There were 254 new listings yesterday and 97 sales, for a sell/list of 38.19%. Inventory reached 8,745 of which 2,470, or 28.24%, were over 90s.
There were 254 new listings yesterday and 97 sales, for a sell/list of 38.19%. Inventory reached 8,745 of which 2,470, or 28.24%, were over 90s.
Filed under Daily Numbers
The Best Real Estate Anywhere! 
It’s the end of the world as we know it.
sing it with me…
It’s the end of the world as we know it.
It’s the end of the world as we know it.
It’s the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
Six o’clock – TV hour. Don’t get caught in foreign
towers. Slash and burn, return, listen to yourself
churn. Lock it in, uniforming, book burning, blood
letting. Every motive escalate. Automotive incinerate.
Light a candle, light a motive. Step down, step down.
Watch your heel crush, crushed, uh-oh, this means no
fear cavalier. Renegade steer clear! A tournament,
tournament, a tournament of lies. Offer me solutions,
offer me alternatives and I decline.
It’s the end of the world as we know it.
It’s the end of the world as we know it.
It’s the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
Repost (just for Rob to give us numbers).
Here are 4 possible events: you have 100 points available and have to split them between the four events. What is your split?
These are the events: in three years from now we have that
1) Van RE house price crash: down between 20 and 30%;
2) Van RE house price correction: down between 10 and 20%;
3) Van RE house price are unchanged in real terms;
4) Van RE house prices have some appreciation.
Rob, please, I invite you to provide your numbers, for future records.
Domus:
Repeat: you’ve claimed a couple times that I’ve undergone some sort of turnaround. I asked you to back that up. You responded by asking me to make predictions (or as you’ve termed them “wild guesses”) based on your 4 outcomes .
Answer my original question clearly (“do you have any evidence of your claim?”) If you don’t have any evidence, come out and admit that your accusation of dishonesty and sophistry was uncalled for and based on a faulty conclusion on your part. That’s fair, isn’t it? Everything I’ve written on the blog is still up, and on the record. Use it to prove your point, or stop making false claims.
You do that and I’ll give you some numbers. If you’re not willing to back up your claims with evidence then this discussion is going nowhere. No hard feelings, but I think there’s a responsibility on the part of all of us to retain some connection to reality.
Rob,
as mentioned in (many) previous posts, you are asking me to give you a single post in which you denied the possibility of a crash. This is not possible because, although you always implied that such event would be unimaginable, you never said so explicitly. This is what I mean by sophistry: the deliberate use of convoluted arguments to avoid any clear conclusion.
This is the reason why I did not show you a post: there isn’t one. In the same way, there is also no post in which you explicitly mentioned that a full-blown crash is likely (that is, until your recent posts). There is just nothing: if I had to rely on your previous posts, it would be a lot of talk about details.
I am not accusing you of anything: what i wrote yesterday is that I am frankly surprised of your sudden change in ‘tone’. You are using correction and crash liberally lately, you didn’t use to to that. Shall I infer anything from it? Are we playing language games or there is a new message you want to convey?
Now: I am giving the clear opportunity to state in a simple and concise way what your expectations are about this market. Expectations are usually wrong, mostly in quantity and often in quality. However they are the very thing investor use when making choices: it is not wrong to have them. Jim Rogers very clear expectations, so did Greenspan, so does Soros….and down to more normal people.
Why the big secret Rob?
I don’t see a crash of Vancouver RE as it happened in the US. There may be a few months of slowdown, however, which is healthy.
Can the guys posting here explain why they are expecting a crash ?!!
…..maybe because most people would have to have 100 years mortgages to pay for houses? What do you think?
The over 90’s % is lower YOY. Which means that the market is more of a sellers market than it was last year at this time.
And YOYOY they are roughly the same (28%)
Interesting stuff.
Domus – do you think we’ll crack 10,000 listings this month?
I think not. Still early. It will be March.
Domus:
Are you really basing your argument on my implied meanings when my explicit statements run counter to them? That’s pretty close to admitting you’re hearing voices in your head.
Despite your claim (“there is also no post in which you explicitly mentioned that a full-blown crash is likely (that is, until your recent posts)” I don’t think a full blown crash is likely, and I’ve said that recently. I have not said, unless I’m very much mistaken, that a crash is likely. If you’re under the impression that my implied meaning is that a crash is imminent, let me disabuse you of that notion.
You’re not giving me an opportunity to go on record. I’ve been on record for years now already, without your help. What you’re doing is ignoring what I’ve said and trying to define me in your terms so that you can vindicate yourself. I’m not biting. We can agree to disagree on that.
What I’m not willing to let slide is your claim that I’ve changed my view on the nature of the market, that I’ve been dishonest, or that I’m engaging in sophistry. Those are unsupportable comments and are based on either an intentional misreading of my words or a lack of understanding on your part. The latter is easily solved without name calling. The former is offside.
You’ve answered the question about evidence by sidestepping it. You can’t find evidence for your claim, so your agruing that my implied meaning supports your claim. Here’s some evidence to counter your illusion. Last April you and I discussed a bubble. I wrote:
“So, is it a bubble? When I hear bubble I think ‘82 style correction of 40%+. I don’t think we’re there. I might be wrong. You might be right. ”
I go on to discuss my preference for picking mulitiple possible outcomes rather than limiting myself to one specific outcome, but the point is that I explicitly indicated that I accept a bubble, and the subsequent crash, as a distinct possibility. That was 9 months ago. You can’t find a post wherein I deny the possibility of a crash because I have consistently taken the opposite position.
You are right that I’m using correction liberally these days. Prices are even higher than they’ve been in the past. Much of the economy is in disarray. Should I stick with an evaluation that is years out of date, or should I, upon receipt of new information, change my evaluation? Is doing so dishonest?
Rob,
I take it that:
1) you think I hear voices (…I do own a pretty cool iPod touch which I got for Christmas, which I use regularly for podcasts….);
2) you now give a positive probability to a crash, upon receiving new information. This I take as an update on an old belief whoch associated no (or infinitely small) probability to such an event. No problem there: expectations must be updated!
3) the post you picked is a typical of example of: yes, no, maybe…..fair enough, you are in this trade;
4) I would still be curious to know the numbers you associate to the above events.
For the record: I do not believe we will see a crash within a year. I give it 3 years.
Also for the record: a crash for me is a drop above 25% of peak values (which is to say, delete 50% of appreciation from bottom values). Where does that take us? Early 2005?
mostly silent reader here:
could you guys cut the paranoid BS already please?
Rob’s just doing what he likes to do: provide the numbers with an opinion.
as far as I can tell, he always said:
– in the long run, RE goes up (doesn’t rule out a downturn).
– always be prepared to be able to hold RE through those downturns.
– don’t jump in with your eyes closed and wallet open.
even though I am in the bear camp, I believe Rob’s a good guy. if he really was just in it for the money, why would he bother with the daily crap he gets?
“Domus:
Repeat: you’ve claimed a couple times that I’ve undergone some sort of turnaround. I asked you to back that up. You responded by asking me to make predictions (or as you’ve termed them “wild guesses”) based on your 4 outcomes .” -Rob
Rob, why don’t you just poop off.
Why does Domus even bother posting? He’s been wrong for literally years, and now he’s saying a crash is another 3 years off, so covering himself left and right. He may as well just basically say he has no idea and save everyone the grief of having to endure his useless posts.
Rob,
If I were you, I would closed the blog. Why waste energy?
If you don’t like this blog and it has no value to you, why are you here
Why?
Thomas,
thanks, I am flattered of your consideration.
If I may say, my posts are basically saying one thing only: now is not the time to buy. Do you want me to give you dates?
By the way, I like reading the blog, have nothing personal against Rob and find it funny that so many people get upset when I suggest the crash possibility.
I have been on this blog for roughly 18 months (check if you want). Yes, I expected a major downturn by now: these things take years to happen. Of course, you make your own judgement: buy that condo if you really think I am so wrong, by all means…
Domus:
You’re coming to the wrong conclusions again.
When I say that you’re hearing voices what I mean is that you ignore what someone explicitly writes and instead decide the person has written what you want them to have said. You’re better off paying attention to what was said, and what the person does. In my case I haven’t recommended buying, and I’ve advised that I’m not selling. I’ve also said that I don’t think a crash is likely, but that fundamentals make most purchases unwise at this time. Those are statements and actions. Add them up. If you think that means I give positive probablity to a crash I can’t for the life of me see how you get there. I’ll repeat: I don’t think a crash is likely, although I will allow that a crash is possible.
The post I picked was a) from more than a year ago b) indicated that I recognized that a crash was a possibility. It was a conversation with you. You’ve indicated two different opinions, depending on the day: one in which I have only recently admitted the possibility of a crash, and a second in which I apparently think a crash is likely. This is in clear conflict with what I’ve explicitly written (I don’t think a crash is likely), and what I’ve done (I haven’t recommended buying, and I haven’t sold).
I think that you are honest in your confusion. You can’t present evidence for your claim that I’ve changed my tune, and I can produce evidence that I haven’t. You’ve clearly misread me in the last two days (twice in this thread you claim that I think a crash is likely, despite my repeated statements to the contrary).
I’m going to try to make it easy for you. As we discussed in April, a lot of this is about risk tolerance. You like risk, and I don’t. I seek to minimize risk, you don’t seem to care.
You want to make specific predictions that really don’t have any pay-offs, but have a large chance of being incorrect. You recognize that you’ve done this before, and you want to continue. You like risking your credibility.
I don’t want to make predictions because I feel that the future is unknowable. However, since we’ll be spending the rest of our lives there, I want to prepare for it and reduce risk. The payoff is greater, and the chance of being right in a manner that counts is greater.
You make wild guesses at probabilities, and I try to prepare for as many outcomes as possible. You seem to want me to abandon my succesful approach and adopt your unworkable approach. Am I missing something?
I’ve done well with my approach. You admit that you’ve done poorly (terrible market timer, bad predictor).
My approach says buy when it cash flows between 25% and 40% down, has an IRR in double digits after 5 years, and a rent mulitplier of less than 180. I can’t find those properties now, so I’m not buying. If the market tanks (more than 40% down), the properties that I and my clients own will survive based on the way we bought. If the market corrects (say 20%), we’ll be better off. Both scenarios will afford buying opportunities, assuming the metrics can be met. If the market stays stagnant, and metrics don’t change, we’ll remain in a holding pattern and wait. We’ll enjoy tax benefits and mortgage paydown, and not much more. If the market continues to go up, we’ll miss capital appreciation on properties with a significant risk factor (i.e., they don’t fit a disciplined buy model), but I don’t like risk anyway.
I’m going to guess that you and I differ somehow. I don’t recommend buying most investment properties (individual circumstances can always dictate different courses of action) right now. You, on the other hand…don’t recommend buying now either. O.K, we’re the essentially same on that score.
I don’t recommend selling now unless you can’t afford to hold (due to finances, age or health). You, on the other hand, recommend…what exactly? Selling no matter what, because we’re at the top? Am I right about that? Yet you admit you’re a bad market timer and have been wrong before, so what is it: sell now or hold?
I recommend providing my clients with as much info as possible and letting them decide what they want to do. I allow that some clients will be wiser and more informed than I am about many, many things. You, on the other hand, admit that you’re often wrong and are a bad market timer. What do you think my clients should do? Listen to you, or to me?
You’ve called me dishonest, and called me a sophist. You’ve also said you aren’t accusing me of anything. You’re quoting me from a year ago, but saying there’s no evidence of my position to be found. Frankly, I think you’re digging yourself a bigger hole.
I’ll answer your questions. But first, admit that I haven’t said a crash is likely, that I haven’t changed my tune, that I’m not being dishonest, and I’m not using sophistry, and maybe (just maybe), that in your haste to prove your prediction right you’ve made some bad assumptions about me.
Rob,
I have no personal issues with you. I am surprised to see what you wrote about not buying in the last post: my understanding of your position was that you were still bullish on RE.
If I were a owner occupier, I would personally share the recommendations: I would not buy new RE for the life of me, but I also would not sell. The reason for that is that I am a bad market timer.
However, I have the presumption not to be as bad in saying that a tanking of some kind will take place soon. You seem to agree, at least to a certain extent. The only problem is that timing the market is bad: so selling RE is a dangerous game.
The metrics are not there. What can change the metrics? higher income or lower prices.
I bet on the second.
Quick comment – there use to be “For sale” and “For rent” (or something similar) on the top links, but I don’t see them now. Not sure if that is accidental or whatnot.
Speaking of rentals, what’s everyone advice on hunting down a good rental place? Craigslist seems to have a lot of chaff, papers seem hit or miss and the asian papers require a lot of groundwork to make sure the place is actually suitable.
Craigslist is the most expensive, based on what I hear from people. Some people I know just went out looking for “for rent” signs in good areas.
I am not sure why, but they often turn out to be at a 20% discount on Craigslist.
Anyway, don’t worry. Rents are the same or marginally lower than this time last year.
“now is not the time to buy. ”
Put the word “now” on a time scale, the “now” have been on it every minute every day since the run up.
Yeah, craigslist is for the lazy: lazy landlords (free advertising, post from your computer) and lazy renters (“hey, I don’t have to pound any pavement to find a place!”). Hence the premium, methinks.
Keep up the good work -A-
The truth is on your side.
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
Hi Domus, anytme soon you will be invited out for a coffee, and or, get censored.
The blogger/realtor man hates being challenged by the truth.
This Domus-Rob exchange seems to have hit a snag and needs some refreshing. It is reasonably predictable that Domus won’t concede any points to Rob about Rob’s professionalism and consistency, and so we are likely to remain in the dark about Rob’s predictions, even though he said he’d answer if Domus conceded that Rob hasn’t changed his tune.
It is unclear what Domus’ motive is for trying to get numbers out of Rob specifically. Why not ask everyone what their numerical predictions are? I’d be interested in hearing what everyone had to say about the numbers. One problem I have with the question is that the probability brackets aren’t designed well…. how about this:
Comparing numbers from January 2008 and January 2011, the median SFH price in the GVRD will…
1) crash (down >30%)
2) correct (down 10-30%)
3) remain approximately unchanged (between -10% and +10%)
4) appreciate modestly (up 10-30%)
5) make laughable the disparity between rich and poor (up >30%)
Distributing 100 percentage points, my predictions are:
1) 2%
2) 15%
3) 45%
4) 33%
5) 5%
What do the rest of you think? I await your slander. =)
It’s all academic; I have official government data which shows that within 10 years there will be more people selling homes in BC than buying.
Not a good long term investment.
My East Van friend will be working a Joe’s Cappuccino, earning minimum wage in his golden years to supplement his income just to pay the hydro bill on the shack which he thinks is retirement plan.
I think that one of the big problems with these prediction discussions is that people are way too hung up on outcomes. Suppose I bet you even money that, with one roll of a die, you won’t roll a 6. Suppose you then roll a 6.
It would be stupid for you to say “Oh, that was clearly a bad bet. You were totally wrong, because a 6 came up.”
Yeah, I was wrong, but that doesn’t make the bet wrong.
I think it’s a similar thing with the markets. The rational thing to do is to evaluate the facts, work out the probabilities, and bet accordingly. Thus, one shouldn’t bet on a grossly overvalued market increasing in value. If that market should happen to go up for a year or two, it just means that the market went up. It doesn’t meant that the bet was wrong.
Effectively, Rob metrics are a rule of thumb that put the odds in his favour, and ensure that his clients can wait for the long-term odds to dominate the outcomes. (i.e. allow his clients to roll the die 100 times, so that a few early sixes don’t cause the game to end.)
On another note, it’s quite unfortunate being a bear. When the market goes up, you take a lot of abuse. When the market goes down, you can’t really abuse the people who lost everything because that would just be cruel. The one consolation is that you get to be right. 🙂
It’s still more fun being a bull though.
1) crash (down >30%)
2) correct (down 10-30%)
3) remain approximately unchanged (between -10% and +10%) (I think this one should have been narrowed down a little to -5% and +5%)
4) appreciate modestly (up 10-30%)
5) make laughable the disparity between rich and poor (up >30%)
Distributing 100 percentage points, my predictions are:
1) 3%
2) 10%
3) 84%
4) 3%
5) 0%
in this market -10% will feel like a crash to many’s psyche.
Where did you guys study stats?
A virtual certainty cannot be expressed in % of probabilities
No one really can accurately predict the direction of the market. However with all the creativity (thanks to Muir et al.) 40 year mort, No money down… Now with interest rates dropping. If prices and sales aren’t up we surely know we are in trouble….
LongTimeReader
thanks for the editing (and brackets!), I like your questionnaire’s looks.
And am happy to know what people think!
Someone a while back said that a crash when the last bear gives up and concedes that price swill not go down: judging from the numbers above, many bears seem to have bullish numbers. A sign of what’s to come?
1) crash (down >30%)
2) correct (down 10-30%)
3) remain approximately unchanged (between -10% and +10%) (I think this one should have been narrowed down a little to -5% and +5%)
4) appreciate modestly (up 10-30%)
5) make laughable the disparity between rich and poor (up >30%)
Distributing 100 percentage points, my predictions are:
1) 35%
2) 55%
3) 10%
4) 0%
5) 0%
The only direction is down. The question really is how much?
HEY ROB!!!!
I appreciate your #s/input!:))
A paid advertorial for Rob, the writer has not officially endorsed Rob as his RE agent (yet)
Wow Alan Angell on global. You guys see that? Pretty extreme for a Realtor.
Long Time Reader, switch 3 and 4 and I agree with your figures.
-A- : “A virtual certainty cannot be expressed in % of probabilities”
Why not ? something that is virtually certain to occur would have a probability of close to 100%.
Snick: “Rob, why don’t you just poop off.”
Its Rob’s blog, there’s no onus on him to leave, if you don’t like his opinion, why don’t you take your own advice or start your own blog ?
Domus: “By the way, I like reading the blog, have nothing personal against Rob and find it funny that so many people get upset when I suggest the crash possibility.”
Domus, I don’t think people get upset, they just disagree or have a different opinion. When they express this, you assume they are upset. There is a difference 🙂
1) crash (down >30%)
2) correct (down 10-30%)
3) remain approximately unchanged (between -10% and +10%) (I think this one should have been narrowed down a little to -5% and +5%)
4) appreciate modestly (up 10-30%)
5) make laughable the disparity between rich and poor (up >30%)
1) 50%
2) 30%
3) 15%
4) 5%
5) 0%
Rob, Jeff (in Miami) – how do you view the numbers thus far? Too early to call a trend?
Here’s mine based on past experience in Vancouver
1) 33%
2) 66%
3) 1%
4) 0%
5) 0%
My bad! I didn’t read the ‘2008’ part. My new numbers are as follows:
1) crash (down >30%)
2) correct (down 10-30%)
3) remain approximately unchanged (between -10% and +10%)
4) appreciate modestly (up 10-30%)
5) make laughable the disparity between rich and poor (up >30%)
Distributing 100 percentage points, my predictions are:
1) 10%
2) 80%
3) 6%
4) 4%
5) 0%
“Wow Alan Angell on global. You guys see that? Pretty extreme for a Realtor…” – paul
No. What did he say? I only saw Bill Good’s chum(p) Rennie yapping on the CTV News.
Skeptic: Poop off.
Hey Paul, I missed Alan Angell on global. What was the gist…?
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
man i haven’t heard that expression foe several decades…. thnx for the nostalgia trip
i couldn’t find anything on the global
site…got a link?
It was Allan saying the market is going to correct whether or not people like it. He said someting about 3-400k haircuts on West Van homes already.He said 5% decline this year and to break even in the valley after 3 years you would be lucky. I am very surprised. He has been in real estate for 34 years and has a massive business. Many other agents will not like what he said. I think it is good to bring some balance to the news whether he is right or not.
found it!
http://www.canada.com/globaltv/bc/video/index.html
at 17 minutes….. now i know what pastrick looks like…… aaaargh
1) crash (down >30%)
2) correct (down 10-30%)
3) remain approximately unchanged (between -10% and +10%)
4) appreciate modestly (up 10-30%)
5) make laughable the disparity between rich and poor (up >30%)
Distributing 100 percentage points, my predictions are:
1) 15%
2)69%
3) 10%
4) 5%
5) 1%
What that Allan guy said was very similar to some of the moderate bulls I’ve heard lately. His comments weren’t really bearish at all. I wondering if he was holding back, just saying what he can get away with.
Domus:
“my understanding of your position was that you were still bullish on RE”.
Yeah, sure, whatever. You’re all over the place, Domus. You say you’re not accusing me of anything after you call me dishonest and a sophist. You say I’ve recently acknowledged the probability of a crash when I’ve done nothing of the kind. You say you can’t find quotes to back up your statements, and blame that on me. Maybe you should read a little more closely before coming to your conclusions. You rely on the implied meaning even though it conflicts with what I’ve explicitly written. Its kind of comical.
Allan Mark Angell is an interesting character. Can anyone find the video interview that hit the web in late ’05? The closest I came was http://www.weblisting.ca/td.jsp?forum=16&thread=1505 I’d like to see it again if someone can run it down.
1) 40%
2)40%
3) 15%
4) 5%
5) 0%
Dude, Johnyrent, Alex:
You guys talk about fundamentals yet most of you predict declines that would not bring us in line with fundamentals (30% would not bring mortgages in line with rents — not even close). I can’t understand your reasoning. If a market out of line with fundamentals is sustainable, why should there be any correction? Your less than 30% predictions make little more sense than the permanent appreciation predictions. It would seem to me, newcomer that I am, that you are picking those numbers, not because you have any theory that predicts them, but just because you think it will make you look reasonable, moderate and of sound judgment. Perhaps that is not the case.
Care to explain yourselves.
Rob – serious question – as everyone (well, my wife and her friends) are commenting on Angell’s comments – isn’t against the RE agent code of ‘ethics’ to say RE prices are falling – I thought that was not possible?
Just kidding, not trying to make you the scapegoat, your not (that said, I think you are a bear in disguise, you are not convinced the market can stay intact, imho).
Anyways, it looks like the market is showing cracks, wouldn’t you say?
Allan has been talking correction for over a year. His talk of 300-400 price cuts is new though.
Newcomer
A 30% correction would wipe out almost 35% of gains. Also, a 30% price correction would put pricing affordability here within striking distance of 40% of median income required for a a median priced home. Still high (too high) but then Vancouver has historically required a higher income to buy less house than in other parts of the country.
Still, I put two to one odds in favor of a higher correction than 30%, something I would not have predicted a year ago. I think 50% is a stretch, but then this whole market has been a stretch for the past number of years. Only the shadow really knows.
Well, we have the 30 year U.S. bond down to 4.18 percent. It has to be very near the bottom again. This is the third time since June 03.
How low can it go? This is weird because if it keeps going down it is approaching the Depression era levels.
For newcomer–
>>You guys talk about fundamentals yet most of you
predict declines that would not bring us in line with
fundamentals (30% would not bring mortgages in
line with rents — not even close). I can’t understand
your reasoning.<<
Cities like Vancouver and San Francisco have always been priced “above the fundamentals”–there’s always been a premium paid to live there, the premium may vary, sometimes in slumps it may approach “affordability”. But, fact is, there’s always people who acquired their $ outside of Van who want to live here, and since there are many amenities available in the city, people are willing to pay a higher percentage of their income to gain access to the water, parks, jobs, etc.
Hence, in Vancouver, always ask yourself
Whybuywhenucanrent?
WBWYCR:
“Cities like Vancouver and San Francisco have always been priced “above the fundamentals”–…”
I tend to agree, depending on where you draw the lines defining the city. I’ve said before that you can buy properties with good metrics in Maple Ridge while buying on the Westside of Vancouver will apparently make no sense at all, based on the numbers…yet a lot of smart and wealthy investors buy only Westside property, and pay the premium to do so. Whats the dif in rent between a two bedroom apartment in Pitt Meadows and one in Kits? What’s the dif in price?
“fact is, there’s always people who acquired their $ outside of Van who want to live here…”
Again, I tend to agree. I’ve had clients from London to Las Vegas sing the praises of Downtown Vancouver. They love it, want to live there, and buy rentals there. On other other hand, I have similar clients who decline to pay the premium and buy in the ‘burbs. Frankly, I think the line is drawn well west of Boundary.
WoW:
Mr. Angell called for a softening “in the next few months” at the end of 2005. If someone can find the video I mention you’ll see it. He was off with his prediction on the wider front, although he may have been right on for West Van, which is his main market. And he is, like Bob Rennie, a smart guy, no question.
Is the market showing cracks? You tell me. How different are list/sells and inventory from last year at this time?
Some posters here are certain about the near future. I’ve been uncertain of it ever since that time back in grade 2…, no, wait, I mean, I was uncertain even in the summer of 2006. You might remember a place I listed in Lynn Valley. The summer slowdown of 2006 confounded me, and that listing was emblematic of it. Here are the links (check out Snick’s comments – he even claimed that VHB and I were the same person!) http://rireb.blogspot.com/search?q=lynn+valley
1) 40%
2) 55%
3) 5%
4) 0%
5) 0%