Another article to throw into the mix…
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/22/1079939584525.html
Those thinking of buying soon should plan to keep the property for at least five years or preferably 10 years or more, said Nikola Dvornak, associate quantitative analyst at CommSec.
There’s a revelation in property investing (sorry for the sarcasm)
About 160,000 new homes will be built this financial year, down 6 per cent on last year. Another drop, of 7 per cent, is expected next year.
With continued strong immigration, this is actually good news for property investors in general
As prices begin to stagnate, investors hoping to make money out of real estate will have to focus more on rental returns and less on price growth, a report has found.
Well, maybe the proponents of +ve CF have it right!
No doubt we are in a softening phase, some harder than others….but 10 years to wait before property prices rise??? I know that’s a headline, I know its meant to get a reaction and make people read the article…but where are the facts.
The media’s love/hate affair with property is like a spoilt child who continues to rant and rave to get attention. It gets your attention once and then becomes progressively more annoying.
James
Thanks Rubba
Here’s another article about “mini-cities”. I guess where there is still population growth, there will still be housing demand. Re your article above, and my article below, I wonder will these mini-villages be forst homebuyers buying in a flat market and prices remaining flat. I still think with such a fundamental as population growth, RE has so sustain its viability. Any comments?
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/22/1079939581973.html?from=storyrhs
kay henry
georgis,
I can see where you’re coming from about the love/hate thing. But I do believe the reporting is about what’s happening. The boom is slowing down, and that’s what’s being reported. The article also said flat times can be from 4-10 years. I know wen I bought my property a few years ago, the market was dead flat, had been for a few years before that, and if I had sold in the 4 years after I bought it, I would have lost money on it.
I like to read every article I can on RE- keeps me up-to-date. The article also said there were some markets- Brisbane and Adelaide, I think- that were defying the current trend of prices flattening.
kay henry
My 2 cents worth.
We are moving into a very exiting phase of the property maket for property investors. How many homes have you looked through recently that were let and how many owner occupied? We have lloked trough about 40 properties and drove by double that in the last month in Soth East Melbourne and only a small hand full were owner occupied. The flock of uneducated investors are leaving the market and this is making buying a bargain much easier.Dave
Kay,
I agree with your comments about reading as widely as possible on what is happening. And neither am I denying what is evidently happening today in the market..
I however, look critically at the source of the statistics and theory and future predictions that they expouse as a result of those numbers.
James
Sure James, I agree. There are differences in reporting from most of the RE people- Commsec, Residex, homepriceguide.com.au, and a bunch of others.
I think it’s super important to be deconstructive on reports. I do however, think it’s important for us to know our market. Guess if we bought shares, we’d be doing the same thing.
For long-term investors, or for those who have a “gut-feeling” that RE will ALWAYS be the way to go, I reckon we’ll be safe. Someone, I think redwing, posted some stuff on the Forum about 90% of millionaires made their money through RE- that’s a good enough stat for me – I reckon I’ll believe that one [biggrin][thumbsupanim]
kay henry
Kay,
As someone who lives in the regions specified in the article you mention, I have witnessed prices in my area jump heavily around the time that the First Homebuyers Grant was in its prime.
If could be a co-incidence, but I put the spike down to the injection of funds (and increase in affordability) brought in by the grant. The areas this article mentions are lower priced areas in general than the rest of Sydney and price rises are in times of high activity because there are more buyers finding the market affordable. Because there are more people in this “affordable” end of the market, price rises at this end of the market are correlated with activity.
For these “mini-cities” to sustainably impact prices for the better would meant that there would need to be a reason to live there (apart from affordability). If this mini-city is filled with semi-industrial areas and patchwork infrastructure then there is a strong risk that this will remain a dormitory suburb (like much of the rest of Western Sydney).
For there to be a sustained positive impact on prices, there needs to be a reason for white collar people to live there beyond affordability. There are plenty of opportunities for “blue collar” and tradespeople already. But if this is the people it caters for then it will just homogenise the area from Camden to Penrith to Liverpool.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
