I read in one of Margaret Lomas' books about the pros and cons of fixed or variable, and her study revealed that at the end of the day the difference between the two was bugger-all. I think fixed interest was the narrow winner from memory.
I guess the "sleep at night" factor comes into play with this one; it's good to know what your interest bill will be every month for several years.
A lot depends on the cashflow from the property/ies as well to affect your mindset. 

"There will be a rally in property in 2010 that will make 2003 look like a blip. But thats a whole other thread……"

Crashy,
I will be happy if you are 100% correct!

An answer in good faith;
baspet, look at the similar properties in the area near your property, and also ask every property manager in the area as well to give you an estimate. Be careful with that one as they can sometimes over estimate the figure (experience).
Better still to get the list of rentals available from each manager and select the ones similar to yours and do a drive-by to see what they look like.
From my experience the rent won't vary too much from individuals to entities such as Govt  bodies etc – they may pay a bit more, and if your property is in an area where they want to rent, you can be sure the managing agents in the area will have some experience in handling them and setting the rent.

GoldCoastGirl; don't let this put you off. Your contribution is enormous and appreciated by many.

How about  "Landlords' Friend Property Management".

F;
I think back then it was a case of a country town that no-one really knew or cared about, and the freeways weren't built and Steve's book hadn't been written. In country towns like that (Ballarat) there was traditionally not a lot of cap growth, but the rents still continued to creep up with the CPI, so by the time Steve arrived the rent returns were rather healthy. I reckon this was the norm for those towns in that day and age.
I don't think it will ever return as the interest in property investing is a lot more widespread than it was in the late '80's, early '90's when Steve was running amuck in Ballarat.
I'm even seeing cap growth in places like Deniliquin (where my Mum lives) as investors start to snap up the cheaper properties because of the half decent rent returns that used to be there, whereas for the last 30 years not much has really happened there.
An area that has cheaper, affordable properties with decent rent returns gets quickly noticed thanks to forums and r/e websites that spread the news in nano-seconds, and with so many more investors around now than there used to be thanks to the spruikers and all the books and videos/dvd's, the increased interest drives up the prices very quickly, thus spoiling the great rent returns we are all seeking and which attracted us to those areas in the first place.
It's getting to the stage now where almost any areas that have cheaper, affordable properties are being swamped by investors desperate to get into the market as the affordability disappears, thus driving up prices and producing (false) cap growth even in areas like Donald, Vic.
I think Steve's book should be on the shelves as a work of History rather than investment.

I don't know who he is. Interesting article though. Can't say I disagree either; I'm not a negative person; just highly cynical, and do things opposite to the crowd.
But I won't pay $50 p/m for a newsletter though, or $195 for a book.
Reading his article reminded me of a few things;
1. Rich Dad's Prophecy – a great book by Robert Kiyosaki about preparing yourself for the future and what it might hold; primarily the stock-market crash that he predicts will occur, and why, around 2012.
2. I recently read a book about the lead-up to the 1929 Stock Market crash, the mindset of the people of the day, the debt levels, the economies around the world. The factors in the 2007 world are scarily similar.
3. Warren Buffet's quote – "I buy my straw hats in the winter".
4. The sentiment about "man-made" global warming. To think that MAN can cause an atmospheric imbalance is laughable; actually – it's not even funny; it's sick. I went to Yosemite National Park earlier this year. There is a gorge there that is SO huge that it makes you feel like an amoeba; actually no – a nucleus. Then I looked at the same spot on Google Earth in relation to the Yosemite National Park. The gorge is the size of an amoeba. Then I looked at Yosemite National park in relation to the State of California. The Park is an amoeba. And so on and so on. Then there are the oceans – 75% of the world's surface. We are fleas eggs fighting over a dog, but the mainstream thinks otherwise because the media tells them so.
It would be interesting to hear Graham's take on that point.

I want an area that has a good representation of renters, and a good amount of factors to support cap growth (infrastructure, employment opportunities, transport, etc), ability to add value and good tax benefits from the property as well.
Without good rent returns and tax benefits (cashflow) the investment will fall over if you can't carry the neg cashflow, and there is no guarantee of cap growth – only an educated guess that it will occur. The ability to add value is a hedge against low cap growth in the short term.

Hi Jon,
as you probably already know it is very hard to locate positively geared properties in this day and age. Some people have posted recently saying they have located some, but I think the location and the cap growth factor may be questionable.

I'm not sure what you are asking for exactly here – are you after properties to buy that are pos geared and where they are located, or are you simply after info on how to identify them and work out the cashflow?

I own some pos geared props and would be happy to tell you the details in a private message if you need.

The other type of "positive" is the pos cashflowed after tax method; is this what you need advice on, or on both types?

"The main reason that people dislike auctions is that they don't have a value to work backwards from. (ie. a listed price)

Jon"

Actually Jon, if only this was the the only reason.

The main reason(s) why people don't like auctions are:-

1. Under-quoting – this is where the agent advertises the property (with or without the Vendor's permission) at a price far below both the reserve and the eventual sale price. The prospective purchasers are mislead into thinking they can afford the property, spend considerable money and time getting inspections, arranging finance, going to the "open houses" to look at the property to help them ascertain if the property is suited to them etc. There are heavy fines for this practice, although it is not well enforced.

2. Over-quoting – the agent tells the vendor the property is worth more than it really is worth to get a listing.

3. Dummy Bidding – this is where there are false bidders planted in the audience of onlookers and bidders either by the agent or the Vendor, or both, to help drive the price of the property up. They usually stop bidding when the the bidding is near or at the reserve price. This practice is now illegal in several States of Australia, with heavy fines attached, but is not well enforced.

4. No Cooling-Off period – the purchaser has no cooling off period after the auction if there is something amiss with the sale, or if they decide the property is not right for them. Again, a lot of time needs to be spent prior to the Auction with searches, building inspections etc to find out the truth behind the property.

5. Pressure and Stress – for the purchaser this is a problem, particularly if they have no experience at auctions. They often feel they will miss out on the property and then spend more than they should; especially when the property has been under-quoted and the price keeps going above their limit. For the Vendor this is a problem as they are quite often inexperienced, and are often pressured to make a decision on the day by the agent. For both parties there is stress from having to make fast decisions about a very large financial transaction in front of a crowd of people. Many purchasers now pay buyers' agents thousands of dollars to act on their behalf at auctions because they are not knowledgeable or scared to do it themselves.

6. Advertising – the Vendor needs to commit to many dollars of advertising to try to generate some interest in the property. In a private sale this is usually not necessary.

7. Auctioneer's Fee – another cost for the Vendor. Can be avoided in a private sale.

8. Time – many people cannot attend an auction or an open house when it is conducted. Sure they can bid by phone, but most people are inexperienced at auctions and this adds to their stress. They prefer to inspect and make offers as they are able to fit it in. This may not be the desired option for the agent and the Vendor, but they want/need to sell the property and should accommodate the customer (purchaser).

It is my opinion that the Vendor should have to provide at their cost, all the relevant inspections included with the necessary paperwork that Purchasers need to read before the auction (Section 32), there should also be a cooling-off period and all bidders should be registered with proof of identity at registration.

"This would stop those nasty comments from people who say that they would have paid more but only paid as much as they had to to purchase (what a crock anyhow)."

Jon, Didn't you say in a previous post on another thread about auctions that it was documented that people said they would have paid more at the auction than they did?

Actually, yeah; here it is – "Interestingly, many 'would be Purchasers' will ring after the Auction just to advise the Agent that they would have paid more for the property had it been for sale with a price -" That was on June 10, 2007.

If I was a Vendor, and I knew of this statistic, I would be reluctant to sell at auction.

There was a report on tv over here not long ago that said that there were people on $250k per year incomes who were going bankrupt, having their homes foreclosed and generally not making ends meet.

Brenda, you have not missed anything from my perspective. Stick to the game plan and don't get distracted by the others.

We do it "tough" from the point of view that we don't buy anything on credit anymore and have no personal debt anymore. Self imposed consumer starvation and happy to do it. We still have nice things and live a nice life, but don't work our guts out to obtain them.

We still use the credit card (to build up frequent flier points) but pay the balance off every month, we own our cars.
We can easily wait up to 2 years to buy the "latest" technological advance for around half the price, and earn some more airfares into the bargain.

I haven't bought a W.I.I yet; it's killing me (not). Maybe next year….after we buy another I.P

We have freed ourselves of the "keeping up with the Joneses" mentality long ago, and shake our heads and laugh as we drive along side the new Beamers and Mercs etc.

The good news is that doing it tough for a while has allowed us to now do it easy. We no longer have to work to service consumer debt; car loans, credit/store cards, label clothes ra, ra, ra.