Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mminion

  1. In reply to: arty on Monday 18/08/08 06:11pm The gap is closing fast, from 4% to 16% in under 4 hours It takes alot of blood, sweat and tears to run ShareScene so it's really nice to see the community giving something back. http://www.compareshares.com.au/vote_forum.php Cheers Matt
  2. In reply to: Danville on Monday 18/08/08 06:00pm Hi Danville, ShareScene was only alerted today about the vote, I've been told it started last week. I've sure over the next week the gap will close Cheers Matt
  3. Mar Qtr 08 to Jun Qtr 08 / Jun Qtr 07 to Jun Qtr 08 Weighted average of eight capital cities -0.3 / 8.2 Sydney 0.3 / 4.4 Melbourne –0.3 / 14.1 Brisbane 0.6 / 14 Adelaide 0.4 / 16.2 Perth –2.4 / –0.9 Hobart –2.0 / 3.0 Darwin 1.9 /7.0 Canberra –1.4 / 7.2 It's worth noting that "Economists" had expected a fall of 1.0 per cent for the June quarter (so they aren't totally in touch with what's happening) The same "Economists" are predicting "Nationally, house and unit values are expected to dip by 10% over the next 12 months". So based on past performance that figure maybe anywhere from 5-10%. BTW I did like the headline "Overall capital city house prices declined by the sharpest rate in more than three years." 3 years? What happened 4 years ago? That's right the Sydney market peaked in 2003 and between 2003-2005 we had declines greater then this one. While I don't hold views like Kevin Young (he's too over the top positive) I do agree with how he is painting the media... the headlines don't match the facts Cheers Matt
  4. In reply to: bam_bamm on Friday 01/08/08 02:00pm Hi Bam_bamm I can show a number of examples that go the other way (offered more to work in Adelaide vs Sydney). I'm sure if your family member told their current employer about the job offer that 25% difference would decrease very quickly (i.e. they would be offered a raise to stay in ADL). It's about averages, http://www.payscale.com/research/AU/City=Sydney/Salary http://www.payscale.com/research/AU/City=Adelaide/Salary Housing maybe cheaper but if you exclude that factor it's not really any cheaper to live in Adelaide (in fact a recent report showed Adelaide's grocery's are more expensive then Sydney/Melbourne) it's simple economies of scale. Anyhow I think you missed my point... two years ago the housing price difference between the two cities was 62.9%, it's now 33.8% and I showed why IMO the "gap" closed (wage difference) Cheers Matt
  5. I'll get to the below in a second, but it's worth noting the Sydney average house price peaked in 2003. Difference between 2006 (June) and 2008 (March) Houses Sydney 5.16% Melbourne 25.85% Brisbane 29.50% Adelaide 28.04% Perth 12.75% Units Sydney 2.25% Melbourne 25.09% Brisbane 26.07% Adelaide 28.78% Perth 17.32% Lets take Adelaide as an example. In the last 2 years the average house price has increased by 28% but if you look into why IMO it's a story about catch up... Software Engineer / Developer / Programmer Sydney $56,301 Adelaide $50,412 The difference in pay is 11.6% yet the housing price difference between the two cities is currently 33.8%. Back in 2006 the housing price difference between the two cities was 62.9%. Now I can't dig up the pay figures for 2006 but I can tell you from personal experience the difference wasn't much more then it is currently (11.6%) It's a simple game of catch up… Sydney grew harder and faster then Adelaide over the past 10 years but Adelaide is now catching up. The 33.8% difference in wages still allows for positive movement in places like Adelaide IMO. Now when you take into account inflation Sydney is moving backwards and has been for the past 2 years… Yet if you listen to the media, depending on which day in the week it is, Sydney's housing prices are either "Out of Control" or "Falling like Rocks". The truth is something very much "in between" and it depends a lot of which suburb your talking about. No two stocks are the same, the same goes for suburbs, cities & countries, search BEHIND the media headlines…. Being investors and traders we already do so for shares, I can't see why property should be any different. Cheers Matt
  6. “according to Gerard Minack, senior economist at Morgan Stanley in Sydney. Prices dropped in all of Australia's major cities last month for the first time since just before the Great Depression.†“Today we hear on the radio in Adelaide that all major cities fell, except for Adelaide. Not quite sure where those figures are from. I don't believe them though......†“I'm surprised at how people can expect that Australian property can hold given it's the most expensive in the world, and the world as a whole is revalueing.†With a little “word smithing†you can make twist statistics to show what you want. Focus on the words “Australia's major citiesâ€ÂÂÂÂÂ… worked it out yet ? Gerard Minack doesn’t class Adelaide as a “major†city. Further more, Australian property is not the most expensive in the world… again it’s about twisting statistics. That headline is based on the "Median Multiple" statistic. (average household price / average household income) Australia = 6.3 Canada = 3.1 Ireland = 4.7 New Zealand = 6.3 United Kingdom = 5.5 United States = 3.6 Now I'm sure people have seen this statistic, but how many know how it's gathered ? One of the first issues in this statistic is they don't count areas under 50,000 people (there goes a lot of Australia and New Zealand towns), the second issue is the not all countries are surveyed (i.e. Hong Kong) for the simple reason, it gets too hard to gather statistics "world" wide. (the above report didn't even include European countries for that matter) Just compare Hong Kong to Sydney as an example… 2 Bedroom unit, CBD district. It's a simple 2:1 ratio… $530,000 - $545,000 303 CASTLEREAGH STREET, SYDNEY - Size: 110 sqm Approx (I've converted this to 1184 ft² ) - Lock up garage: 16 sqm Approx HK$ 7,980,000 (I've concerted this to $1,089,000 AUD) 15, Arbuthnot Road, Central, Hong Kong  780 sq.ft. 2 Bedroom(s), including 0 Ensuite 1 Bathrooms Combined Living and Dining Room Google both if you want to look at each (neither have nice views so it's not a "view" your paying for). Do the same for Paris, London, New York… the idea that Australian property is super expensive is based on twisted statistics. Size is the other issue, the average Australian block is one of the largest in the world, if you focus on flats/units (so plain square meters of living space) you start to have something to evenly compare with… and once you start comparing with that in mind you see figures like the above (Hong Kong VS Sydney) Anyhow back to work… got to pay off the mortgage Cheers Matt
  7. USA vs AUS... It's like comparing apples with oranges when it comes to home loans. First off the "Media", it's in their interest to stir up "fear" as it sells papers (facts sometimes take a backseat), lets just keep that in the back of the mind. "Interest Only" loans, 100-105% Lending & Large "Honeymoon Rate"s created the issue in the USA.... These issues don't effect the Australian market to anywhere near to the same extent. Up until recently people in America borrowed 100-105% of their home value, on a "Interest Only" arrangement and more so on a "Honeymoon Rate". After the Honeymoon rate finished the shit hit the fan and people suddenly discovered they borrowed more then they could service.... further more they also had no equity to draw on as the loan was interest only. Now in Australia almost all the loans are based on your ability to pay "principal + interest on the principal", interest only loans are not common here. Add into that 100-105% loans aren't common in AUS, most are 90-95%... The only place you normally see 100%+ loans in Australia are brand new developments in the outer suburbs. Not surprisingly prices in these suburbs have dropped, those that couldn't afford the inner suburbs (so those already struggling) borrowed more then they could service and when interest rates rose the trouble started. There's also a "Generation" issue... Gen Y want their first house to be their "dream" house but that’s a issue for another day. Anyhow the short of this is both markets (America Vs Australia) are very different... Cheers Matt
  8. In reply to: swuzzlebubble on Wednesday 09/07/08 12:49pm Weight falls under "Indirect Discrimination" "A party may be able to lawfully discriminate indirectly where they can show that the policy or practice is reasonable in all the circumstances." You can have a rule based on weight, but it has to be applied "in all the circumstances". You can't waive the fee for a 75 year old female confined to a wheel chair AND then charge a 35 year old male weighing 145kg (but otherwise healthy) Cheers Matt
  9. QUOTE (Roberts5 @ Wednesday 09/07/08 11:01am) Roberts5 Yes there is a human side, but you can't throw economics out the window because it doesn't suit your issue. If you personally drove her in your car from point A to point B you would be "directly" paying for that "extra cushioning". I don't see you suggesting that the government should be issuing you with a fuel rebate to cover that "extra" cost. In some cases weight is not controllable (as you highlight), but in most cases it is. The issue here is anti-discrimination laws mean you can't have "two rules". I am all for allowing exceptions in cases such as your mother in law but in doing so it's only a matter of time before some 35 year old male weighing 145kg (but otherwise healthy) sues the airline for charging him extra. A flight from Sydney to London (using a 747) there's an aprox 15 to 1 ratio. For everyone 1kg of person, you need 15kg of fuel. Two people, one is 80kg the other is 115kg. At 15:1 and the cost of Jet-A the second person costs a couple of hundred dollars more to transport. Jet-A has increased by 40% in the last year... the per kg model is coming, either suggest a change in anti-discrimination laws (to allow for cases like your mother in law) or tell her to expect to pay more. Cheer Matt
  10. Roberts5 & Sirob How about reading the topic before making comment ? A person's "Age" does not effect fuel economy... What is being discussed is charging ALL passengers based on weight as "mass" as a direct effect on the energy required to move it from point A to point B. Cheers Matt
  11. In reply to: Damon22 on Tuesday 08/07/08 02:18pm The Frequent Flyer annual weigh-in is a very good idea, that way it allows for electronic check-in As for everyone else, it's as simple as building a "stand on" weigh plate (i.e. when you walk upto to the check-in counter your standing on a 6 x 6 weight plate). It weights everything including luggage and you then get presented a visa card receipt to sign. The whole "weight" non-discrimination idea IMO won't last too much longer. As a society we can't afford a total anti-discrimination policy on weight (the health care costs are too great) Cheers Matt
  12. In reply to: Damon22 on Tuesday 08/07/08 09:46am Anti-Discrimination laws are based around the idea of having one rule for all (i.e. you can't have one rule for people under 100kg and another for people over 100kg) With that in mind you can put in place a single rule that is "legal" from an Anti-Discrimation point of view….ALL passengers are weighted and charged a set rate per kilogram per kilometre travelled. Don't laugh the airlines have already looked at this model, it does have two major draw backs: ~ Check-in times.. Not only would it take a lot of time to weight people you then have to charge them (so online check in goes out the window) ~ Variable cost/profit models (they don't now how much they are going to earn until you arrive at the airport) It's only a matter of time before they apply a per kg model…. They just need a more automatic way to weigh & charge you Cheers Matt
  13. QUOTE (alonso @ Tuesday 24/06/08 11:06am) Hi Alonso IMO it's not the end of "mass air travel"... It's the beginning of the end of "mass air travel powered by oil" Have a look at the below link, they are already playing with the idea of planes powered by fuel cells. http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/aerospace.htm Cheers Matt
  14. A dust storm appears over Mali, Sahara Desert - 6/6/2001 (Image courtesy of the Image Science & Analysis Laboratory, NASA Johnson Space Center)
  15. A cloud wake appears on the downwind side of Isla Socorro, Mexico - 2/12/2000 (Image courtesy of the Image Science & Analysis Laboratory, NASA Johnson Space Center)
  16. Stumbled over some really nice photo's… Photo's from space often seem very "flat" as they are normally looking directly down, but the angle of these ones just seem to highlight the "thin" atmosphere that covers this big rock Cumulonimbus Cloud over Africa - 2/5/2008 (Image courtesy of the Image Science & Analysis Laboratory, NASA Johnson Space Center)
  17. Bumper sticker around Sydney hah hah
  18. mminion


    In reply to: wolverine on Thursday 08/05/08 10:57am "they are retaining the brand and staff" The 300 or so Westnet staff "should" improve iinet's support. Skilled IT staff in WA (especially at the moment) are worth their weight in gold. Forgetting Westnet's business for a second this increase in staff levels will help iinet support/grow their business. The question now is.. Who's Next ?
  19. QUOTE (forrestgump @ Wednesday 09/04/08 02:04pm) Hi Forrest I've PM'ed Wolverine asking him to make comment on this topic, from memory he is masochist like yourself http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/wink.gif Cheers Matt
  20. In reply to: mosaic1996 on Wednesday 02/04/08 01:17pm http://business.theage.com.au/a-nightmare-...2zx.html?page=2 "A few observations; the original storyline that the bulk of Opes exposure was Top 200 Australian shares would appear to be calculated on alphabet, or perhaps in view of the small mineral resources index, rather than on market capitalisation. Many of the holdings are substantial and some more than 19.9%, which is the trigger for compulsory acquisition. This means that ANZ may technically be forced to make takeover bids. Clearly that hasn't happened and there would be little trouble in getting a waiver from ASIC on this one. Still, substantial shareholding notices have failed to materialise for recent changes in 5%-plus holdings." Hi Mosaic, See above, It seems TerryA, Directors of SLA & Myself aren't the only ones suggesting that ANZ may need to fill in some paper work. Cheers Matt
  21. QUOTE (BSA @ Wednesday 02/04/08 12:26pm) Hi BSA, IMO it's getting to the point in where I believe the ASX needs to place ALL effected listed companies (around 700 of them) into a trading halt. That way everyone has 3 days (or longer if needed) to contact ANZ/Merrils and therefore work out the issues. Cheers Matt
  22. In reply to: TerryA on Wednesday 02/04/08 11:24am Hi TerryA That's a very good point. More so since ANZ are "new" owners of the shares why haven't we seen a bucket load of "Substantial Holder" announcements ? Cheers Matt
  23. Just saw an announcement by EBT. Around 56 million shares, 25.8% of EBT is held by Opes (hence now held by ANZ) A whole bunch of announcements RE: the % held have come out in the last hour. By the end of the day there should be a good picture of the stocks effected and the % held of those stocks. Cheers Matt
  24. http://www.opesprime.com.au/documents/Ferr...IME-28-3-08.pdf brucem1, I've already heard a number of rumours on which "small companies" are effected. The rumours alone have the power to force down the SP. It only takes handful of holders to hear the rumour, panic sell, the ball starts rolling and the rumour becomes self-fulfilling. Cheers Matt
  • Create New...