What is the best Capital Growth property?

Might ram a car through the right hand side. Get some symmetry going. Feng Shui if you will.

 

Just to your question, if you are thinking of purely capital growth potential, then look into LAND not PROPERTY, remember LAND has the upside potential but BUILDING itself always depreciates....
Just my opinion, hope this helps

 

excellent insight! thx for posting

 

Tesla stocks

 

I am starting to look at QLD for land releases. What are some of the upcoming land releases there?

 

I planted 300 olive trees on 14 acres so for less than $6,000, I saved a few million in land tax. Unfortunately they didn’t produce any fruit and once the subdivision came through they got removed with a bulldozer. But my cousin actually has these trees that he cuts branches from and sells as greens to wholesalers in the cut flower markets. There is a Christmas tree farm nearby, and a former neighbour who has a $200 million dollar holding has cattle in Sydney.

 

Sorry I only buy in my areas of expertise. It’s too hard to know all of Australia or NSW or even all of Sydney. I only buy within 20 mins of home or work in Sydney or my business partners in Victoria.

 

This is great insight, thanks for sharing.

Can I please ask how did you get to the above document? I went to the panning website you linked and tried to find a similar one for future releases but couldn't for the life of me

 

Local councils release their own LEP every decade or so too. But the one I printed is only about 1/2 way through. I do t expect a new one until 2030 or so.

 

Sounds like a smart move. Seems a shame to plant all those olive trees and then see them bulldozed out but I guess that's what happens. You are really just farming valuable land.
The last couple of years I have seen some valuable dairy farming land with millions worth of improvements being sold to cashed up investors and wealthy broad acre farmers from further north. They close the dairy down ( even though very lucrative) and run beef or even sheep. Often farms with top notch infrastructure and homes on them will bring about the same per hectare. People must wonder why they bothered all those years?? Even so, they have done very well and in most cases have passed the active asset rule.

 

This is 12 years old. The big Q is where is the latest.

The biggest earner of money, is money. It takes money make more.
So unless somone has 14m to spend, they may need a much longer timeframe.

 

They only release one every 30-40 plus years, in between local councils plan theirs through the LEP so thats why you concentrate on only 3-4 LEP.

I was never a big earner until I was over 45, I didn’t buy my first car until I was 40, I had 4 children and a wife to support at 28.
I didn’t start this way, I just used this plan to make money. Starting with a $36,000 home unit at 19 years of age when I earned $120 per week. I didn’t buy the $14 million at once either. I was selling the earlier buys to buy the later parcels and to fund my (very expensive) divorce settlement.

 

Thanks for sharing. Sounds like you have done very well all the same.

 

Are you still starting some sort of primary industry on land that you own? If you are it would be interesting to hear what you're doing.

 

No just about all my land holdings are being subdivided in the next two years.

 

I disagree because when i value property they tend to have higher building value then when it was originally built. Construction costs have gone up considerably. If you actually demolished these 1920s homes and rebuilt it then you could lose more than 50% of purchase value or cost significantly more if you want original specs.

 

You are better off ...buying houses in the top 10 suburbs in Perth - Dalkeith...City Beach...Cottlesloe....Mosman Park...Peppermint Grove....Applecross...Nedands... etc.

Hold for 3-5 years and sell and rinse and repeat. I don't you will get the same percent growth in Sydney.

 

Interesting thoughts but I think you misunderstood the statement...

Building itself will ALWAYS depreciate no matter how good the quality it is, that's why there's "depreciation schedule", the same theory applies to newly built properties.

When you are buying 1920s homes, in most cases the building is actually worth nothing so I can't imagine who's going to pay 50% of the purchase value because of the building itself unless it's some sort of heritage building and if that's the case, it won't be a development project.

Hope this clarifies your concern

 

Hi Henry, i thought that too in the past. But all the properties I have valued in my portfolio the replacement value exceeds the original construction cost and even after depreciation the value of building has gone up over time. How is this possible? If inflation exceeds depreciation?

With regards to 1920s build it depends. Builders during that time will usually build quality buildings in higher socio economic areas compared to lower socio economic areas. You are correct to say this applies to heritage builds and they fetch a premium but even non heritage builds that are art deco or premium builds in the past will retain or exceed original value if well maintained. I have seen old properties with 50% building component if it has been renovated to modern standards.

Studies have shown to replace original doors, ceilings, plumbing with new materials have significantly lost its value eg replacing metal structural elements with modern plastic castings; jarrah flooring with laminate; brick veneer over double brick. What gives the building the uniqueness and character loses in value when you demolish it and build a modern cookie cutter home. What makes vintage doors worth tens of thousands on gumtree and ebay? Old watches that should have depreciated and be worth nothing now have gone up in value.

Go to new york or london and you see old concrete skyscrapers and buildings that are centuries old still standing. Why don't they demolish this and rebuild?