As a newbie looking to get into property, I've been doing heaps of reading, research and browsing of this forum. Looking as specific areas/suburbs can one infer much from historic cycles when laid against other areas. Brisbane and greater area/cities By this I mean say area A peaked at $300k in 2008ish, very slightly retracted the following year or two then bottomed in 2011ish, but since as been recovering steady but is still below the previous peak. Where other areas still growing have exceeded or at least reached their previous peak. Looking at such data would one infer that the area's still yet to recover to former peaks are a bit more of a safe bet in terms of at least more immediate growth than others? Ie they are on a slower or out of cycle situation? Very general info I know, with 11ty other variables, but I did wonder if there was some logic to this thinking? Especially if say surrounding suburbs had cycled higher already perhaps.