Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mminion

  1. thresher, Stamp Duty is state based and therefore it differs state to state... and the exemptions only started 2007 from memory. i.e. TAS has a concession of up to a maximum of $4000 QLD $8,750 (property less then $504,999.99) that reduces to nil (property more then $550,000) I've looked at all the states and I can't see any duty rate that would amount to an 18K exemption ? Cheers Matt
  2. "However, a sub-prime equivalent has been created with the first home buyers grant. The grant allowed borrowers who normally wouldn't have qualified, to borrow big sums of money to buy a house without having saved any of their own money for a deposit." Sorry but that made me LOL. That grant was $7K and only last year was it boosted to $14K ($21K for new construction) The average house price (national) last year was just over $400K At 7K it's not even a 2% deposit At 14K it's a 3.5% deposit At 21K it's a 5.25% deposit The grant doesn't in most cases even cover the cost of stamp duty. At $400K most FHO's needed to amass between $20-30K. The media seems to swing between, "the deposit required now make housing out of reach" to "anyone can buy with the FHOG" It can't be both... Cheers Matt
  3. "I have listed a couple of material suppliers - they are not doing well because? I reckon they are not doing well because demand is weak, construction is down. Is it mainly due to slowdown in the commercial property and/or the residential sector?" Demand and supply don't have to be 1:1 Demand can remain static (or even grow) while a market over supplies... the end result is a excess (which is where we are now IMO). The real question is, is demand falling or is supply simply falling to match demand ? Personally based on the stats I've seen supply is falling to match demand while demand remains pretty much static. I don't see any major new excess being created (most planned projects are now being canned) and that IMO is being reflected in the SP of the material suppliers. Cheers Matt
  4. Nohoper, Without wanting to sound rude, try reading the last couple of posts. They part explain the conditions that caused the US/UK to crash and why the same type of crash didn't occur in Australia. It's not a case of simple lag either, if the Australia market does crash it will be due to a different set of factors (i.e. high unemployment) I don't think you'll see anyone claim the market is booming and there are areas (like the NW of Melbourne) that have serious over supply issues. That said it's about averages, the serious over supply in one area doesn't equate to the whole state or country market. "probably suffering from debt over hang, poor demand, poor result and generally are starved of Vitamin M(oney)..." I think you've summed it up nicely. IMO a number of these projects where borderline uneconomical from the start. It's worth remembering that poor management and bad lending practices can cause projects to fail even in a growing market. Cheers Matt
  5. Hi Triage, "somehow is supposed to mean that there can be no price tension is quite specious IMO" I'd have to agree. The other issue is how many of those 60% have been used as credit guarantees against other investments (including property) "Problems in the residential real estate in the US was a leading indicator this time around because unusually it was the banking real estate connection that initiated the problems in the US, but not quite the same here" That IMO is a very important point, it's something I've been trying to highlight for months. The conditions that effected the US/UK property market didn't occur in Australia. IMO If the "supportive effects" remain (low interest rates, FHOG) the market will drift gently downwards until the equity markets improve (early 2010). As I've said many times before... mid April will be the real indicator, we'll know then what big business are planning on doing over the next 6-12 months. Cheers Matt
  6. Well worth a read... http://business.smh.com.au/business/safe-a...hk.html?page=-1 I've copy/pasted a couple of IMO keypoints... 'Between June 1990 and June 1992, full-time employment fell by 7%, and then took a full three years to get back to where it started. So, how far did home prices fall? Actually, they didn't. Average house prices across Australia's state capitals rose - not fell- by about 2% per annum in nominal terms as that early-1990s recession and jobs disaster unfolded. ''It turns out that the downward pressure on home prices from shrinking employment in the early-1990s recession was more than offset by upward pressure on home prices from the halving of mortgage rates, from a record 17% in 1989 to 8.75% in 2003. ''I have no idea if average Australian house prices will fall somewhat or rise over the next five years. But those with their eyes wide open can see that sharply lower mortgage rates this time around - lower than most Australian home buyers ever dared to dream - already are having a strongly supportive effect on housing markets.'... ''Now that mortgage rates suddenly are nearly 400 points lower, the ratio of household interest payments to disposable income has dropped from about 15% to near 10%. That is, Australian households on average now devote about $1 of every $10 of after-tax earnings to interest payments, down from about $1.50 about 10 months ago. ''Australian households' debt burden just dropped dramatically, something that didn't happen in the US or the UK when it mattered.''..... "To help keep a little perspective on the average Australian home, it's worth remembering that more than 60% of households are mortgage free - even unemployment can't see a bank repossessing them.".... "That's perhaps not the impression you might get from the general media - especially if your local paper is the Mosman Daily." Cheers Matt
  7. Standalone stats are nothing but dangerous Sydney House Prices (Commsec) How about something that shows past 2000 ? (if you find it, it will show the down turn that occurs 2 years after the end of that graph) Compound Annual Growth Rate graph is displaying the creation rate not the total number of still vacant houses (nor how long they were vancant) Real Home Price Index. Now show it adjusted with forex in mind (as the base line is 119 years old) Household Debt, again adjust it with forex in mind. (we have covered this before in this topic if you look back) The next two graphs now factor dual incomes... the idea that dual incomes will stop anytime soon is unrealistic. Alot of this has been covered in depth on this topic before, Jasonjeroo take a hour and have a look back thru the last 25 pages. You'll see the past debate about the US vs UK vs AUS household debt and how when you adjust it to take into account forex (and how that the three countries measure the figure) AUS is below the US & UK When you see the same figure by three different researches and they are all different you'll start to understand that each country has a slightly different way of measuring (it's just like how TheFerret was amazed at how the AUS unemployment is measured) 15+ posts and you still haven't answered 3 basic questions... so I'll repeat them: So your 100% cash ATM? Your parents renting ? Your renting? Cheers Matt
  8. Jasonjeroo, "it's tip for tap on answers (i.e. I'm not answering you because you didn't answer me)" Not this again. How about replying to my 3 questions ? (if you carefully read my post you'll see I didn't claim you personally attacked me) Here's a selection of your claims that are based on past events "Supply is NOT drying up. The exact opposite is the case" "At the bottom of the market the quality is not low" "Guess what? Prices are getting cheaper." (compared to prices in 2003/2004) "I say supply is increasing. It can be proven statistically." "Adelaide? It only started to rise after all the other "investors" got priced out of the other states." "average earnings there are too low to support any serious cap gains" (Adelaide) Cheers Matt
  9. jasonjeroo, I shouldn't be replying as yet again you've posted with no real stats or sources to backup or even lend support to your viewpoint. If you read my posts you'll see I'm not predicting any short term house price increases. What I am saying is the statistics don't point to 20-30% falls as per your claims (or the other claims like Adelaide) As to your "personal circumstances" you made clear; You told family to sell 3 years ago You believe the market will fall 30% You believe the share market has further to fall. It's very "on topic" to ask if you are following your own advise, it would be hypocritical not to. As to quality you again seem to selectively quote or read the post so quickly you miss complete lines, I don't know how many times I've said at the bottom and not now. Just like my last post, Awaiting a reply with stats and sources. Cheers Matt
  10. This is getting childish now, any disagreement is meet with a personal attack, it's tip for tap on answers (i.e. I'm not answering you because you didn't answer me). There's 3 direct questions in the last post you seem to have ignored. "crystal ball advice" ? Please point me to it… it must be a big ball as it fits RMIT, ABS, Aus Gov etc in it. "You say "Supply is falling, it can be proven statically". I say supply is increasing. It can be proven statistically." Please supply it, I've been posting on this topic for months now, lots of stats and sources for those stats. In reviewing your posts I'm yet to see any major stats and/or source to backup a viewpoint. Quality isn't just about price, supply is a factor… because you can afford something doesn't always mean you can obtain it when you want it. As to Adelaide, your comments show a lack of research (and something else but we're being nice now). Adelaide started to move based on the mining boom, defense contracts, etc. We come back to stats, it's easy to measure when "investors" from other states move in (i.e. the address of the title holder, it's all recorded by the State Title office) and the stats show what you claim "started" the rise... occurred 3 years after it (funny that). Average earnings, ABS will clear that up (have a look and then compare against average state based property prices) as to cap gains whats better, 500K to 600K or 1m to 1.2m ? . Awaiting a reply with stats and sources. Cheers Matt
  11. jasonjeroo Your handing out lot of "hindsight" advise. The market is more than just Sydney (try expanding your view point), based on your "advise" I should not have bought my last property (2005) I should have also sold all my shareholdings in October last year. So your 100% cash ATM? Your parents renting ? Your renting? Supply is falling, it can be proven statically. You've claimed "There are more properties on the market now than a couple of years ago". The stats don't support that, they do support that your getting confused with "number of days on market" as that is increasing. The past shows at the bottom of the market quality is low. I'm talking about the "bottom" not the last 12 months unless your claiming it's bottoming now. What's been on offer in Mosman in the last 12 months may not be quality when you compare it AGAINST other Mosman properties. Like for Like, Mosman vs Mosman, Bondi vs Bondi, at the bottom of the market the quality on offer in each suburb is below its normal par. As to missing out, if you quoted me correctly you'll see I talk about risk. You claiming it is better to buy at the bottom, so when is that ? I see people call tops and bottoms on shares all day and more often they miss them by a clear +10%. Anyhow, again the property market is more than a single city or state. Sydney prices topped out more than 5 years ago (again statistics show this clearly) but other markets like Adelaide grew up to the last quarter (if you do a little research you'll see Adelaide was a little slow, it didn't run like Sydney did in the early 00's and hence it was "catching up") Cheers Matt BTW If I followed your advice I would have missed on a 54% increase on my last property.
  12. jasonjeroo, Duster's question is very valid and you last post seems to imply the answer is no. With that in mind the second part of the question should be then "why ?" Forgetting the liquidity issue for a second the other major difference between shares and property is no two parcels are the same. Supply will and is drying up... It's the simple fact people put off selling into a depressed market unless they are forced to. It's a little like trading, at the top or bottom of most rallies volume is very low. Anyhow back to no two parcels being the same, at the bottom of any property market the "quality" on offer is always low, it's part caused by the average "type" of person thats forced to sell. It's like any market based system (i.e. a fruit market), the specials come at the end of the day when the seller is forced to sell. Normally by that time anything of quality has long gone and the supply is low... if you plan to only buy then you need to accept the risk that you may simply "miss out". Cheers Matt
  13. TheFerret, Don't laugh, Tri Incomes households are coming (children can't afford to buy themselves and hence living with the parents longer). Tri/Quad income households are common in Asia. Anyhow while a little off topic you'll laugh at this... http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/03/pallet_x_10000.jpg While you will never see a trillion dollars in person (nature's way of protecting your sanity amidst the bailout), computers can do the job without breaking a sweatâ€â€ÂÂÂÂor worrying about retirement. Measurements were taken of a $US10,000 stack of $US100 bills and pretty much multiplied from there using simple geometry. In that trillion dollar shot, each pallet holds $US100 million...and the pallets are double stacked. As for that red blob on the left? It's a human. Cheers Matt
  14. jasonjeroo, "You think 10X wages house prices are sustainable? My older brother bought his first house at 3X average wages. Houses have seen a massive rise in a fraction of a generation." I've commented on this before (4th Feb 2009) the stats don't paint the full picture.... two words "Dual Income" It's also worth pointing out "other" daily products cost less now verse then when you factor inflation (i.e. cars, petrol). The "good old days" approach seems to falter when you sit down and work out what really changed. Cheers Matt
  15. Mags, This will come across rude but it has to be said, your showing your age a little.... it's your first down turn in the labour force. I'm reading a lot of panic and lots of media quotes in your post but one has to ask what have you seen happening around you? Oh but it's not a recession it's GD2 (Great Depression II). Sept 2001, GD2 talk. 2000 (Tech Bubble popped), GD2 talk Early 1990's (our last recession), GD2 talk 1987 (Wall Street), GD2 talk was very loud then I can go on and on... every downturn since GD1 you'll see talk about GD2 starting. The media reports what sells papers, the truth comes second. Job stability, If you know 100 people (of working age) statistically 2 of them will become unemployed this year. If you live in a state other then WA or QLD you'll be lucky to know 1 out of 100. That's reality and anything more is just media hype. Recessions are a part of life, will housing prices drop this year... sure... but so will supply. It's not one for one and there's a lag but it will happen. Based on RMIT modeling only 4% of Australian 8.5 million households will face "negative equity" this year. 97-98% of that 4% will be able to service the mortgage and/or refinance, 2-3% will default. Lets talk numbers that meants there will be around 7,000-10,000 properties sold onto the market. Sounds like a big number but the reality is 600-800 properties per month mainly focused around WA & QLD. SA wise based on the stats there will be less than 50 "fire sales" per month mainly focused to the north and south. If you want something really scary to think about...try the aging population and the effects on the economy Cheers Matt
  16. wren "In Florida,prices peaked in 1927 and did not recover (in dollar terms--not inflation adjusted ) until 1957. There are many reasons for home ownership:not sure if "as an investment" is one." wren it's worth pointing out WHY Florida prices peaked 1927.. The 1920's Florida real estate bubble bursting was caused by a number of factors: The railroads couldn't handle the demand (food and building supplies) 1925 the rail demand was so high they embargoed all goods other then food. 1926 the Prinz Valdemar sank in the mouth of Miami harbor (blocking it) Now also add 2 major hurricanes that destroyed a number of industries With the above in mind the cost for building supplies skyrocketed, projects collapsed. Wall Street didn't come into the issue until 1929. As to AFTER the great depression... the arrival of the Mediterranean fruit fly destroyed both the tourist and citrus industries upon which Florida depended (so the state didn't recover like many other states recovered after the great depression) So my point is trying to compare what happened then vs now is drawing a long bow. Cheers Matt
  17. Hi Bam Most large companies announce bonus, pay increases, staff levels and project budgets early April (they close the books 31st March as it normally takes 3 months to finalise) With this in mind I think by late April, early May you'll see how bad it's going to get for the next 6 months. As to the grants and all that... try thinking about them as % So your question is (based on $400K) buy now and get 3.5% in grants or buy later and get 1.75%. IMO really don't see the markets droping 1.75% between June and July. For example the last house we bought, we drove by the open inspection on the way to another open inspection (this house wasn't even on our radar). After looking at the house I said to the better half "I love you but no" as it was out our price range. 3 weeks later I bought the house at action (it sold for less then we expected) I think the point I'm making is long term a 2% difference is NOTHING... the bigger issue will be finding the right house. Cheers Matt
  18. Why girls model cars... enough said
  19. Sad but true... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...-false-leg.html Man has electronic tag fitted to false leg Bret Ravenhill, 29, was given the tag to ensure he obeyed a curfew after being convicted for the possession of cannabis. He said a Group 4 security worker failed to notice that his left leg was made of metal and detachable. Ravenhill, a forklift truck driver who lost the leg in a motorcycle crash six years ago, told The Sun: "Two friends were at my house when she came round and were killing themselves laughing. "I thought she would realise straight away - but she never bothered to turn up my trouser leg or look underneath my sock. I just left things as they were for a joke." Ravenhill was given probation by a judge but barred from going out at night for three months. Despite security workers checking his tag every four weeks, none noticed it was attached to the metal leg. He said: "I didn't break my curfew once - but I could have been out living it up every night. I'm no danger to the public - but what if they'd done the same thing to an armed robber?" David Hanson, the justice minister, told the newspaper: "I am very concerned." A spokesman for Group 4 added: "It would appear that in this instance the procedure has not been followed."
  20. "As an example :we should be the world leading country in solar and we're not." Totally agree onefineday Using the 42 billion we could convert 10-11% of all Australian households to grid connected solar power. Become the world leader in Solar power usage Meet all of our "carbon" targets Kick start the "Green" industry (which would have long term effects) Keep the building sector going (someone has to install them) Drop the base load demand by 10% and hence fix all the power supply issues Want to spread the wealth ? Match dollar for dollar then… we would then convert 21-22% of all Australian households to solar power. Don't like power, we all know water is a issue in this country, $42 billion on water based infrastructure would go a long way in trying to fix the issue. We need to start thinking outside the box and not token handouts that may help now but after a month or two are simply forgotten in the big picture. Cheers Matt
  21. A little something in the paper today... http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/files/stepback.pdf Year (Decade), Avg Interest Rate, Avg Adelaide House Price, Average Monthly Mortgage Repayment, Average SA weekly wage. Decade / Avg Mortgage/ Avg Weekly Wage / Avg House Price (% increase difference) 70's vs 00's /830.43% / 809.23% / 924.37% 80's vs 00's /243.95% / 254.85% / 380.89% 90s vs 00's /199.59% / 135.32% /246.64% Shock horror... now factor how many household where dual full time income in the 70's, how about the 80's ? When you factor that dual incomes are now the "norm" the average household income starts to keep up with the mortgage repayments and the average house price (my point is stats by themselves don't paint the full or correct picture) Anyhow if you want a laugh compare 40's with 00's. The average weekly wage has increase by 7900.68% yet the average house price has only increased by 6953.22% So over a 60 year point of view, housing has increased less then wages Cheers Matt
  22. I don't disagree. When I heard how it was collected I almost feel off my chair but after hearing all the reasons it did make sense (i.e not all unemployed people collect benefits, some people work without telling the ATO, part time vs full time etc). Cheers Matt
  23. TheFerret, Sorry but your wrong there. The unemployment rate statistic is collected by a "sample poll", i.e. they interview a sample group and ask them questions on their employment in the last fortnight. If the "few folks" you know told the interviewer to "shove it" they would be excluded from the poll (not counted as employed or unemployed). Cheers Matt
  24. Best AD I've seen for a long time... Scroll down to the bottom of the attachmentVeet.pdf
  • Create New...