Search results

If you're generating negative gearing, then your assessable taxable income is a loss. Publish numbers? No need to. I'm not selling anything on this forum, nor encourage people to email me to ask me about what to invest in.

Read my earlier post. I said you'd probably get 10%. But even then without capital growth it's a pretty mediocre investment - especially given the risk it won't grow. Also don't forget, a small half of your cashflow is based on tax losses. Meaning it's only useful if I go to work.

Again, that's why I have a problem with the way you market these things here. Market reviews are a double edged sword - and yes I have been tenants of things subject to market reviews and landlords of many things subject to them. You could well get revalued down.

People in East Melbourne, Middle Park are going to get very angry.

So to be conservative you'd be up $6k a year, on a $100k investment. Obviously I've included council rates, water, insurance, body corporate, land tax, maintenance blah blah blah on it. To be fair, I didn't include depreciation and maybe you get back to $10k after that? But to be honest...

Hmm. So if I buy a $400k rent @ 80% gearing, that's $320k debt. Or $16k/year interest. I presume there's a bunch of fees, rates etc too. So maybe $20k/year all up? To be cashflow neutral you'd need to rent these things out for $400/week? If I was a low income earner and had to pay...

As I said, I know very little about NRAS. Why is the rental low and he's saying you can get 10% return per annum on cashflow?

Haven't really looked at NRAS nor understand them. But others have raised issues already here. In any case I highly doubt anything with 10% yield is "recession proof". At least I'm pretty sure Consumer Affairs and ASIC would agree on that one. But anyway. For some people including myself...

Precisely. Also the trend now is more apartments so more residents, inner city living is the new thing, and populations are booming especially in Sydney and Melbourne. http://www.theage.com.au/national/city-of-8-million-unliveable-20080904-49xo.html

Buing 25x $300k properties will, as someone mentioned earlier, rack up your expenses pretty quickly. Or you can just buy a $2.5m commercial property yielding 7.5% net (if you can find one). No hassles, all expenses paid for by tenant. Of course this comes with the downside of tenancy...

Well yes, that's usually the more difficult part.

$100k passive income means: Rent minus - Interest Cost - Council rates - Maintenance - Water Rates - Insurance - Land Tax - Agent Fees - etc etc = $100k per annum Or at least for residential property.

I look at a very small circle - but that's just because of my risk profile, my personal investment ethos and what my finances allow me. I typically look at CBD commercial and/or inner city mixed use and/or residential. I always only buy freestanding (ie I never buy office floors, apartments...

Some alternative thoughts to the above: - Find an expensive but severely undervalued property (I saw three and bought two last 12 months, the other one was bought by a colleague of mine) that may or may not have positive cashflow post conventional gearing package - Acquire it, after maybe 6...

If some of us got together and did some wealth seminars, we'd rake it in, or at least have a full session every time of 300+ people. But I don't do unscrupulous things like that.

Self-made just means I never used a dollar from my family, except had a place to stay at. That said, I got a good education from them (which was free), had good experience and knowledge imparted on to me (which is good), and a free luxury car so that helps. Everything else though I earned from...

Of course it is possible. I hit and surpassed it at 25, self made, a few years ago. It requires financial disciple, casting your eyes on bigger things and always realising you're just a small fish, some big risk taking appetite when you're young and some good investment decisions. Now the...