eww, KAY!!!! this really scares me, and shows how desperate Aussies are to buy up the dregs of their well and truly boomed property market. YES broken hill is CF+ve but it’s so risky as it’s so remote and only relies on one industry. It’s not a tourism place, it’s not on the state highway one en route to whatever and there are about a zillion places I would recommend for CF+ve before Broken Hill. You can totally get whatever yields they have in BH in NZ in far better places with more prospects and not remote. like say 80k out of a town the size of newcastle. Nowhere in NZ is remote really because it’s so small.

NZ Bird Dogs. SOLD OUT! More deals coming…

kay,

“was enabled by a differing property market”

totally, which is why I’m buying in NZ now for the time being not Australia. You can get the exact same kind of properties Steve and Dave started with – i.e. a similar looking 3 bdr house on freehold land like S and D were buying, 60K, rents for 130 per week, regional towns, and will go up in value kinda property. You can even get better than this, but this kind of property is still relatively *easy* to find.

and, four people? huh? it was only Steve and Dave, yes obviously two people can go faster, but there’s nothing stopping anyone from teaming up with someone – I’ve teamed up with two different people this year already. But even if teaming up is not for you, a single person can still do it. The guy who started this thread only has to do a seventh of what steve and dave achieved in 3.5 years, in 5 years. I think it’s totally do-able, however it depends on how much time he sits on his arse and thinks about it, ya dig.

Adam, I think the idea about Interest only at least in the beginning was to maximise your cashflow in the first couple of years when you need it most. After that rents should rise and things get easier. There was a product I was looking at recently (st George lo docs loan to be precise) where the difference between interest only and P and I on 77k was about 50-60 bucks a month from memory. And there was flexibility to repay lump sums at any time as well as redraw any time for a $25 fee. it was almost like a LOC but wasn’t called one. Anyway, i was going to go for it because it would have provided the lowest repayments NOW and the most flexibility down the track.

Probably the product I will use next time I buy in Aus. cheers-
Mini

oh! found something else that I have a burning desire to comment on, “manual which teach them how to copy a millionaire .”

um, yeah, so wouldn’t that be a good sort of person to copy if you want a bit of what they’ve got? rather than for example copying someone in the dole queue?

“Do you think the world is so simple?”

The principals are really simple – spend less than you earn and invest the rest in income producing assets. It’s simple but not necessarily easy. I mean for me to purchase three properties last year and reno two of them wasn’t just me sitting in a chair and whistling while watching the footy, put it that way. BUT, I had no prior particular experience, I just learned how the numbers worked, got over the fear factor, and went out buying houses. it really does become more and more simple, like a no-brainer, the more times you do it.!

“may be to somebody lucy man, “

I think you mean lucky….yeah well there you are, this kind of person I was telling you guys about, the one that pops up and says ‘if you did well it’s just lucky’ (or you’re a crook, yadda yadda). I TOLD you it wasn’t just sitting on my ass that got me where I am now (which is: I’m started, and well on the way) – it was reading, learning, using a calculator, looking at a lot of properties, getting my finances in order, doing a budget, research research research, and so on. It wasn’t luck. Luck is what the people that are too chicken or lazy to do anything say to justify why a million dollars didn’t just ‘happen’ to them while they sat on their arses watching the sport.

>just as lotto, 1%of million?
If you see Lotto as an investment of (say) $1 with a 99.99 percent chance you’ll lose the lot and a 0.01 percent chance you’ll make several times your money, then fine. I guess that does count as an ‘investment’ and if you only have a dollar to spend, then keep on dreaming. it is a get rich quick scheme though. No don’t move, stay on that couch and keep watching for the Lotto results. – it’s out of your control.

property is a more certain investment, within your control, and it’s almost impossible to lose the lot. It’s almost certain that you will make money, as residential real estate is one of the most ‘forgiving’ of mistakes investment form there is, over the long term – no matter whether recession or boom people still need a place to live.

end of rant!

When I told my parents I was going to buy a property every three months for 5 years and then pay them down for five years, they laughed…but I’m doing it anyway.

There will be always people who say ‘you’re dreaming!’ and ‘it can’t be done’ who outnumber the ones actually doing it by 999 to 1, or more!

Only 0.5 percent of Australian investors own 3 or more properties, so even if you get that far you’ll likely be using a different approach to the ‘average’ investor who only gets ‘average’ results.

you have to be strong and know what you’re doing in the face of so much nay-saying, too. But that’s good training.

1-135 properties in 3.5 years is just SOOO way beyond most people’s paradigms that there are still many many people that believe it isn’t possible, that if you did it, you were either rich to begin with, lucky, a crook, or – whatever.

the key to being able to carry on and purchase more quickly is to only buy CF+ve properties.
the ones ‘the average investor’ will tell you to avoid.

NZ still has lots which are not only CF+ve but will go up in value. If you don’t believe me then good for you! Because you shouldn’t believe anything you read until you have checked it out, but hey – go check it out.

the thing about +ve CF properties is they not only pay for themselves but give a surplus. May only be 50 bucks a week, but that’s 50 bucks you didn’t have to SAVE from earned income, it’s automatic. And that can get you into the next property faster plus add to your income so your serviceability goes UP not DOWN with every property you buy.

well, that’s the theory anyway.
Just read the book one more time and this time make notes as to what YOU”RE going to do and in which order.

then start working through the list until you have your first property. Once you get the first one out of the way you will have got over the hardest bit – getting started. the second will be a piece of cake, the third you’ll hardly notice, and the fourth one you’ll become almost blase, calculator in hand, working out whether it suits your big picture. At least that’s how it happened for me.

cheers-
Mini

NZ Bird Dogs. SOLD OUT! More deals coming…

“Retirement Villages would be just throwing our money to the wind.”

Ouch! How can looking after your mother be classed as throwing money to the wind? If that is ultimately the kind of care your mum will need, instead of saying ‘we can’t afford it’ or ‘it’s not worth it’ – say ‘how can we afford it?’ and then go solve that problem.

I think the solution is to increase your own wealth so you can look after your mother privately, rather then staying poor so the government will give you some kind of handout.

just my two cents
and I love everything Steph said about the practical considerations and the ‘heart’ benefits.

I certainly never posted for stars, they didn’t even have them when I started here.

Like the e-bay thing where the longer you have been there and the more deals you’ve done with positive feedback the better, you get your little stars. i think that’s fine.

I am proud of my stars because i know how many hours of reading, writing and learning it took me to get there. It’s my history, if you like.
If people are threatened by that making them feel
…useless? racist? outsider? misleading?
jealous? just to pick up some words from this thread, that says everything about them –
not me.

Mini

NZ Bird Dogs. SOLD OUT!

yep,

realenz.co.nz

NZ Bird Dogs. SOLD OUT! More deals coming…

Hi Guys,

comes down to which is better – CF yield or CG?

all other things being equal, a dollar now is better than a dollar in the future.

That’s been proven.
So a property with 10 percent yield and 0 growth is better than a 0 percent yield (i.e. own home, vacant land etc) and 10 percent growth on paper.
(all other things being equal such as holding costs.) On Paper.

In favour of 10 percent yield – you get your money now out of the property and can more quickly get it into the next property. Not so much financial risk (i,e, serviceability)

In favour of CG – your ten grand you made in the first year is locked in to the house. And then you have a 110k house. You are therefore far more likely to get the most out of the compounding thing the following years with CG because it’s much harder for you to get the money out and spend it!

The CF +ve person has also more flexibility as to what to do with their profits. Lifestyle? pay down loan? fund deposits or renovations? buy shares?

whereas the neg geared person doesn’t have any choice, their ‘profit’ is locked into the house unless they get it out by selling or refinancing.
thus further increasing their risk, (unless they saw the light and bought a few +ve CF props to balance things out.)

Neg geared property, which loses money each week, has more risk that something happens and you can’t afford to pay in to your property any more, have to sell, get hit with CG tax which eats into your ten percent anyway. Then stamp duty to get back in to a different property at the same point in the market.
CF+ve means (even with no growth) you probably wouldn’t want to sell (you are making money!) and if you fall on hard times are less likely to have to sell (property supports itself) – so therefore the risk is less.

And are more likely to be able to buy the next property quicker.

I can totally agree with westan. ‘the world’ told me I wouldn’t get any CG on my 20 percent yielding properties which I bought a year ago,but I did, 60 percent growth in one year. That’s 80 percent ROI in a year, not bad eh. I don’t believe i was lucky, I believe I was buying in undervalued areas.

Well then again there seem to be people such as SIS who seem to hate profits, but i am not one of them. At least i think that’s what he means when he says (sic) “that +ve cashflow property and with is IRR, it would be profit at a blinded lost.”
(- say what?)

Oh yeah and the other thing to compare is that you get two properties for 80k for your one property for 160K so you also have to compare the benefits there…. risk mitigation (2 lots of rents, so it’s more spread. 2 titles, so spread there too

and drawbacks (2 lots of property managers, 2 lots of maintenance)

Also rents tend to rise over the years. an actual figure from a Tokoroa property: 1991 purchased for 5K rented $20 per week value 2003 50K rented $130 per week
do the math as to how much ‘yield’ you are making by the 13th year even with NO capital gains.

and as you can see the property also ten timesed in value (CG) in 13 years.

If you’d bought that kind of property you probably could have owned 75 of them in ten years. I know this because I know someone that did. If you’d bought neg geared props it would depend on your income as to when you could afford to buy more.

cheers-
Mini

NZ Bird Dogs. SOLD OUT! More deals coming…

Yeah…Queensland better than melbourne cause of population growth. Do some research on google and don’t quote me but I’m sure I read that melbourne – 0 percent growth and q’land 4 percent. growth equals demand equals rising prices.

re financial planner, I’m so not one, but I could work out the numbers for you and show you. meaning, anyone could!

Re; check them out due diligence, of COURSE an ANZ financial planner is going to seem more legit even if they are really just salesmen on commission trying to get you to park your money in a 3 percent yielding *whatever* super-fund so they get their commission, and giving some free advice along with it like ‘stick to a budget’ so it seems like you are getting good ‘financial advice’. Sure it’s easier for a person with a trusted ‘brand name’ behind them to be taken seriously than a single bird-dog, but the bird-dog might find you a much better deal, and you’ll be on your way and retiring a whole lot quicker than the ‘anz guy’ or whatever

NZ Bird Dogs. SOLD OUT! More deals coming…

“Does this sound logical or am I dreaming?”

Not dreaming, but 38 bucks per week surplus has to cover insurance, rates, vacancy and insurance.
And maybe property management.

So do the numbers on what that costs annually and it could be a property you have to pay into.

I don’t generally purchase properties with returns less than 10 percent if capital gains are likely, or 15 percent if not, so I wouldn’t be that excited about this deal on the numbers alone, there would have to be another reason (i.e. emotional (i.e. in the same street as my parents, it’s cute, i want it ) or financial (near some kind of ‘action’ that would make the property go up in value.)

this to me typifies the deal that 90 percent of investors would go for, though.

NZ Bird Dogs. SOLD OUT! More deals coming…

Hi Geo, you could just buy the property in NZ in your own name for the moment and then transfer to the trust or whatever later.

No stamp duty in NZ so not a big deal.
buys you a bit of time to wait for the right advice.

My two cents- cheers. Mini

NZ Bird Dogs. SOLD OUT! More deals coming…