Forum Replies Created
well reminded Acey! Happy Passover to you!
“newbie, 4 posts”,
bah humbugi got a dark chocolate egg with ginger for myself a few days ago (!!) as well as everyone’s favourites, but they are long gone! and from my partner today a divine special swedish easter egg with inside it all these special imported chocolates I love like Mozart Kugeln and liqueur cherries, special jubes with real fruit, and handmade truffles decorated like manuscript paper.
so cool and yummy and of the highest quality, kind of the ‘easter egg’ version of the person who gave them to me.*awwww*
depreciation is basically a loss. it’s an on paper loss really, but it is deducted from your income so basically you ‘earned’ less. So less tax to pay. Also don’t forget that expenses from activities done to derive income (minus the personal component, of which there must be one otherwise the tax dept’s don’t go for it – according to my accountant!!) are ‘losses’ i.e. tax deductible.
So the quicker you start your ‘home-based business’ which is property investing, the better, I reckon.
thanks yack, that’s a major acknowledgement from you, and as such I’ll take it!
*grin*
I have to work on something else for a bit and if I get time I’ll write ‘chapter two’ tonight, but you’ll prob all be asleep as I keep ‘writer’s hours’.
Thanks for all the PMs, man! This is v. cool!
hey bear, I’m only dealing with NZ property contracts so far.
“You can even get gifts from RE agents for refering a bit of business their way.”
re the above, I am quite certain you are right! However on our initial mail-out to clients, we promised (among other things) that we are not getting kickbacks from agents, or brokers we recommend, but we reserve the right to fully schmooze them and take them out to lunch! We also promise never to knowingly sell clients rubbish, and that we don’t have any personal connection to any vendor of any property we are bird-dogging.
However non-monetary gifts, such as – after 4 people had bought properties from an agent I have also purchased from – ‘Thanks for the referral. ‘I owe you’! There is a property we have just listed which is not on the market yet but will be next week. 20K, excellent condition, ex-housing commission (well maintained) rents for 100 per week.’
That kinda thing is a win-win ‘good karma’ situation which i feel good about accepting. Money kickbacks to me feels weird kinda like bakshish in Egypt, if anyone’s ever been there.
Also leads to conflict of interest I feel.cheers-
Miniflipping a property to a client is not ‘being a real estate agent’. It’s passing on a deal from one investor to another using the ‘and or nominee’ to assign the property at settlement (i.e. when the conveyance of title passes to the new owner.) In between the time when the flip has occurred and before settlement, there is an agreement between the bird dog and the client. This is where the lawyer comes in and it is very necessary for a potential bird dog to totally know inside out what their position is and what they are and aren’t liable for in a worst case scenario. Get documents and agreements drawn up and signed to protect both parties. the client so they feel secure that the ‘deal is theirs’ and the bird dog so their responsibility has passed to the client who effectively steps into the deal in their place.
At what point the agent and vendor is informed that the property has been flipped is also worth discussing first with your solicitor and then with your client.
Agents don’t seem to mind, (so far so good – ) a sale is a sale, I guess until it falls over. The decision of falling over or going ahead now passes to the client. It’s their money and their choice to go unconditional, pull out, or try to renegotiate as they see fit, just as I would if I did DD on a property and discovered defects with the builder’s report not apparent to someone not a qualified building inspector, no matter how experienced.
As a bird-dog I have been staying in the loop after flipping, making sure all is flowing smoothly between client, solicitor, agent, due diligence people, etc. Disclaimer: define ‘smoothly’!!!!
Thanks for reading! “i do love a nice bit of info-tainment!”
So i will carry on tonight with part II!!!
As far as “(‘Personally I really don’t know if all the work, time and expense are worth it, not to mention the risk.’)”
I always said,’I;ll do it as long as it’s a) fun or b) profitable, and if it’s neither I’ll throw in the towel.’
If it’s fun then it doesn’t matter about b) right? And if it’s profitable but not fun, I could eventually coach others to do it, and just continue to do the bits I love.
Anyway was close to throwing in the towel recently, not because of the above actually, but because I didn’t realise how much I would still have to monitor the deal even after having bird-dogged it. This was due to a couple of people’s slackness in many ways, but that’s another story….later….
PS Re; people’s slackness, SO not talking about my clients! Who are all nothing but A-grade people and now feel like friends! …more later though!!
SOOSHIE
*rushes over and gives her a big pash*
how I’ve missed you!!
haha, vindicated, love it when that happens.
I told you guys that the CF+ves would pop back up in Aus when the ‘crash’ happened (the good side of a bust is cheap buying opportunities!) and it seems they are starting to.
time for hallelujah?
Maybe it will become like Auckland, Auckland city being the number one highest spot in NZ for cashflow returns, according to the latest KPI magazine!
“All I can say is that it’s a good thing I don’t own any NSW real estate.”
I agree, as a non-owner. I mean, I couldn’t have afforded to negative gear anyway, even if I believed in negative gearing which I so don’t anyway.
But I have sympathy for those who lost money for years negative gearing their crap 2 percent yields, looking forward to eventually splitting that capital gain with the government, (not) and now being dealt another savage blow. I mean, the boom is over so clearance rates were already down, prices were dropping, interest rates were rising as were vacancies, capital gains tax was looming, there weren’t any CF+ve properties on the horizon to balance things out a bit, and now THIS!!
However i think it will kill the market even before they put the law in, people scrambling to sell now to keep that 2 percent if they can.
Look how people panicked when interest rates rose a measly quarter of a percent, well this is 8 times worse. Also wait until the media get hold of it. Maybe we will see some battlers crying on TV with no make-up on. (sorry, just what I was bleating on about on some other thread recently!)
I agree that the Sydney market was overvalued. If you don’t ever stick your head out elsewhere in the world and that’s all you know, you might not have realised it, but globally, Australia is one of the top four most overvalued nations, and Sydney’s gotta be THE most overvalued of all surely?
Yes, indeed – the other thing you could do is refinance, grab some of that equity and buy some CF+ve properties in NZ….hehe
Elves, yes not everyone can refinance, but if they bought +ve CF they probably would have a heap better chance.
“Also, check out http://www.positivelygeared.com.au They source positively geared property in New Zealand, and put you in contact will everyone you need.”
For a very reasonable $4400 per property.
Hmmm. i think it’s time to put our prices up.sorry, mistyped. I meant the other way around. 600 equity.
Also you misquoted me!!! Grrrr…. I wrote, “I know TO someone who has a house they bought in Sydney in 1991 which is now worth 850K a…..controlling a mill worth of property doesn’t sound like a big deal”, not ‘I know someone who has a blah blah’. Leaving out that little two letter word ‘TO’ word made it a lie when you quoted me.
Hey…just had an insight into the media!!!
As for the rest of your post, you misunderstood it, I was trying to say ‘it’s a waste of time to argue what you and i think it should mean, even if we could agree on a definition which we can;t, because all of them are flawed.’
the only person who can define it is Steve because it was his MAP and his offer. But if TT decide to invent their own headlines which mislead the public, that’s tough on Steve and the public really. But we can’t solve it by arguing what we think it should mean and someone winning and being ‘right’ Do you see what I mean now?
“Heard on ABC radio that mini bugdet will make stamp duty payable on the sale of investment property.”
Ohh, I feel a NZ real estate boom coming on even more so now.
hi, thanks for sharing what you bought it for and when. no reason other than curious. I agree that you should try and hang on to it especially if it is performing (or has the potential to perform) as a rental.
the reason people don’t get loans or do is three things, debt to equity, credit rating, and serviceability.Perhaps if you keep the house you not only have equity (the house) but income (the rent) so increasing two out of three. Re. the debt, perhaps you can take a LOC out of the house to repay consumer debt at a lower rate than your credit cards or whatever.
i dunno.
I am just thinking of the countless people I have met in my life who said ‘I used to have a property a few years ago but we sold it. Ah! What it would be worth today!” never met too many people who didn’t regret selling ‘a few years ago’.
“I agree with Kaye Henry – a property millionaire is EQUITY based and can be no other – 1 mill property and 1 mill debt = 0”
agree or disagree with KH all you like, (“lets see whos opinions win”) -knock yourselves out!
I’ll even join in and mess up your argument completely though before we throw it out of court, which is given that you are right and that’s the definition, then it’s ridiculous, because under that definition, if one of the mappers did nothing for 11 months and then suddenly their grandmother died and left them her vaucluse house worth 1.1 mill, they succeed according to your definition, but what would TT and the viewers make of that?
You’d realise it’s not the definition that counts, it’s the ‘from here to there in a year’ factor, the INTENT.
it was TT who used the term ‘create property millionaires’ (whether Steve said that or not) because they KNEW that the general public would ‘agree’ that’s what it means.
But I just don’t think the general public, bless their hearts, thinks about things as much as i do and my friends here at the forum. They are way too busy working in their rat race and spending all they earn and 5 percent more per annum.
They watch a telly program that appeals to their dream of ‘sudden wealth’ without effort AKA the lotto factor, imagining (from their lounges) it would be easy as long as you were among the privileged few getting whispered tips from their mentor, with whom they dine, last supper-style.
swanning about doing deals and having cognac and cigars to celebrate.Whether or not ‘create property millionaires’ was what Steve said or meant. TT made up their headlines and that was that.
In fact i’m sure i remember Steve defining what that meant on TV.I know to someone who has a house they bought in Sydney in 1991 which is now worth 850K and they only owe 600K, controlling a mill worth of property doesn’t sound like a big deal.
but that took a few years. And these guys only had one.
And when the story get shown, or the book is out, i think the interesting stories will be the ones that got furthest compared to where they started from.
“Sibo,
Spotting is illegal in Australia if you do not have a Real Estate license.”Rubbish.
OK, if it’s not, define ‘spotting’ and show me the law I’m breaking.Castle, it wasn’t API it was The New Zealand Property investor magazine.
“make great television’ (my words)…..
and will appeal to many people. THe more people know about scams, the better!”
I meant ‘great television’ ironically!! how sick it is that we have (i.e.) the aus idol programme where the cameras follow the fat/cleft palate/ugly/can’t sing at all (i.e. underdog) – watch the judges make mincemeat of them, then they start to cry and the cameras follow them out to the corridor. “how did you FEEL?” sob, sob.
ditto the half drowned kids mentioned above, too.
Those stories aren’t exposing a scam, it’s just that ‘good television’ (used ironically again) so often these days seems to include the ‘battler in tears’ shot.
So of course we expect from our ‘reportage’ – the bigger the scam, the bigger the tears, right?
Contrasting with the ubiquitous “father playing footy with the son in the back yard’ shot – “in happier times…’
Tonight I was in channel 7 all day and all that you could watch was channel 7. At one point there was some heinous current affair programme about a mother and daughter teen pregnancy. The mother was shot crying and no make-up on, big zit on her face, unflattering lighting (they have concealer you know, but the point is they WANT them to look as sad and poor victim low status as possible) and then cut to the daughter, flattering light, dressed to the nines and full avril lavigne make-up, which I bet she didn’t do herself.
The last shot was the mother in tears again, and the segment ended freeze framed on her face crumpled and distorted.
And you can just imagine the editor and director, guaranteeing their job security by creating this stuff that their bosses say makes ‘great television’ in the editing room, cutting the pictures together, and the director going, ‘GREAT! that’s it, that’s our final shot, we’ll end on her face crumpled…”
cue the emotional sad piano music…
I guess the pseudo-emotional manipulation of the thing, the ‘entertainment factor’ is the thing I think is so sick.
Whether it’s a scam or not, see enough old ladies in tears and you’ll have the emotional response they want you to have.
Fear or negative stories seem to be the ones people latch on to more. Maybe it’s the ‘at least it wasn’t me, I feel better’ factor. Or maybe it’s perpetuating the myth that people that make money are scammers.
There was this baddie all over the TV recently a while ago called Saddam Hussein with many bad things screened about him. But he wasn’t ‘marketed’ like that when he was helping the US against Kuwait or whatever it was, a few years ago?
Same guy, different day, different agenda of the media. Of the US. (are those two terms interchangeable?)There are many worse and bigger scams not shown on TV because the average Aussie can’t relate, and therefore won’t make good television.
I.e. 95 percent of the news in the US is US-related. The population ‘don’t care’ about the rest of the world and will change channels. Then the network loses advertising dollars.
Rest of the world just doesn’t make ‘good television’ in the US.I rest my case….
how to get a great return from a rental property without buying one?
um, sublet?
or, kinda – rent someone’s 2 percent returning negatively geared nightmare which is costing them 8-10 percent after costs, and possibly also going down in value, thus giving you as a tenant the lifestyle of living in a property you could never afford to buy, and freeing up income cash to invest in +ve CF properties which will let you get into more properties even quicker! Snap up some of those bargains going for a song coming up in the next few months!
Oh but I forgot, the rule was not actually buy….well, then,
just….ummmm*stuck*
oh yeah, start a home business and use a portion of your home as an office. claim a portion of your rent back in tax as a business expense, thus increasing your ‘return’ from a property you don’t own. (but someone else does.)
hehe
