Who the heck writes this shit
“Weekly rents across the combined capital city measure increased 0.3% in February however rents were unchanged over the past 12 months”
if its going up 0.3% in the month of February….then it must have gone up over the year (its in the report summary as well eg not a cut and paste error in the press release)
In the report however it then goes on to say that 0.3% increase for Feb 2016 is bad as the year before it was 1.7% increase in Feb 2015
…..well thank goodness its not that again this year as it could equal 20.4% increase for the year.Seriously?? doesnt anyone proof read anymore?
Hi Dean,
Well, I reckon they “could” be right:-“Weekly rents across the combined capital city measure increased 0.3% in February however rents were unchanged over the past 12 months”
If they grew in February, but had previously dropped 0.3% at some other time in the previous 12 months, this has the nett effect of staying the same over the year.
Benny
That would make sense but elsewhere it talks about rents being up for the year…..
I was thinking afterwards maybe the word ‘yields’ was missing but that’s not even right as on a sales price yields were down.
Just feels like ‘all PR fluff’ no responsibility these days.
Words have meaning ;)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
