tightly held suburbs

not sure if this has been posted before...

Australia's Most Tightly Held Suburbs

I found it quite informative. From hoods to favelas, the tool is quite comprehensive I think in its selection and comparisons.

 

This would change depending on the cycle right?
Tightly held for the past 12 months only shows a fraction of the whole picture.

 

Thanks
I just wonder how real this is...... because the figures/stats could be somewhat misleading if you have areas where there is a larger supply of units???

 

in the tool, you can select between houses and units. Results may be different for both.

 

thanks, will check this out and pay more attention

 

yes, however, I think is a reasonable assumption ( albeit not a very tighly correlated one) that tighly held will be independent of where it is in the cycle. Not sure, but tighly held suburbs persist with the tag no matter where they are in the cycle.

 

There's a few glaring caveats though. (If I understand the parameters used in producing the report correctly):
1. If people are selling up homes in the area to developers who then put higher density dwellings in that location then your sales ratios will be relatively high compared to suburbs where little or no development is happening. One sold home may result in many new dwellings that will probably change hands. That's not a sign of the suburb being tightly held or not. It's a sign that the Council is more developer friendly than some others that may mandate that your frontage must be 36m (or some other nonsense) before it can be subdivided. It also means if you are lucky to have one of these homes that can be higher density... possibly a developer's premium on your block can be obtained. Why not sell out? I would (unless I was to try to develop it myself) .

2. Suburbs with no sales are excluded - so actually these are more tightly held than even any in the list.

3. Any suburbs with a small number of dwelling homes (below a certain threshold) are completely excluded from the list. It's why I hardly ever see unit stats on a suburb where one of my units are held, there would be fewer than 10 unit sales in that suburb per year. I suppose they could be considered reasonably tightly held. Anyway, it is what it is. If this suburb could be rolled in with a neighbouring suburb (there's a lot of very well known suburbs surrounding this one), then that would be helpful for market stats in general. It may have some impact (positive or negative) on the sales prices in the suburb too...

 

Tightly held? Or just difficult to sell?

 

That's quite interesting
So applying this to the average investor who has 100 properties.
A tightly held portfolio is where you trade less than 2 properties each year!
Curious to know are there many investors that have not sold a property in the last 30 years ?

 

Original owners of my house/land never sold for 80 years.... it then sold in 1976, I think those owners may have passed away and it was then sold 1982, 1997, and 2015/6 when I was lucky enough to pick it up. .
There were renos and a subdivision during this time.
Would be nice if it can stay in my family for 80 odd years....

 

Just tried a few mining towns for fun.... Moranbah, Gladstone, and Karratha.... you guessed it zip, need over 1000 properties on market

 

Can I call BS (possibly)?

Most of these suburbs don't have 1000 houses sold annually - what is the time frame for 1000 properties to have sold?

I know that my suburb turns over around 200 houses annually and others even less but still make the rankings.

 

I don't think it's 1000 houses sold, but 1000 houses total. The numerator is then the number on market.

 

Does your house sponsor the forums or something? It seems to weave its way into every single thread!

 

Well, it is an awesome house ... previous owners did some research and got all the historical ownership details on it.... I just love it

 

The transactional cost of switching properties is so wasteful. ..better to avoid selling

 

Fortitude Valley has hardly any houses