say they are doing that, but with Trump coming in, that is, I’ve heard of people saying that we’ve seen greater interest in real estate and things like that as a result of protectionist policies. I think that’s a better word.

Protectionist policies may limit our growth, that as well, it doesn’t have to a war on our soil, but maybe some sort of an incident globally. That again, could unfortunately, for a certain population, could work in our favor. I mean, you look at how many people have settled here due to wars as refugees and things like that.

Andrew la Fleur: Absolutely.

Igor Dragovic: One thing I’m trying to figure out, I mean, those things, I don’t foresee those things …

Andrew la Fleur: Let’s talk, I mean, especially with your expertise and your background, what about the supply side of the equation? Do you see any scenario where there is a massive influx, too much influx, of housing, of too much housing coming in that would have a downward pressure on housing pressures in the greater golden horseshoe?

Igor Dragovic: I think that would be a positive, right?

Andrew la Fleur: Right.

Igor Dragovic: Here’s the thing. I remember talking at the ministry about this stuff. There’s been a lot of discussions over the last year about supply, demand. Which one is it? What are we doing? What you have to understand is that we’re building 40-something thousand units per year, in the last few years, in this region, which is a lot of supply being added.

Complaining that the supply isn’t there is not a great argument because when you compare it to other places like San Francisco and San Francisco is the best one, they build like a tenth of what we do annually.

We’re churning out housing units all the time. Our real estate market is a very healthy one. I mean, you can ask any developer/builder and all they’re doing is, “We’re looking for land. We’re looking for land to build more houses.”

It’s working out, but when you look at things since the ’80s, what we saw was a lot of development. A significant amount of development, both residential and non-residential space being added. A lot of people have indicated that there was a bit of an over-supply, especially with both residential and non-residential spaces. Commercial space, office buildings.

I mean, half of the financial district literally was built out during the ’80s. That over-supply, yes, prices did plummet. Yes, it was a bit of a tough time to be in the industry from 1989 to ’96 or so, but what you saw over that time was a large supply of housing that was affordable that allowed a lot of people to come and settle here in the ’90s, in the 2000s. Only now, we’re saying that the house prices are too high.

An over-supply isn’t particularly bad for a growing region, because that space will eventually or should eventually be taken up. Look at what happened with our office buildings. We built so many office buildings in the ’80s and some people said, “Too much supply. They’ll never be filled.” Our vacancies are the tightest in North America, in downtown.

When you talk to employers, they’re clamoring to find space in downtown in different parts. There’s a lot of demand. I think that maybe the opposite might drive people away. Like that increase in prices, but not housing. Not just housing, right, because I think when you combine it all, like the basket of goods.

Food prices are particularly also getting expensive. It seems like daycare and whatnot that as a Province and regionally, we have to think about things like that, but that’s more of when you combine all those things, I think that high prices might actually be more of a deterrent.

Andrew la Fleur: Right. It’s definitely a double-edged sword.

Igor Dragovic:  Reasonable goals is 3 to 5 or 10% a year, depending on location and type of house, is reasonable growth, but 15% a year, maybe that might drive people away from living here.

Andrew la Fleur: Right. At some point, it just flat out becomes unaffordable.

Igor Dragovic: [crosstalk 00:24:31] point whether …

Andrew la Fleur: Certainly, I think on that note, a lot of people have hit that breaking point when it comes to purchasing, buying their own housing. As a result, they’re becoming renters. We’re seeing record high numbers in the rental market as well.

I don’t know if you look at that market too much or you study that too much or you’ve done research or talk about that in what you do, but I’m curious to see here what your thoughts are on the rental market as we continue to see …

Urbanization just brought out stats today, fourth quarter rental status. All the numbers just continue to show that rental market is growing at double digits, much, much higher than what it typically has grown at. I’m wondering what your take is on that market and, again, if you see anything on the horizon that could potentially change that.

Igor Dragovic: I mean, in terms of rents, what we have seen is, yes, they’ve definitely gone up. It’s taken a little bit longer for them to start to creep up relative to prices of housing, but they have lately been increasing. Interestingly enough, with Ontario’s rent control, the policy that they’ve introduced as part of their housing plan, that might, I guess, have an impact on what’s happening.

What you may see, I mean, I’m not an expert, especially say like Shawn Hildebrand on Urbanation on the rental market, but what can happen is, or what could have happened is that more so recently, the condos or the units that you see with higher rents, have been put back on the market to get that higher rent so that you can consistently raise your rents over the next say, 10 years, at the standard rate that the rent control legislation puts out.

They may have increased it now, and then you may not see as big an increase over the next 10 years. I’ve heard of people that, how can I say? I don’t want to say they kicked tenants out, but they essentially have thought about doing that so that they can raise rents or have a family member move in so they can raise rents.

Now, you’ve sort of protected that a little bit as a Province in terms of going to the Land Tribunals Board, with that. Land and Tenants’ Board, sorry.

These kinds of things. We’ll see how that’ll play out, but I don’t anticipate rents to be increasing that much on the residential side over the next few years with rent control in place.

Andrew la Fleur: I think it’s a tale of two markets. It’s existing rents and new rents where the existing rents obviously are covered under rent control now, across the board, for all units, condos, everything. They’re going to obviously be 1, 2%, whatever the allowable rate is each year.

Then, you have the new product coming into the market for the first time, that is going to be rented at the much higher current today’s rate. Those are the rents that we’re seeing as jumping up at 10% or more a year at the moment.

You’re right. I mean, it’s early day still in this new era of rent control. We’ll have to see in a couple of years how it ultimately plays out, but at the moment, the rents on new product is just running away like a freight train as well.

Igor Dragovic: Absolutely.

Andrew la Fleur: Again, it’s rent control. It’s a double edged sword like it’s great if you’re in an existing property and you don’t want to move. It makes things a lot more challenging if you’re new to the city or if you need to move and you’re looking to rent a new space for the first time.

Igor Dragovic: Yeah. It’s a bit tough. I mean, how much rents have gone up. I’m not sure. I think the rent right now … What would it be in downtown? Like $2,000 a month or so for a one bedroom or one den?

Andrew la Fleur: One bedroom’s are averaging about $2,000. Yep.

Igor Dragovic: I mean, if you were to say calculate your procuring costs for that, it might be around that level. Literally about $2,000 when you look at your monthly … I mean, depending on the price, down payment, that whole deposit structure, but essentially, your mortgage monthly, your maintenance, property taxes, and insurance, give-or-take, at about $2,000 a month.

You’re given an option now, at this point, whether you want to own or rent. If you want to own, you probably do need to have a down payment ready, with renting, not so much.

Andrew la Fleur: Right.

Igor Dragovic: See how that’ll play out.

Andrew la Fleur: Exactly. Anything else that you’re looking at or interested in studying or working on right now that you want to talk about or anything in terms of looking ahead to the real estate market in 2018? Anything else you’re tracking?

Igor Dragovic: I mean, I’m always tracking things across the region. I’m a big believer in that jobs drive housing. I’ve always, I mean, we’ve probably talked about this before, given the work that I do at the city and have done at the Province, a lot of it’s largely focusing on non-residential or commercial development.

I’m always a huge proponent for more non-residential space to be developed, whether that’s industrial space, retail or offices. Things like that. I like to see those jobs because I can tell you right now, without a job, you’re not going to get approved for a mortgage, unless you have a really …

You’re privately wealthy or you have money or something like that. I can tell you right now, go to a bank and they won’t approve you unless you can prove that you have an income.

Andrew la Fleur: You have an income.

Igor Dragovic: I’m a big proponent of that. I usually track where those things are happening across the region and where the new transit investments and infrastructure investments are happening and combining those two. Identify growing in residential markets and things like that.

Andrew la Fleur: On that note, what are some of the up-and-coming pockets or areas that you could share with us that real estate investors in particular might be interested in. “Hey, here’s where the jobs are going to be in the future. This is an area that might be good for investment today.”

Igor Dragovic: There’s a ton. I mean, all across the city. If you look at … Say, if you were to step outside of Toronto, you can see Vaughan is an interesting one, right around Vaughan metropolitan center, because you have a trifecta there of a subway. You have fantastic highway access. You have the Concord Rail Yard. You have employers that are slowly, bit-by-bit, starting to potentially move there.

I mean, KPMG had an office building built by Smart Center there. There’s another one. I’m not sure if it’s under construction at the moment, but I know it’s gotten approval. It’s going to go ahead. You have Vaughan’s. Vaughan’s definitely an interesting place to look at.

On the other side, you have Markham as well, which is being built out largely by Remington and that’s going to … When you combine that with Buttonville. We’ll see how Buttonville, the airport, plays out, because that was a very, very large proposal by Cadillac Fairview, but in combination, there could be a lot of potential there because you’ll have a lot of jobs there. You have a more dense community. Those two pockets, for sure.

I’m just trying to think if Peel or somewhere in Mississauga is interesting. In terms of the city, I would definitely … Downtown’s a great place, but I’m huge on accessibility for some reason.

To me, it’s how can I get around where I need to get in the shortest time and place so it’s all about locating close to maybe subway stations or where two subway stations intersect like Blue and Yonge, or St. George or things like that and where you have good highway access.

Things like that, I think, are important in terms of getting to jobs and to shopping and getting out of the city if you want to, as well. Probably downtown, maybe the shoulder areas, like Liberty Village.

You stop at Eastern. Unilever. There’s a large proposal there as well, on that site. Potentially where the new Edwin [inaudible 00:33:24]’s being built, along with, that could be an interesting well and as well, maybe the [inaudible 00:33:30]. There’s always opportunities across there, but I think it’s the access. Access is big for me.

Andrew la Fleur: Right. Access. You put it well. Accessibility, transit, as well as roads and highways are so critical.

Igor Dragovic: Yeah. Sorry.

Andrew la Fleur: Go ahead.

Igor Dragovic: I was going to say, it’s strange in the city because half the people will say you need transit access and the other half will say highway. I wouldn’t …

Andrew la Fleur: Go for both.

Igor Dragovic: Yeah, exactly. I would definitely not disocclude or include highways from that assessment of accessibility places.

Andrew la Fleur: That’s a great point.

Igor Dragovic: Keep that in mind, right?

Andrew la Fleur: Yeah. It’s a great point. Igor, thank you so much for your time. People want to find you online, what’s the best to get in touch with you? What’s the best way for people to do that?

Igor Dragovic: I mean, you can go on my website. It’s just idragovic.wordpress.com. Then, on there, if you go on my About Me section, essentially you can connect with me via Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, whatever you’d like. From there on, we can further connect.

Andrew la Fleur: Great. I’ll definitely include a link to that in the show notes for this episode. Once again, thanks for your time today. Really appreciate it. Look forward to talking to you again soon.

Igor Dragovic: Absolutely. No problem, Andrew. Great chatting with you as well.

Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to the True Condos Podcast. Remember, your positive reviews make a big difference to the show. To learn more about condo investing, become a True Condos subscriber by visiting truecondos.com.