tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,446
- Reactions
- 6,471
2010 "The Peak":
Maybe you should be more specific in ya riddles, someone might start to think that you're saying 2012 is the time to buy!.......
Never people have realised property is not an investment but a neccessity property is reverting back to its fairly valued 100 year mean from there it will be impossible for property to ever print a positive return in real terms again, it is a depreciating asset after all. it is well documented in this thread property prices are depressed in both inflationary and deflationary times due to being leveraged you cant win best to buy gold it goes up in both win win! Everone knows the true way to increase your worth is through precious metals sure its miles of its highs and dont yeild a thing but precious metals have great fundamentals just wait till the world ends youll see!
Well, if you're going to include dependent children your argument is irrational from there.What? You don't know anyone with kids? That is two for a start.
Well, if you're going to include dependent children your argument is irrational from there.
If you are discussing two or more generations living in the same household, you would surely assume said generations are both going to be adult.
Now you are just getting silly!
By selling I realize profit that can be better used elsewhere.
if I cant find anything straight up then I have it set ready to go with pretty well all else freehold.
Industrial is all returning far more /1000 than domestic.
Costs way way less to develop and Tennant s pay ALL outgoings.
They are much better tennents and once established are there for years.
I can determine the property value on rent return.
The latest is small 120-150 square meter sheds for tradies.Each sell for $130K or rent for $15K a year.
Cheap but great return. I can fit 8 on the 2200 square meter block I hold currently.
Thats where part of the proceeds will find a home.
So not a contradiction as some would ha
ve "hoped".
Very wise.
Showing that not getting emotionally attached is very important.
However, I don't think the majority of property "investors" have a clue what could happen.
If you have 3+ properties, and haven't gone into damage control since the GFC first raised it's head, then you only have yourself to blame.
MW
PS Where is Robots?
what do you suggest as damage control? Property prices would have to depress quite alot to make this worthwile and thats if you nail the top and bottom. have not seen this as a viable option for any of the markets where my properties are located even now with the advantage of hindsight, without it your dreaming
What sort of equity do you have in your properties?
No alot 70-80% lvr
No alot 70-80% lvr
No alot 70-80% lvr
The problem you have is multiple.
Without increasing equity your Losing most of your interest.
Rent which off sets the interest is wasted ---- the bank loves it.
You take the risk and loss --- they take their risk free interest.
So if your interest is say $60k a year in 3 yrs you'll have lost
Most of $180k Taking a loss from the highs now would be better than
Bleeding to death.
So as you can see your the banks patsy.
Im only loosing what they generate so its not quite as bad as that (this isnt the full story anywho) work through the sums on liquidating dont forget tax and cost of reentry. how much further does the market have to fall to make it worthwhile? I understand you have found outher opportunities but lets say you havnt your just joe average having held for however long youve held them for?
Kind of like how the sharemarket invertors held onto their bluechips as they didn't want to trigger capital gains, and exit and re-entry costs.
Yeah, I can see the benefit in that.
On the contrary, it's entirely rational and I thank you for 'reframing' with such clarity.Irrational? How so, it was more an observation than an argument and as is typical we are focusing on the throw away lines and not the actual argument.
Let me frame my actual argument it a different way as we seem to be hung up on the minutia.
As pointed out by 'im sparticus' housing has become far more aspirational than utilitarian, house sizes have increased and in many instances the number of people in them has decreased. The bottom line is that we now appear to have (guesstimation here sans stats) what should be a high in the ratio between square meterage of domestic housing and residents. There is room, under financial pressure, for that ratio to head back down and for people in one way and another to consolidate making better use of the resources available to them. This is a factor that is not taken into consideration when stats are done on supply v demand as the stats are done in a 'static accounting' fashion, that is my actual argument. Do you find that irrational?
Yes, I agree. Perhaps especially confidence which seems at a pretty low ebb at present.I simply believe that housing supply is a little more elastic than people think. It reacts more to monetary conditions, economic conditions and confidence factors than it does straight out theoretical supply and demand numbers.
On a lighter note. Development land should be priced very attractively as demand for this asset would have been low. Project builders doing anything for your business is not a good sign for actual development though! Have you thought of selling the industrials?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?