Total Members: 158,431

harb

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 323 total)
  • Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    bumskins wrote:
    Depends really. There is a lot leverage in property. So if you looked at say $100,000 invested in Property Vs Shares. It might look like: Property (80% LVR) $500K – 6% = $470K, $30K loss. Loss on $100K Principal = 30% Since the person investing in shares probably had little to no leverage, their portfolio would have to have lost 30% to have the same effect. Which on average it probably did, so they are sitting about even.

    As you said, it depends. Not every property investor is leveraged at 80% and not every shares investor has no leverage, then it also depends on the location or stocks they invested in and period of time they've been in these particular properties and stocks. Since this thread has been running since 2006 it would be interesting to compare the loss (if any) of particular properties against particular stocks , for eg.  compare a house which sold in 2006 and again recently against a stock like ANZ, BSL, RIO, TLS or WOW and then see if it looked anything like a 30% loss.

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    ZSlaveski wrote:
    It's so great to see this talk about the crash becoming more prominent in forums like this one.

    The talk about a crash was always here to see, what we did not see was the crash.

    Quote:
    I can smell the fear. It’s palpable on the Australian Property Forum where the desperate bulls and spruikers are frantically posting threads trying to disparage the bearish message…

    APF – Check out the bearish sentiment in all threads!

    Isn't APF the forum where most of the refugees from Global House Price Crash Forum gather ? Some of them have been waiting for a property crash since Halley's comet came near Earth last time and the rest of them since the Y2K bug was going to delete all property titles. Thanks for the link, they were always good for a laugh.  

    Quote:
    The RBA wants the bubble to deflate.

    keep them coming.

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    ummester wrote:

    There will likely still be a panic satage in the coming year where the average punter/investor realises this and tries to sell – this will seem like a crash for a little while.

    What would you say will likely cause the average punter/investor to panic , rising rental returns ?

    I believe that your average punter/investor would be unlikely to have purchase a property post GFC for a quick CG so as long as rents continue to go up they would have little reason to panic.  Anyway, that is assuming wages and inflation remains under control which up to now was helped by a rising AUD. What do you suppose would happen to inflation if the AUD starts falling back towards $0.75 over the next 2-3 years ?

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    realestateedu.com.au wrote:
    Hi Garb, This will b my last communication with you.

    Yeah, whatever.

    Quote:
    … I have done the hard yards including 4 corporation licenses and 3 diplomas but to someone like u that makes no difference because u will always find a way to put others down to make yourself look or seem larger that what u r. The only difference between u and me is that I have done it, including my first 50 lot subdivision at 28 years old …

    and you felt the need to brag about it because ? ……….

     

    Quote:
    OK go reply but I won't you r a tall poppy in my view. 

    insecure much ?

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    realestateedu.com.au wrote:

    Aussie dollar at 97.6 and inflation kicking in … higher taxes, governments running out of money, grow yr own veggies and raise goats hehe

    Yeah , let all stock up on baked beans and head for the hill (again)

    Quote:
    If property prices double who will afford it?

    People who's incomes will also double ?
    I've heard the same 'who will afford it" when prices where 1/3 to 1/2 of what they are now and guess what , someone can still afford them.

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    realestateedu.com.au wrote:
    Hi Harb, You sound sooo wise so how many houses have you built?

    Geez thanks Phil,  you think I' m ready to write a few get rich quick books and hit the personal development circuit to flog them to suckers looking for the magic secret to wealth and happiness ?  You sound alright too, from your blog page it  looks like you picked up a thing or two from all that money invested in  Tony Robbins and Tom Hopkins tapes and seminars. 

    As far as the number of houses I built go what does it matter if I only built  20 new houses or  200 ?  And would the 20 homes built on my own count for less then someone else's 30 who had to go into JVs with professional builders to complete them  or had others manage the projects?  Lets just say I built a few IPs,  I did a few small renos, a few larger renos , took me 5 goes to get my PPOR just right and have acquired the skills to build a complete home on my own if I wanted to do so.  

    Quote:
    Money does not make you rich but the process of making money will make you rich, many people are good at playing monopoly but fail in real life using their own cash. Real estate is not the same everywhere, you can't compare Penrith to Point Piper

    An then there are the people playing monopoly with other people's money. 
    Real life IS playing Monopoly. Some people play it, some people who can't play teach it and some are like bunnies frozen in the headlights watching others playing it but too scared to make a move.

    Quote:
    In 1980 a home cost 3 times earnings today it costs 8 times earnings.

    Blah, blah ,blah, the same old fallacy the bears have been pushing as to why prices HAD to crash 40%  a few years ago.
    Putting aside the fact that since 1980s our wise and illustrious leaders have been deceiving the masses with dodgy CPI numbers and ever changing contents in the "inflation basket"  to keep the lid on the working class wages how can you compare today's basic new house with the 80s basic house ? Where will you find a builder prepared to build you a 3×1,  75sqm dog house with a single carport , like they were building in the 80s ?  And if you were to find one where will you find a council willing to approve it ?
    If you were to compare apples with apples and take today's blue collar tradesman earnings and use it to build a home of the same dimensions and specs as the 80s home on the city's outskirts it doesn't cost you that much more now then it did in the 80s.

    Quote:
    In Japan they had 3 generation loans because of the cost of real estate was so high.

    I was wondering when you were going to bring up Japan's property crash . 
    And yet despite the crash there and declining population prices in Japan ares still relatively high.  Even if we were to take the 8x earnings pushed by property bears (which I think is BS) prices are still low when compared to a lot of other countries where the ratio goes well into double digits.  To justify the claims of  our property being overpriced "the experts" are using the price/rental income ratio which in Australia is affected by Negative Gearing keeping rents too low. .

    Quote:
    People are flooding to USA now because the prices are so cheap and ROI is over 30% compared to Australia of 2/3% negative geared new (not second hand) properties. If Steve and Dave did today what they did in 2000 they would get a different result, times and markets are not static therefor our strategies need to be altered.

    People are flooding to USA because the spruikers are pushing USA properties the same way the spruikers were pushing dodgy Gold Coast investments in the 80s and dodgy self help tapes and various courses costing as much as a house at the  "free" seminars run by  "life coaches " and "super salesmen" in the 90s.   Prices that are cheap  in USA are "so cheap" for a reason so anyone thinking of buying there should do his own research and take everything being told by the spruikers with a large pinch of salt.  Just wondering why have you brought up USA , are you planning to invest there yourself or begin selling USA properties to Aussies  ?
     
    The markets may not be static but nobody can be sure of how Steve and Dave's strategies would work out today anymore then they would have back in 2000 but one thing that we can be sure of is that doing nothing would have resulted in achieving nothing.  I do remember some of the "experts" flashing their qualifications around on TV and claiming that properties were overpriced back in 2000 and that  we have reached the peak and property prices were due for a correction. In hindsight they were of course wrong and they could also turn out to be wrong today but only time will tell.  

    Quote:
     Interesting reading your views and would like to hear what advise you have for others to prosper. 

    Unlike yourself I'm not into educating others and have no intention of pushing my views onto others.
    I have no advise to give to others other then to tread carefully and don't believe everything they read on websites, be wary of offers of "free"  seminars, books ,etc. because  nothing comes free and may end up costing them tens of thousands or more and  always remember the old saying ' if it sounds too good to be true it probably is' .

     

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    ummester wrote:
    Interesting conundrum you present Harb.

    If the rich are downgrading, this would put more pressure on the lower end right?

    But are they downgrading or just staying put which is causing the lower end pressure?

    Quote:

    If there is more pressure on the lower end you suggest an OS of lower end property could arise like it has in the US (except that isn't how it happened there – the OS was apparent before the GFC, just not admitted in all circles). Anyways, the top end places must be a hard sell or empty now because of the downgrading. Fair enough, no-one is debating this – its been that way since 2008.

    But, if the low end is so under pressure, why haven't more of the lowest income earners been pushed out onto the street?

    I believe the low end is under pressure most of the time, if not from low income earners  spurred on by boosts to FHOG then investors. Rather then being pushed onto the street  the lowest income earnest are being pushed towards the new outer suburbs, houses on smaller blocks of land and apartments.

    Quote:
    I believe there is an OS in most places already (especially apartments) but lets just say there isn't.

    Lets say it is,  given a choice the majority of people prefer to live in houses rather then apartments there is always going to be an OS in apartments ahead of free standing houses.

    Quote:
    When the rich recover, as you foretell, and move back into more expensive pads, surely this will leave some of the bottom end empty and thus create an OS in that end?

    Hehe, you make it sound like I look into crystal balls to foretell the future. Since  cavemen times humans who could afford it would show off their wealth by residing in better caves, dwelling, manor houses, castles and in recent times exclusive estates and suburbs. No need for crystal balls to know that when people can afford it they will start upgrading once again. In Australia its harder to create an oversupply at the bottom end of the market then say US because our developers develop land and when they do build an  apartment block they only start work on it after the vast majority of apartments have been presold. Compare that with US developers who turned cow paddocks into new suburbs without having presold a single house and the left investors take the losses when they were forced to sell below replacement cost or ran dozers through partly built homes because it was the cheaper option . Also if you look at our bottom end (new homes in the new outer suburbs) competition between builders keeps prices reasonably low and the price of land is also only slightly above cost. I believe that having the cost of building new homes in new suburbs so close to replacement costs is helping to regulate the OS in our market. Any falls in the existing low end market is causing the new homes to be uncompetitive and reduces the number of new starts removing the OS and putting a floor under the prices. Combine the self regulation with the fact the entrants into the bottom end market are FHBs , investors and the odd people who refuse to keep up with the Joneses there is no reason to believe we will ever end up with oversupply at the low end of the market. These people would not normally go out and buy or build a more upmarket property unless they sold or rented out the current one.  

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    realestateedu.com.au wrote:
    Hi Harb, Firstly I cannot understand why you are so sarcastic in your responses

    Perhaps you are just feeling tired after the round the world trip and think I was sarcastic ? :P

    Quote:
     When you get a quote of $200K from AVJ the end price will be $300K

    Fair enough , except that even today in today's dollars you can have them build you a complete ( end price )house for $200K AND that we were talking 10 years ago. Not sure if AVJ even built such expensive ($200k) homes back in 2000. Anyway the point I was trying to make was that as buildings depreciate in value if you wanted to maximize your profits from your house you could have gone with a basic house and use the savings to buy another old house on a large block. 

    Quote:
     $800K was a quote for a finished Peter Binet home I paid $425K for a 5 bedroom finished Westminster home, go do one one yourself.

    Congrats, for that kind of money I'm sure it must have been a very nice home. Can you remember what the median house (and land) prices for Sydney were 10 years ago ?
    Fair enough you want to build upmarket residences for the lifestyle and because you get a better feel from them but then why complain that after inflation you are no better off ?  As I understand it you bought the worst house on the best street which was a wise investment move but then you went on to demolish it and built a residence that made you feel good which did not increase in value as much as you hoped. Did I get it right ? If that is right then you paid for the feel good factor and built the home to feel better first and to profit from it financially second. Much like someone who buys a large Audi or BMW instead of a small Toyota or Hyundai  because of the feel good factor rather then the lower depreciation. 
     

    Quote:
    Single story houses on the Nth Shore are hard to sell hence the 2 story 40 squares with a few bells and whistles to attract a better quality buyer.

    Only because sellers are unrealistic about the asking price and expects to recover the full costs plus interest of rebuilding or extensively renovating the property. A smaller amount spent on the building would allow the seller to sell the property for just above land value and maximize the profits made from his investment.
    I have a property on a street where on one side of it most of the houses are your typical 1980 small basic 3br and on the other side they are mostly 5 years old or less, mostly 4&5 br 400sqm mansions.  Despite having spent anything from $350k upwards to build these modern homes the sellers are struggling to sell them for  $100-$150k more then the older termite infested homes and with prices on this street going sideways over the past 2-3 years anyone who built recently and placed the house on the market would have been better off by at least $100k to not build and sell the land as vacant.  Yes the bells and whistles (house) helps to sell the property ahead of a vacant block but it makes no sense spending an extra $350k to build just so you can sell the property for  $150k more.  

    Quote:
    Lastly don't worry about the state of the Rich and the Poor in society Hard, in the long run they will all be OK. Philip Sigglekow

    Who's worried ? LOL

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    realestateedu.com.au wrote:
    Hi Harb, Sorry I didn't go for the solid gold fittings

    I'm sure you are , probably wish you went something like this
    http://www.allweirdthings.com/hongkongs-100-gold-bathroom/

    because now Instead of a depreciating asset you'd have a building that has appreciated at the same rate as the land beneath it. LOL

    Quote:
    Secondly I built a project home not a designer builder … I had Peter Binet give me a quote at the time which was around 800K I went for Westminster Homes and did my own personal touches like 40mm granite in the kitchen, marble floors in all baths and fully tiled walls to give a better feel.  This is the 15 house I have built 

    Hang on a minute, have you built them to profit from selling them ?    800k is a lot of money for a house even in today's dollars, go to http://www.avjennings.com.au and you can get 4-5 homes built for that amount in today $$$ 
    Instead of spending 800 on a building you could have gone for a 200k home and use the remaining 600k to buy 2-3 more existing houses which would have gone up 2-3 times in price since then. ;) Of course hindsight is always 20/20. 

    Of course if one overspent on the building and built the house to satisfy his/her wants rather then needs  like some of these more extreme examples did  http://design-crisis.com/?tag=gold-toilet   then they should complain about their house not doing as well as some of the low priced homes around them. :p

    Quote:
    I just got back from a semi world trip of Europe and Asia … the same news is there as well … bottom end becoming expensive and the top end suffering …

    I think its probably because while everyone needs shelter not everyone needs to live in the top end of town so when the economy suffers the top end gets hit more.   Of course when people go silly and build an excessive number of homes like they did in some parts of US even the low end suffers until population increases takes care of the oversupply. As the economy eventually recovers and the rich recovers with it , the number of wealthy increases the top end will recover as it did in previous recessions. Expensive houses are more about status then comfort so unless the GFC has caused a major shift in human nature I don't expect the wealthy to start slumming it with the peasants in low priced basic shelters. I believe its only a matter of time before the top end recovers as the wealthy feel the need to flash some of that wealth and upgrade to more expensive housing. After all what is the point of being filthy rich is nobody notices your wealth  ? LOL   

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    realestateedu.com.au wrote:
    HHmmm good points here however, How long is a piece of string? I bought an old sh.tter in 2000 knocked it down built a 40 square pool 3 marble baths and am up one million profit HOWEVER If I had to upgrade in the same suburb (Hunters Hill) i need another 500K 

    How about if  you bought it and rent it as it was, or if you demolished it and put 2-3 basic homes on the block ? If its an investment you would hardly go for marble baths or solid gold bathroom fittings. As we all know (or should know)  its the land that appreciates in value while the improvements (the building) is usually depreciating in value. 
     
    Which is why I was intrigued by gmh454's comments that he had clients who bought 9-10 years ago and are bleeding.  But now that you posted that I could see how someone who bought 10 years ago and knocked down the old building, built a very expensive mansion then had a full reno done every 2-3 years could be bleeding and would have problems recovering  his costs.  But that sort of mistake would be more likely made by some overenthusiastic new investor and not the type of educated investor using financial advisers and accountants like gmh454's clients would be.  That's like the  P-plater spending $20k plus hundreds of hours of labour  tarting up his $3K and 10 year old Hyundai then wondering why he is having no replies to his ads  when asking  $20k for it.  lol

    Quote:
    Australia is CHEAP on the bottom end

    That is exactly what some of us have been telling the bears for years now, only they keep pointing to upmarket mansions and call them unaffordable because people on Centrelink benefits can not buy them.  :P

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    gmh454 wrote:

    can you guys point out the quote where I said they bought OVER ten years ago. I said IN THE LAST TEN years..

    AGAIN  last ten years…think about it ..

    maybe the light will go on…

    somehow doubt it

    OK, give us an example of someone who bought in Sydney 9 years ago and is still bleeding now then.
     9 years ago is  "IN THE LAST TEN years", is it not ?  :)

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    gmh454 wrote:
    Harb, I give up, I talk apples and you quote me as oranges….

    I try to get back to apples and you turn them into grapefruits.

    Sorry gmh454 but  why bring up these fruits ? Are your clients ( who bought property 10 years ago and are still bleeding)  invested in orchards and lost money due to drought or a cut in water rights ? 
    I was under the impression that we were talking about people who bought a house  in Sydney 10 years ago and are still bleeding now but if you want to change the subject and talk fruits there is not much I can say  about them..
    To me apples, oranges , grapefruits are all fruits that  grow on trees and make for good fruit juice either alone or in combos.  :P

    Apples-and-Oranges.jpg

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    gmh454 wrote:

    Harb you are killing me.

    This poor naive client (who has a Harvard MBA and beat Kerry on a deal) then did the the following

    bought another Mosman property and resold it for 300k profit before settling,

    Well done.

    Quote:
    bought in central highlands 65 acres, for around 650k, did close to 1m improvements then sold for low 3s

    Well done again.

    Quote:
    bought three blocks inline at Waitara, for around a mill, put in around 1mill (probably a bit more) and built something the size of a town hall, sold it for 13.5M,

    And well done once again.

    Quote:

    oh yeah forgot in between did Palm Beach  2M + 2M improvements 2 years later sold 6.25

    And another 'well done' going to him.  Was this your example of a bleeder who purchased 10 years ago ?   Short of using the Mastercard at 24% interest p.a  to purchase properties back  in 2000 and holding them until now he should be reasonably happy with the profits he made.  If he ignored his advisers and kept his Mosman property for a few more years he'd have scored  5/5   lol

    Quote:
    but I still say there are loads of naive baby boomers who are bleeding…

    You can say it and I'm sure there will be some bears who want to believe it even if you didn't say it ,  but do you have any real examples of bleeders who purchased 10 years ago and are still bleeding now  ? Lets not use real homes as examples because with population increases the city expands and actual homes increase more then the increase in median prices. Lets use the median price of a Sydney home 10 years ago and the median price now,


    http://www.myrp.com.au/sydney_house_prices.do

    Ops, even the medians almost doubled and that despite half a decade of little to no growth. And we all know what happens after a period of no growth … ;) 

    So how could someone who bought a house (rather then a median)   10 years ago possibly bleed ?  As the article said, going back 20 years the results are undeniable,

    Quote:
    http://www.theage.com.au/business/property/rewriting-golden-rules-of-real-estate–a-mansion-at-a-time-20101007-169pw.html

    Sydney house prices have tripled over the past two decades, but they have quadrupled in the harbourside suburbs in the east and inner west, figures show.

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    WJ Hooker wrote:
    harb and DWolfe,
    I was wrong…there I said it.

    No worries W.J, it sometimes happens to everyone. :)

    Quote:
    But don't call victory just yet, the fat lady hasn't sung yet..the world economy is going to catch up with us sooner or later. Lets see how prices are going in another few month's.

    What do you expect to change over the next few months ?

    Quote:

    Why home prices are not about to crash and burn

     
    James Kirby

    October 10, 2010

    IS THE value of your house about to plunge? Macquarie Bank has tipped a 20 per cent drop in housing construction next year while commentators say the smallest lift in interest rates will pop the ''home price bubble''.

    House prices have been sliding for months. Industry estimates suggest that over the past quarter Melbourne prices are down 2 per cent and Sydney is off by 0.5 per cent. But these figures are nothing compared with those for Britain and the US, or Ireland, where home prices are down 40 per cent and falling.

    So it is no surprise that every time anything remotely negative happens in the wider economy – this week it was the mere threat the Reserve Bank might lift interest rates – there are suggestions home prices are about to go over a cliff.

    The doomsayers' arguments have been well aired. They pivot mainly on the sheer price of our real estate in relation to average income. There is also a lot of credence given to household debt levels and the presence of incentives that prop up the market, such as negative gearing.

    Invariably the doomsayers are economists, especially offshore, while the bulls are linked to the success of the property industry (mortgage financiers, builders, developers and real estate agents).

    Associate Professor Steve Keen, of the University of Western Sydney, for example, who has gained national prominence for his dire warnings on house prices, is still talking about a sharp home-price downturn. On Friday he told the ABC that property investors on average incomes would not be able to endure even flat prices in the coming years. Keen estimated property investors earning less than $80,000 a year make up 20 per cent of the market and the slightest pinch in the market would prompt this sector to sell out, causing ''the bubble to burst''.

    Alternatively, we get experts such as ANZ economist Paul Braddick, who made his name with a presentation he took round the country called ''the mother of all housing booms''. Braddick believes the outlook for house price appreciation is now ''soft'', but he is convinced the momentum is strongly upwards over the long term.

    Fresh voices are rare in the debate. But in recent days a new perspective emerged from John Wilson, the Australian chief executive at Pimco, the world's biggest bond fund. Wilson, in a paper on Australia's housing market, argues forcefully that our market is no bubble.

    He begins with some obvious points – worrying that Australia may follow the US or Britain is pointless because we have an utterly different economy with relatively strong growth and high employment. Likewise, where the US and other nations built too many houses in recent years, we have not built enough.

    He follows with a range of points:

    ? We have relatively high mortgage repayments but the ratio of housing costs to household disposable income (a key indicator of people's ability to finance mortgages) has remained unchanged at 30 per cent for more than a decade.

    ? Australians pay a relatively high amount in cash for their homes, but a closer look shows that one-third of repayments go on principal, not interest – that's saving and investment, and because housing has risen steadily (6 per cent a year) the situation is better than you think.

    ? Our household debt figures are high, but the debt relates to bricks and mortar – we are not spending any more on cars or credit cards. What's more, the average equity we have in our homes is 60 per cent and that has remained steady.

    Wilson also suggests the worst of the interest rate rises may be over: a view that is gaining momentum.

    Add it all up, and though it is clear home prices may be experiencing a weak patch, the merchants of doom have got it wrong so far and there's little reason to believe the local fundamentals have changed.

    http://www.theage.com.au/business/why-home-prices-are-not-about-to-crash-and-burn-20101009-16d3p.html

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    SydneySider2000 wrote:

    From a naive person point of view who had purchased residential property in 1999 in Inner West Sydney without any advice from any financial advisor, I can say that my property has more than doubled.  Even if I had to sell it now.

    You are not alone SydneySider2000,  short of some rare unfortunate case of bad luck everyone who bought 10 years should be sitting on some major capital gains and a decent return on their investment.

    Quote:
    http://www.theage.com.au/business/property/rewriting-golden-rules-of-real-estate–a-mansion-at-a-time-20101007-169pw.html

    Sydney house prices have tripled over the past two decades, but they have quadrupled in the harbourside suburbs in the east and inner west, figures show.

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    gmh454 wrote:
    harb wrote:
    gmh454 wrote:

    The thing I am seeing this year, is that for those (most of them) who bought a property in the last 10 years, they are all bleeding. Now I know that is because they are not clever little cashflow + types, I guess they went to the wrong seminar, – the neg gearing one.

    You sure its 10 years ? Even Sydney and Melbourne buyers are way in front if they bought 10 years ago.  If you look at Adelaide, Brisbane Darwin Hobart and Perth buyers they are around 300% up on 10 years ago and rents are about that much up as well. Take Perth as an example (because it has been lagging behind the other capital cities) where properties selling for 150K 10 years ago are now selling for well over 3 times that and renting for $450+ per week. How can you say they are bleeding when he interest repayments are around 200pw  LESS then they receive in rent ?  I'm not an accountant like you but even I can see that someone in this position would be positive geared. 

    My piece relates to my clients, which is a microsm of the population. I gave their age range and back ground, and all but two who bought in the late 90's will come out behind. The best so far was a city apartment bought 98, sold in 2005 for a loss after capitalisng purchase and sale costs – and it had been negative every year. (and that was the peak growth period), lots of these people bought new or near new apartments, they let others sell them property (Often with sellers fees built in at 10%).

    Wow, are you getting all defensive on me ? :P  I only asked because I find it unusual to hear that someone who bought a house in 2000 is bleeding , unless he unknowingly  built a mansion on top of a toxic waste site. 
    I find it incredible that most of your clients who bought in the last 10 years are all bleeding, no matter what capital city you are in prices have gone up since 2000 unless they have been ripped off and paid 2x-3x market value 10 years ago.  Even 50% overpriced and with seller's fees of 10% built in the price depreciation and NG over all these years should have helped them get ahead.  As their accountant you have advised them about that I hope. :)    

    Quote:
    I never said, you or any of the other smart operators here who only make huge gains, and I never saidanything about Perth, or the trolls who drop in from time to time with the "next year it's gonna boom" spiel, but my clients. The naive investors who drove up the market and ask any accountnat with a few over 55s and I think they can tell you of some if not a lot of their clients who have done the same.

    No you didn't say that, but are you saying  we  "only make huge gains" because we don't have you as our accountant ?
    I haven't seen any trolls with the "next year it's gonna boom" spiel in here but I did see a few with the " " xxx-insert your reason here-xxx will pop the bubble soon" and " this is crazy, the  real carnage will begin soon "   type of trolls around, do they count ?
    The "naive "investors who ignored "expert" advice and used common sense probably did alright if they bought 10 years ago.  Its the truly naive people who listened to unfounded doom and gloom spread by "experts" in search of their 15 minutes of fame and followed their advice who may not be doing so well.  Btw, do you only add up numbers for your clients or do you also advice/discuss with them financial strategies ? I'm guessing you are not or else you wouldn't tell us your clients are bleeding, next Xmas instead of a card and hamper basket maybe you should send them a ticket to one of Steve's seminars or some investment books.  LOL

    Quote:
    Also on the stats on property question. One of my clients made the property pages over ten years ago when he sold his Mosman house for 950, 000. The piece saif he bought it for 410, 000 less than ten years before. It forgot to mention that he put over 500,000 in improvements into it. Take into account stamp duty and commission, and yep he lost

    But the piece only mentions the buy and sell,….funny about that.

    No, what is funny is that you gave it as an example when you were trying to make the point that anyone who bought in the past 10 years is bleeding.  How much would that house be worth these days, if he spent 500k on improvements I'm guessing at least  $2M ?  Its a shame that someone as naive as this person didn't get some advice from you or his financial adviser to tell him 
    1) not overcapitalize on the property if he intended to sell it    
    2) demolish and build a new one for less then $500k
    3) since he spent 500k in improvements  keep it for a few years.
    4) wait for prices to stop going up before selling

    <moderator: delete abuse>

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    simple wrote:
    We see same situation totally different obviously based on our education and experience. So we shall keep this thread 'life' and  see how it will develop.

    I agree, it is a an excellent thread and by keeping it life it shows the folly of listening to doom and gloom merchants.  I still remember 1986 when some of these D&G merchants were telling me to stock up on baked beans, fuel and water because the  HC (Halley's comet ) was going to destroy life on Earth as we knew it.  Then came the 90s recession followed by Y2K,  then the GFC  hit us and now that I have just about  eaten up all my baked beans stockpiles its time to restock again because according to the Mayan calendar the end of the world is coming. Just as well I say, after 24 years I'm sick to death of eating my way through stockpiles of nearly  expired baked beans.    LOL 

    Quote:
    As I side note, we got 50 people  full time working in our manufacturing facility on award wage in Brisbane. I see them struggle much more with there's personal finance now than 15 years ago.  We always paid award.

    Not the same 50 people you had working there 15 years ago I hope. :P
    If they are then they probably deserve to struggle for being too stupid to try and improve their earning capacities. Don' know the employment situation in Brisbane but her in Perth with award wages  if you do get someone to turn up at all  it will be some brain dead zombie who can't tie up his own shoelaces, some alcoholic or  junkie in need of a fix  who will take a couple of days off after every pay day.  If you do get anyone worth keeping they are probably new arrivals in this country and will leave you as soon as they have a bit of local experience and find how to look for a better paid job. These days even unskilled workers expect to gross $1000 pw  once they've done a bit of overtime and if they can't make that much in a workplace they will go somewhere else where they can.  If they don't  and don't demand a pay rise then you have to wonder what is wrong with them. LOL

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    WJ Hooker wrote:
    Almost 1 year since posting.
    Lets see now
    http://www.news.com.au/money/property/house-prices-dip-and-will-fall-further/story-e6frfmd0-1225932622360?area=money-sub-one
    House prices down 0.2% see I told you so….LOL… I rest my case…

    Just joking..but still  If inflation is at say 3% then really the loss is 3.2% roughly. So I guess I was sort of right.

    Looks like you rested your case too early and stopped reading the article after the first line. ;)
    If you looked further on  the second paragraph you would have seen this,

    Quote:

    The latest seasonally adjusted figures from the RP Data-Rismark Hedonic Home Value Index were released yesterday and showed capital city property prices fell 1.2 per cent for the three months to August, while gaining 8 per cent in the past year

    Take out your 3% inflation and you are left with a gain of  5%.   LOL

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    simple wrote:
    on the other hand we have gravity of reality that general public cannot stand futher price rises in RE.

    Don't want to be picky simple but how did you work that out ? 

    Quote:
    Wage to House Price ration is way out, it must return to 'normal' trend at some point…

    Maybe what you call "normal" was actually "lower then normal" 
    Looking at the rest of the world wages to house price ratio Australian cities don't look expensive at all, in fact none of them are into double digit ratios. Looking at wiki  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_property_bubble I found this interesting table http://www.numbeo.com/property-investment/rankings.jsp  which list the income the price ratios in major world cities.   Take Sydney Aus.  with a ratio of  6.7  and compare it with something more extreme like Minsk Belarus with a ratio of 40 and Sydney looks like bargain of the century.  If not for a few US cities where they went silly building cardboard abodes on cow paddocks which caused a massive price crash in certain locations we would have some of the lowest price/income properties on Earth.
     

    Quote:
    1995 when I came to OZ, min wage in our industry was $10, now it's $20.

    Minimum wage is something earned by young people just starting in the industry, why kind of loser would still be on minimum wages after 15 years in the industry ? And if  by that you meant it as in comparing the minimum wages a young person just starting out and wanting to buy a property was earning back then compared to someone in a similar position is earning now then your following comment is comparing apples with oranges.

     

    Quote:
    Houses went from $145K to $500K on the same street!!!

    With population numbers increasing by 5 million people between 1995 and 2010 surely you didn't expect prices "on the same street" to grow in line with earnings.  The extra 5 million people competing for a residence near the CBD has pushed prices on "the same street " above the inflation rate and pushed he city outskirts further out.  If your hypothetical young person now is prepared to buy the same size house on the the outskirts of the city  the same as his hypothetical 15 years senior did earlier he should be able to find something in the $290k range with little difficulty. 

    Quote:
    Somthing is out of controll there…

    You are correct, there is something out of control here and it is the younger people of today who have higher expectations then previous generations . An today most expect instant gratification, buying everything on credit, ,  to be able to afford their first home in the same area their parents live but preferably in a much larger, modern  and better equipped home and they expect to work less hours so they can spend more time with the family and partying with friends.  Nothing wrong with that of course and people starting a family in past decades all had the same aspirations and most of the people buying homes previously have complained about the high price of homes  when compared with the ones paid by their parents. The young people today may think they are special and hard done by life but they are not unique, every generation before them has been singing the same song throughout the history and only those prepared to put in the hard work have succeeded while most of the ones waiting for the opportunity to come to them have failed miserably.

    Profile photo of harbharb
    Member
    @harb
    Join Date: 2006
    Post Count: 324
    gmh454 wrote:

    The thing I am seeing this year, is that for those (most of them) who bought a property in the last 10 years, they are all bleeding. Now I know that is because they are not clever little cashflow + types, I guess they went to the wrong seminar, – the neg gearing one.

    You sure its 10 years ? Even Sydney and Melbourne buyers are way in front if they bought 10 years ago.  If you look at Adelaide, Brisbane Darwin Hobart and Perth buyers they are around 300% up on 10 years ago and rents are about that much up as well. Take Perth as an example (because it has been lagging behind the other capital cities) where properties selling for 150K 10 years ago are now selling for well over 3 times that and renting for $450+ per week. How can you say they are bleeding when he interest repayments are around 200pw  LESS then they receive in rent ?  I'm not an accountant like you but even I can see that someone in this position would be positive geared. 

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 323 total)

harb

Step 1 - 0% Complete

Fill Out Your Member Profile Below

Fill in the required fields below to complete your registration.

Registration not only grants you full access to this website, but will also enable us to send you our newsletter, latest investor tips, strategies and information about events/products relevant to investors. You can opt out at any time.

Used to log in to the website and for targeting with messages. Alphanumeric characters only. No spaces allowed..

Member Login
Lost your password?
×
158,431

Register Free To Unlock Unrestricted Access To PropertyInvesting.com

×
1-Day Millionaire Mastermind Workshop - Only LIVE Training in 2019!