Notably, the percentage of any gain is higher than the percentage of any loss.
Hi Michael,
I read the article. It’s not a bad idea, if it can be used for investments aswell, especially people with little or no money, but are looking in a high c.growth area. I guess it’s just another way for them to reinvent themselves, get more of the market and look like the goodguys to home buyers.
It could also be a good reason to do away with FHOG, as what would this be needed for if financial institutions were willing to take on this sort of partnership with home buyers. This removes the onus on Gov’ to help out. Any thoughts?Cheers
Sooshie [
]“Giving is a Blessing, receiving is the bonus”
Hi again. I think it’s great for +ve cash flow properties because capital gain is secondary. If this helps secure more IPs that put money in your pocket AND you retain 100% control of the property (deciding when to sell, among other things) it should be good.
Of course, the devil’s in the detail.
Michael
Of course, the devil’s in the detail.
Guys, I think it is a great idea designed to make the banks more money. If I own the house and decide to do extensions or renovations, or otherwise add value apart from the natural capital growth, will the bank contribute their share of the costs, including an allowance for my labour[?][?] I think not[]. Suffuce to say, it sounds good, too good[][]
]
]. Suffuce to say, it sounds good, too good[
][The topic ‘New’ is closed to new replies.
