Any see the Nathan Birch interview with Kochie on Sunrise?

[Deltaberry]

I got ripped of two times by a buyers agent, one from the forum i won't mention names and another by a known buyers agent from WA.

You live and learn plus karma is b.itch. This forum is on a payroll by select buyers agents, i have learnt that NO buyers agent has access to what you and i don't, they are a real estate agent but these days they call themselves buyers agents with access to property no on else has.

Whatever

Not true.

I've had a real estate agent last year find me a property that had this city's property investors wondering what happened by the time the deal closed (ie they openly told my consortium that). And I didn't get charged for it (the guy made nothing off me).

I was told the deal on Thursday, and only another person knew. I put a cheque in front of the vendor on Friday and signed the contract for him to mull over on the weekend. Monday he counter-signed.

 

[sash]

Yep.....and the lambs are fronting to the slaughter.....

What I was told was over estimating prices and returns, I have not used his services by the way but my sources would be pretty much on the ball.

 

[impala67]

I think the problem with Nathan or shall I say Linda's portfolio is the complete and utter lack of QUALITY. I wouldn't have the nerve and propensity to hold any of them.

She knows why she's holding them, based on Nathan's tutelage.

We don't, because the host didn't hit any journalistic highs with his line of questioning and didn't explore the portfolio, or thought to ask the reasoning behind certain purchase locations.

 

[Moneyman_85]

What I found interesting about Nathan's strategy is he's NOT looking for boom towns, just good cash flow and potential for capital growth in the future

Seem like a lot of people are trying to chase the white rabbit

John.

 

[see_change]

a) Kochie or whateve his name was was being an absolute A-grade *****

On what basis do you say that ?

It's a mass marketed breakfast show . He'd be negligent if he didn't question everything they did and sound skeptical .

To be honest I'm surprised they actually did the interview .

The type of person who is going to be a successful property investor shouldn't have to learn about it on Sunrise.

Cliff

 

[willair]

I watched the show and found it interesting,plus Kochie has a job to do and the people that see him every morning,i think Natham and the Lady had a lot of guts to go nation wide in the media and maybe will become a mediatized property tycoon..

 

[jaspn]

I watched the show and found it interesting,plus Kochie has a job to do and the people that see him every morning,i think Natham and the Lady had a lot of guts to go nation wide in the media and maybe will become a mediatized property tycoon..

Nathan is frequently in the media, I reckon he puts his hand up for interviews, comment etc. whenever he gets the opportunity. What a way to promote your business.

 

[oc1]

I don't see why people are attacking Kochie here. He is TV presenter. He is raising few concerns an average Joe may have in this occasion. It gives Nathan & Linda a chance to answer them.

Very true. And i also don't blame the presenter for questioning the purchaser of properties in such areas. Capital cities, in general, is where the growth is.

 

[TMNT]

I must admit, knowing the sort of properties nathan buys, when kochie mentioned the moree property, did he hint that he called a few agents and believed from what he heard that the value nathan quoted was way over the top??????

Some of nathans estimated values I think are a little exagrerrated but overall not out of line

 

[Peter_Tersteeg]

Look at this from David Kosch's point of view...

Kochie has a long history in financial services and has seen the Henry Kayes and other property sharks in the past. He's seen the groups flogging crap properties at inflated prices whilst claiming they're a bargain. He's seeing Nathan recommending 20 properties to Nicole and charging $10k each.

Put another way, Nathan has charged Nicole about $200k and other than a statement that they're all bought below value and are neutral to positive cashflow, there's nothing else to support that these are actually good investments. There's no evidence in their statements of prudent risk management. The word strategy is spoken several times, but nothing is actually detailed. Nathan actually doesn't have a license to give financial or credit advice either.

From David's point of view Nathan is potentially a very nasty shark and in the current hot market, the environment looks like Nicole is going for a swim in the open ocean after slathering herself in tuna oil. I doubt David would encourage any of his views to work with Nathan.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe Nathan operates in this manner at all, he's to be commended for a lot of good work that he's done. However he is operating in a manner that can look dubious when observed from a certain perspective.

 

[willair]

Nathan is frequently in the media, I reckon he puts his hand up for interviews, comment etc. whenever he gets the opportunity. What a way to promote your business.

First time I have ever seen Nathan on any meia tv outlet does he get paided to turn up?,one would think as time is more important then being seen on the seven network,also experts like the seven network have a massive following and have questioned the authority of professionals every day rather then testing their own ability to look into or gauge their boundaries of their own knowledge it's a pity in AUSTRALIA we have the tall poppy syndrome ..

 

[dan c]

First time I have ever seen Nathan on any meia tv outlet does he get paided to turn up?,one would think as time is more important then being seen on the seven network,also experts like the seven network have a massive following and have questioned the authority of professionals every day rather then testing their own ability to look into or gauge their boundaries of their own knowledge it's a pity in AUSTRALIA we have the tall poppy syndrome ..

He wouldn't get paid to turn up, but it's a great advertisement for his business.

The so called tall poppy syndrome is rubbish. There is nothing wrong with people questioning a strategy, especially a strategy which sees the promoter being paid 10 grand every time he buys a property for a client. We have had enough investment gurus rip people off in this country, that we have a right to be sceptical.

I suppose the people who were sceptical of Henry Kaye and Kevin Young just wanted to cut down a tall poppy too? Please.

 

[Jacque]

I got ripped of two times by a buyers agent, one from the forum i won't mention names and another by a known buyers agent from WA.

You live and learn plus karma is b.itch. This forum is on a payroll by select buyers agents, i have learnt that NO buyers agent has access to what you and i don't, they are a real estate agent but these days they call themselves buyers agents with access to property no on else has.

Whatever

Hi John

I am sorry to hear that you had poor experiences with buyers agents- without knowing the details and both sides it's impossible to make fair comment here however I take umbrage at your comment about "select" BAs being on a payroll on this forum... I mean seriously?! I've been on this forum for almost 13 yrs now (yes it's addictive for some) and honestly I believe it's one of the most actively moderated Australian forums out there (completely run by volunteer mods). An accusation like this is simply uncalled for and insulting to both those BAs who actively post and the forum operators and mods who donate their time.


I would suggest airing your grievances with the BA company directly or, if no joy there, taking it up with the OFT or ACCC (depending on the nature of your complaint) rather than tarring the entire industry with the same brush on a public forum. I hope you obtain a satisfactory result.

As for BAs having access to properties the public don't, I have posted and blogged about silent sales in the past (so won't repeat myself ad naseum) however I think it's important to keep in mind that such sales obviously represent a small portion of the market and are usually in the prestige end. If you only hired a BA on the basis that they could uncover a majority of silent sales in their quest, then you may have been misinformed here. Of course there are opportunities when we consistently talk to agents, in uncovering off-market properties, stale listings or possibilities (usually via canvassing) however obviously most vendors want maximum exposure for their property, hence their reason for open advertising. What BAs can do, as part of their job, is to locate, assess and negotiate properties more efficiently and with more local market knowledge on board than the average buyer.

As for BAs being real estate agents, this is certainly true as you require a RE licence to act as a BA, however as BAs they are paid BY THE BUYER so are not representing the seller in any way. The OFT NSW site explains it all here:

http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/f..._property/Using_an_agent_to_buy_property.page

 

[willair]

He wouldn't get paid to turn up, but it's a great advertisement for his business.

The so called tall poppy syndrome is rubbish. There is nothing wrong with people questioning a strategy, especially a strategy which sees the promoter being paid 10 grand every time he buys a property for a client. We have had enough investment gurus rip people off in this country, that we have a right to be sceptical.

I suppose the people who were sceptical of Henry Kaye and Kevin Young just wanted to cut down a tall poppy too? Please.

Dan they have been here from the time the first fleet sailed around Sydney Heads while the Aboriginals stood their watching in their lap-laps and spear
in their hands,there is only one person that puts the ink on paper with minimal theorizing,i guess you gotta know when to hold them and when to fold them Dan..

 

[Deltaberry]

On what basis do you say that ?

It's a mass marketed breakfast show . He'd be negligent if he didn't question everything they did and sound skeptical .

To be honest I'm surprised they actually did the interview .

The type of person who is going to be a successful property investor shouldn't have to learn about it on Sunrise.

Cliff

I actually have no problems with the questions he asked, it was just the way he asked it. Just his tone, body language and facial expression.

That said, if you choose to go on these shows, then you shouldn't be complaining. He obviously has a job to do - and that is to attract a TV audience.

So it was more an observation rather than a critique of the interview.

 

[neK]

From David's point of view Nathan is potentially a very nasty shark and in the current hot market, the environment looks like Nicole is going for a swim in the open ocean after slathering herself in tuna oil. I doubt David would encourage any of his views to work with Nathan.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe Nathan operates in this manner at all, he's to be commended for a lot of good work that he's done. However he is operating in a manner that can look dubious when observed from a certain perspective.

Nathan might not be operating in that manner, but doesn't mean the people he's share the same work ethic.

Still I have to question the properties on offer. Obviously properties can be ranked, is Nathan taking all of the good ones, then passing them down the chain to his staff, then whats left over is passed on to the binvested clients?

Also, is Nathan really sharing his strategy? Or is he simply giving a very high level of his strategy and passing a list of properties to his "clients" and taking a fee? Its easy to say "buy undervalued properties" but how does one really determine if its undervalued?

 

[MTR]

Very true. And i also don't blame the presenter for questioning the purchaser of properties in such areas. Capital cities, in general, is where the growth is.

Have to agree, I am not a fan of Kosh, sickly sweet, but what he raised were very valid questions regarding risk - LVR on portfolio, locations of properties.

 

[twodogs]

I actually have no problems with the questions he asked, it was just the way he asked it. Just his tone, body language and facial expression.

Have to agree, there was almost a felling of hostility in the air. Questions were valid, but the tone was denigrating. Surprising really as I would only ever expect to get fluff from such a show and host. I wondered if the interview was about to go "a current affair" style.

 

[SamL]

Interesting watching, the situation definitely seemed a bit tense. Saying that it was interesting hearing about her portfolio and knowing nothing it seems ok at the moment. You would have to assume a minimum gross yield of 5% in all those areas so 300k a year. Interest repayments at 5% is about 200k. Say 50k a year in costs. Leaves a 50k buffer, not huge by any means at 3 months worth of interest costs. Though it does get interesting if rates start to rise and get above about 7%.

One advantage is at around 20 properties in different areas you are diversified. You would have to be unlucky to have multiple empty at the same time. Better than holding 2 x 3 million properties in that sense.

 

[Giuseppe]

Geez, I don't know... I detest property sprukers. There is no reason why a reasonably intelligent person couldn't learn the mechanics of property investing by reading, hands on experience, getting technical info from an accountant, and by being on forums like this. $10k is a lot of money to part with for virtually nothing in return.

Regarding the interview I could see Kochie's point. If you want capital growth, buy in a capital city.