Recommendations/examples of net positive cash-flow IPs?

Discussion in 'Investment Strategy' started by masterjoe91, 13th Jun, 2018.

Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community
  1. masterjoe91

    masterjoe91 Member

    Joined:
    21st May, 2018
    Posts:
    10
    Location:
    Sydney
    Hey all,

    Can anyway show me some good examples of net cash-flow positive IPs in Australia within the first 2 years?

    Suburbs most likely to achieve this? real IP examples? stories from your past experiences etc
     
  2. Jaxon Avery

    Jaxon Avery Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4th Sep, 2017
    Posts:
    87
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    42 William street, Cohuna, Vic

    Purchase
    $121,000
    Rents for $240 a week.
    Around $80 per week positive after all expenses (no reno, no complex strategy, just buy and hold)

    There is so many great suburbs but more importantly is the specific deal and when you go rural you sacrifice growth (generally)

    Kind regards

    Jaxon Avery
     
  3. Sackie

    Sackie Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    19,452
    Location:
    Bondi Beach
    Buying cheapie duds with small amounts of CF a week at the expense of growth is a terrible idea imho. Especially if you have good income/serviceability.
     
    croseks, Beelzebub, VB King and 4 others like this.
  4. NG.

    NG. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    9th Nov, 2016
    Posts:
    69
    Location:
    Sydney 2219
    Net on paper? Or cash flow?

    I prefer to look at the gross yield here as everyone’s borrowing for the IP would be different ie 80% lend versus someone borrowing 100% of all costs related to the acquisition etc

    IMO for resi rentals, majority would be at a loss on paper with at least an 80% lend - interest expense would typically be the biggest expense for associated with any rental.
     
  5. Jaxon Avery

    Jaxon Avery Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4th Sep, 2017
    Posts:
    87
    Location:
    Gold Coast

    and your better purchases are?
     
  6. Sackie

    Sackie Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    19,452
    Location:
    Bondi Beach
    All depends on a person's income/serviceability and goals. But imho rarely will the $20 a week PCF properties with minimal growth get most people anywhere .
     
    Ben_j likes this.
  7. Jaxon Avery

    Jaxon Avery Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4th Sep, 2017
    Posts:
    87
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    "Suburbs most likely to achieve this? real IP examples? stories from your past experiences etc"

    Mate you clearly have your own ideas and path but the property generates $4000 PA after expenses and that is on a 20% loan,

    with stamp duty I think it was $29,000 outlay (maybe less).
    thats a 13.7% return not even including the P and I loan, so its closer to $6000 first year including the PnI (20% return), now yes this is not liquid in any way comparative to a stock. but I am getting a far more likely return than betting on capital growth and I have less downside and still have the benefits of reno's etc for building equity.

    Knocking this strategy when I am literally getting a 20% return on my money and also buying in an area where the occupancy is higher than 99% of the country is crasy.

    This is a no brainier and realistically I have always planned a $18,000 reno that would alter the price from 121000 to 175,000 and increase rent by $30 a week which would make it
    $100 pw CFP
    Return even higher than 20%

    Mate maybe your a high income earner but you cannot find much better for $121,000 in this country with as little risk comparatively and more importantly it fits my long term financial goals perfectly.
     
    WattleIdo and np999 like this.
  8. Sackie

    Sackie Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    19,452
    Location:
    Bondi Beach
    That's all that matters then.

    I stick by my comments. Those with good incomes/serviceability choosing the strategy of $20/week PCF (give or take a little) with cheapie places in woop woop and wanting to build an asset base - are likely making a serious strategic mistake.

    I know quite a few individuals/couples on good incomes/zero debt who came to me asking advice for properties they wanted to buy in some obscure place. When I asked why, they said, "it doesn't take any money out of our pockets". Mistake colossal.
     
  9. Trainee

    Trainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th May, 2017
    Posts:
    6,679
    Location:
    Australia
    Cash return on outlay is misleading when the outlay is low. 20% return on a 29k outlay is 6k. 5% capital growth on the whole asset over the long term gives different numbers.

    The investment fits your plan idea is only as good as your plan. Just because you stick to a plan of paying down debt asap and no negative cashflow doesnt mean its a good plan.
     
  10. cstar

    cstar Member

    Joined:
    24th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    17
    Location:
    Sydney
    After nearly a decade of chasing & building PCF investments, i come to a conclusion that Capital Growth outweigh PCF if one is to build serious equity. PCF plays a part in the portfolio now to balance negative cashflow properties in bluechip areas..
     
    croseks and Blueskies like this.
  11. Blueskies

    Blueskies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    1,293
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Different strategies for different folks I think. At the end of the day it is about total returns. You have a regional property that has a gross 12% yield but low CG prospects. You have a blue chip inner city property with 2% rental yield with a 10% CG component. The returns are the same, differences are on how and when you receive them.

    High income earners can afford the negative cashflow for the CG payday, low income may need more of a focus on rental yield. There is no one size fits all approach and in my opinion most of the time the market prices in these differences factors appropriately.

    When you can find solid CG, solid yield opportunities is where it gets more interesting...
     
  12. sumterrence

    sumterrence Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    447
    Location:
    Sydney
    I don't believe there is a 1 size fit all golden rule. I'm a string CFP believer and have so far worked pretty well.

    The danger in betting on CG is that too many macro factors that will affact your growth.

    While I do believe CG is the ultimate winner in investing but that is only true if you can liquidate the asset. Otherwise I see very little point in holding a valuable asset that produce minimal or no income VS holding onto a cheaper asset that is giving you consistent dividend.

    The beauty in cheapie CFP asset is that you can set and forget and just let it pay down the debt for you.

    In the end unless you fully own the property its technically the Bank's asset not yours regardless of the asset value.
     
    welshmin, WattleIdo and Tony66 like this.
  13. radson

    radson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    1,556
    Location:
    Upper Blue Mountains
    I used 10% and 2% on a 400k property over 20 years and I very roughly calculate the difference as around $800,000 in the favour of capital growth.
     
  14. Trainee

    Trainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th May, 2017
    Posts:
    6,679
    Location:
    Australia
    Rent is taxable yearly. Capital growth is not.

    Rent usually doesnt grow faster than prices. So at a constant yield, long term the rent starts losing out.
     
  15. Blueskies

    Blueskies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    1,293
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Then you have added in some other assumptions. Are you factoring in tax implications? Or subtracting the rental losses each year? Or not assuming reinvestment of positive yields into other assets? There are lots of things that could change the outcome but a 12% return is a 12% return no matter how you cut it.
     
    Last edited: 15th Jun, 2018
    masterjoe91 likes this.
  16. Blueskies

    Blueskies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    1,293
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Are you factoring in the lost investment opportunities from the net losses each year? I am not trying to start a CG vs CF debate but I don’t believe you can use a one size fits all approach. There is more than one way to skin a cat, and from what I have seen there are not many +$5m property portfolios out there which don’t have some component of CF positive assets balancing them out, be it commercial, unit blocks, regional or something else entirely. If they don’t there is almost certainly a high income individual pumping cashflow in from another source.
     
    aussieB likes this.
  17. Sackie

    Sackie Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    19,452
    Location:
    Bondi Beach
    There are just better asset classes for yeild than RE imo for the average investor. Add value/growth? Definitely I'd go real estate. But for yeild? nah.

    Ironically, if you focus on growth with RE then yeild options in RE down the line becomes totally doable.
     
    Codie and cstar like this.
  18. Sackie

    Sackie Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    19,452
    Location:
    Bondi Beach
    Imo the PCF pittance from woop woop properties doesn't outweigh the risk of taking on an 80% loan with zero to minimal growth deals. It just makes no sense to me. I'd rather park my money in a different asset class which gives a better yield and lower overall risk. Not to mention the calibre of tenants in these places is often a money drainer.
     
    Blueskies and Ace in the Hole like this.
  19. Ace in the Hole

    Ace in the Hole Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,602
    Location:
    Sydney
    Wouldn’t some of those cheap properties even have negative growth?
    I mean for a house and land at 120k, allowing for inflation it was probably worth more than that new.
    After all this time, zero or even negative growth is not a quality asset.
    If the returns were high it might be worth considering, but at $50/week, you’re losing money.
    A few substantial maintenance issues will put you into negative cash flow for a year or 2 and negative growth if the market continues as it has.

    What’s the upside?
     
    Angel, NHG, Ben_j and 1 other person like this.
  20. radson

    radson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    1,556
    Location:
    Upper Blue Mountains
    After 22 years with both scenarios. All gross. Its worse for high yield of course when taking into account income tax versus capital gains discount.

    10% Capital growth with 2% yield: A $3.2 Million house earning 65K rent. Earnt 628K rent over life of asset

    2% Capital growth earning 10% yield: A $618k house earning 61k rent. Earnt $1.113 M rent over lifetime of asset
     
    Andy909 and Jaxon Avery like this.

Are you an Aussie investor? Track all your trades, dividends, portfolio, CGT & more in one place with Sharesight. Ditch your spreadsheet & try the award-winning Australian portfolio tracker and tax reporting tool for FREE today.