The future of Australian property prices

[MACCA350]

73% Reported
72.61% Actual based on their figures
68.01% Actual based on what sold at auction.

..........let's wait for the revised figures shall we

cheers

 

[Dowdy]

hello,

so how does a ng share investor help productivity and business investment, they dont, zip

But yet wont find 1 blog on the internet about it vs 5mil on ng propert investment

Business provide anything for consumptiom

Stock market investors don't AIM to make a loss. They don't buy a share in order to make a loss as opposed to a NG property.

Name one stock investor (there are 100's on this forum) who's main aim is to make a loss.

And BTW, buying stock in a company DOES help the company and hence help productivity and job creation.


On another note,
any look at the Realestate.com.au figures. It's got Melbourne clearance rate at 69%

http://www.rs.realestate.com.au/cgi-bin/rsearch?a=ars

 

[nunthewiser]

Robots.

The top is in for now .


Thankyou.

 

[robots]

Stock market investors don't AIM to make a loss. They don't buy a share in order to make a loss as opposed to a NG property.

Name one stock investor (there are 100's on this forum) who's main aim is to make a loss.

And BTW, buying stock in a company DOES help the company and hence help productivity and job creation.


On another note,
any look at the Realestate.com.au figures. It's got Melbourne clearance rate at 69%

http://www.rs.realestate.com.au/cgi-bin/rsearch?a=ars

hello,

how? please explain

i dont buy a property to make a loss either, so share yields are the same as interest costs

gee why is everyone so focused on clearance rates, for 5 yrs people have been telling me i am a loser for posting them up

they mean nothing, now you all want to hang your hat on it, amazing

thankyou
professor robots

 

[MACCA350]

another note,
any look at the Realestate.com.au figures. It's got Melbourne clearance rate at 69%

http://www.rs.realestate.com.au/cgi-bin/rsearch?a=ars

Now that's interesting.

23/5/10
RP Data: 756 Auctions = 69.4% clearance rate
REIV (revised): 756 Auctions = 74% clearance rate

One note, they both calculate the rate in the same way. The differences were in the reported sales.


cheers

 

[UBIQUITOUS]

hello,

gee why is everyone so focused on clearance rates, for 5 yrs people have been telling me i am a loser for posting them up

they mean nothing, now you all want to hang your hat on it, amazing

thankyou
professor robots

Robots, you are right...the clearance rates don't mean much...as they are falsified in the case of the REIV. But the number of sellers does mean a lot.

600 auctions a week....700....800....900....and now 1000 week after next.
It means that sellers are swamping the market. Where will it end? 3000 a week?

 

[Dowdy]

hello,

how? please explain

One reason why a company releases an IPO is to raise capital for research/ development or to get a project up and running.

This is particularly true with mining companies. They release an IPO in order to raise capital to fund a project.

That's why alot of mining and health companies are spec stocks as the only reason they list their company on the ASX is to raise capital for projects and research. Occasionally you get lucky when their mining project discover a big field and then their company turns into a blue chip instead of a spec stock.

Take Fortescue for example. When they had their IPO, shares were 1c. Now their company is worth $4.19 a share and they employ thousands of people which help the economy.

gee why is everyone so focused on clearance rates, for 5 yrs people have been telling me i am a loser for posting them up

they mean nothing, now you all want to hang your hat on it, amazing

thankyou
professor robots

They mean nothing on a week-to-week basis. Only on a month to month to me because housing should be regarded as a long tern investment....

But you on the other hand were all hoping around and doing cartwheels when the clearance rate was above 80%. So suddenly we were in paradise and now it's irrelevant. Can't have it both ways, pal.

 

[UBIQUITOUS]

But you on the other hand were all hoping around and doing cartwheels when the clearance rate was above 80%. So suddenly we were in paradise and now it's irrelevant. Can't have it both ways, pal.

Anybody who bought a positively geared property recently eg an apartment in Melbourne's bayside must really be sweating A LOT over interest rates and these recent clearance rates. Quite conceivably next year, those persons may end up negatively geared and in negative equity. Talk about buying a the wrong time!

 

[robots]

hello,
Exactly, cant have it both ways

Whats IPO's got to do with it, what about when i buy bhp tomorrow on 75% margin, yield is nothing, NG is enormous and you can claim same tax benefits as PropInvest

And prop investor would provide more employment

 

[robots]

hello,
who bought bayside Ubiquitous?

thankyou
Professor robots

 

[explod]

hello,
Exactly, cant have it both ways

Whats IPO's got to do with it, what about when i buy bhp tomorrow on 75% margin, yield is nothing, NG is enormous and you can claim same tax benefits as PropInvest

And prop investor would provide more employment

Few would in the current market and most certainly not on margin. I have never used margin or any form of loan monies to buy shares and after the ruffle of the last few years a lot of people would be in the same boat.

And on the type of investor and employment I do not see how you can say that. Buying shares and therefore supporting a company such as Woolworths, BHP, Wesfarmers and even the banks to name a few would be very supportive of employment. And the 4 or 5% return is usually pre tax paid (fully franked dividends) so for all the bother of owning units etc including liquidity I would go the shares by a long shot at the moment.

And bit of maintenance on an investment property and the property manager and agents fees would be a very small input to employment in the bigger picture. So its all a bit debatable in my humble view ole Champ.

 

[UBIQUITOUS]

Can somebody check Enzo's figures please? It seems as though he is FOS because I make it a shocking 68%.

http://reiv.com.au/home/inside.asp?ID=162&nav1=1226&nav2=162

Weekly Auction & Sales Results, Market Overview

Week ending Sunday May 30th 2010

There has been a shift in the residential property market in Melbourne over the past month, with six successive interest rates and unseasonably high auction numbers having an impact.

The number of homes on offer at auction is at the same level we normally see in the spring selling season and, in that context, clearance rates remain very healthy, this does provide buyers with a better opportunity than was the case earlier this year.

The clearance rate from the 924 auctions reported this weekend was 73% per cent.

Of the 924 auctions there was a total of 631 sold and 250 passed in, 167 of those on a vendors bid.

On this weekend last year there were 667 auctions and a clearance rate of 82 per cent

There will be around 900 more auctions next weekend and then a record 1000 the weekend after the Queens Birthday long weekend.

Enzo Raimondo

CEO REIV

 

[robots]

Few would in the current market and most certainly not on margin. I have never used margin or any form of loan monies to buy shares and after the ruffle of the last few years a lot of people would be in the same boat.

And on the type of investor and employment I do not see how you can say that. Buying shares and therefore supporting a company such as Woolworths, BHP, Wesfarmers and even the banks to name a few would be very supportive of employment. And the 4 or 5% return is usually pre tax paid (fully franked dividends) so for all the bother of owning units etc including liquidity I would go the shares by a long shot at the moment.

And bit of maintenance on an investment property and the property manager and agents fees would be a very small input to employment in the bigger picture. So its all a bit debatable in my humble view ole Champ.

hello,

i see why none of you want to address the issue, stop banging on about negative gearing for property when exactly the same rules apply to share purchases on margin

and shares purchases provide no productivity AT ALL, lets see, i buy 100 bhp shares tomorrow, the seller gets the money i get the shares, the yield is less than interest, i claim it to ATO AGAINST INCOME, presto i get a tax deduction

have i created any productivity buying those shares? created any work? no zip absolutely zip ole Pal

thankyou
professor robots

 

[MACCA350]

Can somebody check Enzo's figures please? It seems as though he is FOS because I make it a shocking 68%.

http://reiv.com.au/home/inside.asp?ID=162&nav1=1226&nav2=162

Ahhh, the revised figures.

Nope, 72.94% based on the way they calculate it..........68.39% if you only count those sold on the auction day(ie exclude 'sold before' and 'sold after')

cheers

 

[MACCA350]

have i created any productivity buying those shares? created any work? no zip absolutely zip ole Pal

So you're saying shares have no value to the economy. Any idea what would happen if every listed company was forced to payback ALL shareholders the current value of their holding?

Could they continue employing, producing, servicing our population? Or would we see thousands of companies bankrupt(or at least downsized substantially) and millions of employees made redundant?

cheers

 

[BigAl]

hello,

i see why none of you want to address the issue, stop banging on about negative gearing for property when exactly the same rules apply to share purchases on margin

and shares purchases provide no productivity AT ALL, lets see, i buy 100 bhp shares tomorrow, the seller gets the money i get the shares, the yield is less than interest, i claim it to ATO AGAINST INCOME, presto i get a tax deduction

have i created any productivity buying those shares? created any work? no zip absolutely zip ole Pal

thankyou
professor robots

Touchy Touchy

The Titanic <cough> Real Estate Ponzi Scheme <cough> is going down and someone is panicking.

Regards
Professor Reality

 

[Tysonboss1]

i see why none of you want to address the issue, stop banging on about negative gearing for property when exactly the same rules apply to share purchases on margin

Well Mate, They can't think of anything wrong with investing in property in itself. So they have to attack the method in which some investors use debt to invest. Which as you have quite rightly pointed out is a separate topic entirley.

Using this arguement against property based on negative gearing is like saying the share market has no value as an investment grade asset class because all those over leveraged storm financel customers lost out when they bought at the top of the market using margin.

By far most property investors out there are positivly geared.

 

[Beej]

hello,

i see why none of you want to address the issue, stop banging on about negative gearing for property when exactly the same rules apply to share purchases on margin

and shares purchases provide no productivity AT ALL, lets see, i buy 100 bhp shares tomorrow, the seller gets the money i get the shares, the yield is less than interest, i claim it to ATO AGAINST INCOME, presto i get a tax deduction

have i created any productivity buying those shares? created any work? no zip absolutely zip ole Pal

thankyou
professor robots

Well Mate, They can't think of anything wrong with investing in property in itself. So they have to attack the method in which some investors use debt to invest. Which as you have quite rightly pointed out is a separate topic entirley.

Using this argument against property based on negative gearing is like saying the share market has no value as an investment grade asset class because all those over leveraged storm financel customers lost out when they bought at the top of the market using margin.

By far most property investors out there are positively geared.

Yup! Both these guys are exactly spot on! The hypocrisy of some posters on this issue is amazing! Personally I have used NG to invest in both property and shares in the past - I see no difference between the two. In ALL cases my aim and intent is to make money, not lose it.

As for IPOs etc and the stock market, well the obvious property analogy there are people/investors who buy/build new houses vs existing. But with shares, just like houses, the bulk of the exchanges are for existing securities.

Cheers,

Beej

 

[Mofra]

With RE, people are allowed to offset the losses against a totally DIFFERENT income stream. This is not allowed with losses on other asset classes such as shares and nor should it be allowed with RE. Any investment decision just to save tax should be punished, not rewarded. The pain will come though. It always does, except that this time it is going to be a lot worse.

a. Margin loan interest is treated exactly the same as any other investment loan interest
b. You're assuming that property investors are just trying to reduce tax?
You know what they say about assumptions...

 

[cutz]

a. Margin loan interest is treated exactly the same as any other investment loan interest

Correct,

But in my humble opinion, debt to equity on a margin loan generally doesn't allow interest to exceed dividend stream, if it does you're playing with fire.

Also, FWIW, whether your dealing with margin loan or IP, deductions should not be allowed to written off against other income, that tax rule is a joke.