Apparently Everyone Here Is To Blame

The driver wasn't a shift from community cost to developers /buyers but those trustworthy fellows called the accounting fraternity.

The attitide being "shouldn't the users pay for all of the infrastructure up front rather than the government borrowing to build/invest over a 40 year life cycle and recoup the cost over 20 -25 years?".

This effectively lowers rates which are diverted for maintenance not construction.

If you want to live in a new community you pay for it if you buy into an established area you pay for it.

 

Lol

 

If there were no investors, there'd be less people buying property. Less people buying property means less demand (clarified). It's all supply and demand, and investors DO contribute to it. Is it investors fault only? No way!

 

Um, if there were no investors there would be a larger number of individual people buying 1 property. But I do agree that it is a combination of investors and private buyers. The common denominator here is easy access to credit.

 

Even If there were less people buying houses the banks would still be wanting their 20% deposit and the exact same people will still be complaining about how hard done by they are because they cant save money.

 

No.Less people buying means less demand not greater supply.

If investors and upsizers don't price FHB out of the inner rings then there's reduced demand for new stock on the fringes which impacts on building and white goods suppliers as well.

 

You're right, must've been my tired brain mucking up xD thank you

 

Yes less demand for buying however as people would still need somewhere to live and FHO would be needing 20% deposit as the stock is now riskier in the banks eyes there would be more people needing to rent which is a problem for us/government or there would be homeless people and crime would go up.

Removing investors (new or established) would also slow down the economy as the investors would be investing elsewhere which could be shares or overseas investments. Which would then make the share market take off and we start the cycle again!

 

Good point...but I was surprised to find Melbourne people are lot more conservative...they run a mile when houses are over 500k....the good news is unlike Sydney...there are still places in Melbourne you can buy for under 300k....and better still you can still buy a NEW house for under $400k...you just have to wait for land to title..this will take anywhere from 6-12 months at the moment. Not a lot of registered land at the moment which is also titled.

 

It may also have a lot to do with the demographics of each city.

I suspect that Sydney has a larger proportion of higher earning, higher professionally educated folks than Melb, and there is apparently more limited supply generally in Sydney.

The other factor which may be an influence is the world awareness of each city.

In my travels O/S - it seems every single person knows all about, and has been to, or wants to go to - Sydney (and then Cairns for the reef), and noone ever mentions Melbourne.

This is possibly going to influence where folks who come here as immigrants may want to live.

 

I really can't understand why. There's not a lot to do in Sydney. It's a boring place to visit. You've got the Harbour Bridge & the Opera House. Some museums (but there's museums in all cities), the Zoo, the small Wildlife Park, a Casino, theatres......but not really much else. It wouldn't be my ideal holiday location.

 

Then again I am tempted by the Barossa - who ever was the genius who put Red Right Hand as the sound track to the advertisement deserves an award (or two).

 

Man, in today's date it really is getting tough to buy an IP. People who started out earlier (even with cheapies) do have an advantage - but then thats what people who started out earlier would say about people who started earlier than them. It's getting tough at least for me. My example, I have been trying to save up on a single income (6 figures and living frugally) to be able to buy IP 1 but the thresholds keep getting pushed further away. By the investors or by first home buyers or by foreign purchasers. Either the prices go up Or now the new song and dance of greater than a 10% deposit. Or the fear of no cf with ips in darwin - now there are so many units in supply that Darwin is almost running empty. There was an article in NT news the other day where water front properties fetching 1200 a week are not finding renters at even 600 a week. Those units of course are priced at over 1M - but it gives the picture. A decently located and decent condition land and house package would begin from 600k upwards.

It is almost impossible to find a below market value property. Everything is appropriately and proportionately priced.
Far far away from the city, the price range remains the same - the land parcels get bigger. So no love from rural. Its good to have a drive and a plan and all that jazz. But with no saved up money one ain't getting no where. I believe its time the gov started giving First Home Investor grants

... so all you multiple IP owners can send some property dust my way please

 

You are single, on a six figure income. You don't have to buy in Darwin, you know. Put your money where it makes sense instead.

 

Hang on a sec...did you say; single and on a six figure income?

And you can't find affordable first IP?

It's a joke to stir up argument, right?

 

Sorry, I meant, I am a single earner in our family of me, missus and a bub

 

No, my bad. Not single. But single earner in a family.

 

OK, but still.......look outside of Darwin. Australia's a huge country, & there's tenants looking to rent all over the place.

 

Maybe. If vacancy rates were very low in a capital city, and rent increased too much for certain people, they would need to consider moving were vacancy rates were higher and rent was lower. This influx of people don't necessarily have to live in the big capitals.

 

Ah! More info - that helps us.

Are you renting or buying atm?

Being your first IP, and assuming dollars may be a factor, you really need to look for areas that are better for cashflow NOW, but with the prospects of CG in the future.

Most likely this will be a unit or flat etc, and may have to be regional...depending on your budget.

Stick to smaller complexes in good locations, and with good floorplans, courtyard, preferably separate water metering, low Body Corp fees, etc.

Must have criteria -
1. Rent yield at least the same or more as the loan interest rate.
2. Depreciation (built after 1987 and get a Depreciation Schedule done)
3. I/O loan secured by IP, with 100% offset if possible.

Or, regional areas - houses with possible subdiv zoning.