Search results

Good point, but do you mean the ANZ Job ads forward indicator? Anyhoo here's the up-to-March-09 chart for those interested: Apparently a big driver for the spike in unemployment is a higher "retention rate" i.e. boomers are putting off retirement as their nest eggs take a battering. Still...

No, just used the ABS spreadsheets for each state.:) Like WA News: Queenslanders should be relatively happy. Hopefully for them Rio Tinto gets to partner up with Chinalco and they don't have to shed more jobs there. But as Blue Card points out 5.7% is nothing historically, although his...

Don't pull a muscle reaching so far mate!:D I wouldn't see why you'd actually think Jessica Irvine was desperate, especially when she lead the campaign for "rents thru the roof" early last year. Don't throw her under the bus because her new tune (for that day) doesn't meet your approval. ;)

That's quite a big post to still not answer my question "How did the number of would be tenants (especially the non-bogan ones) decrease in the example market where tenants who used to pay $800-1k/week rent now want to pay $500/week?". The only way I can see that would happen is if the number...

Hi Michael, I thought you ended this on a whatever? Not that it matters, but since's its important to you... Look, we're actually in agreement for the most part. Where we disagree is that the abundant supply of would be tenants is a given. That's all. You'd have to think it's the most...

That is laugh out loud funny! :D It was me arguing that the number of tenants was the same! Michael Whyte finally realised he'd misunderstood me, and now you're pretending that was your position all along. How cute! You're not fooling anyone, but let's pretend you are. So how did you go...

"No, it would increase the number of tenants looking to move into the $500/week properties which would cause prices to move UP not down." and "Obviously someone forgot to tell that to the fake landlords in Botany Bay. http://www.housing.nsw.gov.au/NR/rdo...RSReport85.pdf Within the...

It wouldn't result in a net reduction in would be tenants. I never said it would. In fact I've been pointing out to yorke that the number of tenants remains the same. It's not even ambiguous - why would you think I wrote that?:confused: Frankly I can't believe you actually misread my posts...

Let's see, so some landlords aren't dropping their rents because some landlords in another suburb are raising their rents. I've got to hand it to you, that kind of "logic" is hard to argue against. :confused: And an increase in renters preferring/able to pay $500/week rather than...

Umm mate, there's still the same number of the different types of potential tenants. How does the total number of would be tenants get reduced? The, um "better quality" tenants are still there, they're just not renting the $800-$1k/week places - so the $500/week landlords get better...

No worries. I think it's pretty clear that there's a sizeable proportion of mortgage holders who are able to increase repayments are live within their means, and are doing so now. The other debat I'm sure is alive and well in another thread.:)

Assuming there's an abundant supply of would be tenants. Like I said if there isn't strong renter demand and rental places are on the market for a few weeks because there's more supply than demand, then the better quality places at $500/week go first, leaving the "old" $500/week places empty...

It suggests that most households are able to pay down their mortgage debt, which is why I said "better for those households in severe housing stress of course". Who's overstating the "picture of the stressed household P&L"? And who's saying that stretched households aren't cutting their...

Are you serious? Do you think all the landlords of the expensive empty rentals will be happy to keep their properties empty? No, they'll drop their rents (as they are doing) to get tenants, increasing competition at the midrange level. Now landlords of the "$500" places are competiting for...

:confused: I agree, it's the smart thing to do for householders. Unfortunately it'll mean a recession for us. Is that what you're joking about? I assume you're being sarcastic in some way - are you agreeing with Westpac that interest rate cuts aren't being effective, or laughing at the OP's...

The tricky thing about the IR cuts to date has been that it seems a big proportion of mortgage holders haven't cut their repayments in response, and are instead paying down their debts. Great for them and their balance sheets, and better for those households in severe housing stress of course...

At the very least you should add one or more disclaimers that your (you're) not giving financial/investment advice etc.. You might also want to have a think about whether your advice is applicable if house prices don't appreciate rapidly - but that's your call as it is a blog of your thoughts &...

I didn't mean you in particular, I meant "you" as in everyone (i.e. the site blocks out the acronym) - sorry for any confusion.:) But do you see the irony in the OP, where you have had to deliberately misspell the acronym to get past the censor? Or the irony in your response where you are...

Heh - you're funny! Suggesting this site is more tolerant than another one, when you can't even spell that site's name!:D How ironic! I'll have to take your POV view up with the moderator who's also a Property Investor.;) Still, I think the mods here have their hands full - good luck to...

I think you'll sind the answer to that in the OP. The assumption that the number of households per person will keep rising underpins the underlying demand calculations. For example, if you instead assume that the number of households per person will remain flat, then Australia's building...