Buckaroo, I would take the opposite approach and stay put...the article is written as a warning, not to jump in.....
as for asbestos....fine if you know where it is, so as not to touch or move it, or do anything else with it....but how many of us know where it is, in the first place....???
sure I will have a better idea now, after that news about the underlay has broken....so now some really serious research to find out where it is in my houses.......
did some calculations on a couple of my houses today....one has returned capital growth of 9% pa for 8 years....then 8% in the last year.....thats not bad...its not worth shouting about....just good steady growth year in year out,
the other one I measured started from a higher cost base, and its showing 9%
all years for the past 5 years....
so I am using the 9% as the basis for the estimated growth for the next 5 years on all properties....
its nothing like the higher estimated returns from superfunds or the stockmarket, but it should cover my retirement years.....on a conservative basis
as for asbestos....fine if you know where it is, so as not to touch or move it, or do anything else with it....but how many of us know where it is, in the first place....???
sure I will have a better idea now, after that news about the underlay has broken....so now some really serious research to find out where it is in my houses.......
did some calculations on a couple of my houses today....one has returned capital growth of 9% pa for 8 years....then 8% in the last year.....thats not bad...its not worth shouting about....just good steady growth year in year out,
the other one I measured started from a higher cost base, and its showing 9%
all years for the past 5 years....
so I am using the 9% as the basis for the estimated growth for the next 5 years on all properties....
its nothing like the higher estimated returns from superfunds or the stockmarket, but it should cover my retirement years.....on a conservative basis