Blowfor Frankston ?

Nope. There has always been issues around the night club district. It was the same 20 yrs ago when i occassionly went to those venues.
 
I don't get Frankston! In any other major Australian city you would think that a beachside suburb with reliable transport links to the CBD and plenty of land to develop or infill would be absolute gold! But it seems to have been a great "potential buy" for ever. Friends have an IP in Seaford, and it's the same story.

Some people (perhaps unfairly?) refer to "Franger" as "Broady by the Bay" and perhaps that's what holds it back?
 
I don't get Frankston! In any other major Australian city you would think that a beachside suburb with reliable transport links to the CBD and plenty of land to develop or infill would be absolute gold! But it seems to have been a great "potential buy" for ever. Friends have an IP in Seaford, and it's the same story.

Some people (perhaps unfairly?) refer to "Franger" as "Broady by the Bay" and perhaps that's what holds it back?

You are not alone in that department.

Advocates of Frankston and surrounding areas have been preaching this 'potential buy' and 'undervalued suburb' for years yet has achieved very little in my opinion. The problem always resonates with the fact that people say Frankston has done well, but under the illustion of % growth off a low base.

If you really think about it, no suburb that far from the Melbourne CBD has ever boomed (and most likely never will) and this goes from all around the clock from Werribee to Melton to Broady to Lilydale to Pakenham and to Frankston. People these days often confuse cheap with value. Hence why so many people on SS find 'value' with places like Werribee and Melton and of course, it is no coincidence to find very little discussed about buying property in premium suburbs like Kew/Hawthorn/Camberwell because they believe it is overpriced yet have always been proven wrong over the years with the greatest absolute growth achieved in these very suburbs they shun.
 
I don't get Frankston! In any other major Australian city you would think that a beachside suburb with reliable transport links to the CBD and plenty of land to develop or infill would be absolute gold!

absolutely - unfortunately, the Victorian buyer wants to stay inside the ring roads for fear of looking like they don't live and/or can't afford to live in Toorak.
 
I don't get Frankston!

Thats easy. There are markets within markets. Frankston South, Frankston, Frankston North.

Look at it like

Glen Iris, Ashburton and Ashwood or Ivanhoe, Heidelberg and West Heidelberg.

Because they have different names, you dont bunch them up together do you. But because Frankston is in the above names they are all considered to be in the same pot.
 
Leave your prejudices at the door

I am always astounded at the continued biting (pro and con) about Frankston and surrounding suburbs especialy on SS. Its just another suburb.

Anyway, if unfulfilled potential is a 3 year (well its 3 years in April) 31.9% increase in value and 22% increase in rent, based on recent bank valuation, then I can wait for the real potential to hit.

I lived in Sth Melbourne for many years, and loved it. But it had a few incidents (murders, attacks at nightclubs etc) that were never portrayed as being a Sth Melbourne only culture. There was a recent glassing at The Motel nightclub. We are all blinded by our own prejudices.
 
well well well..... when ever Frankston North needs a fair comment i will always be here ;-)

now i have been to Heidelberg West , and that is shocking even to me! and they do not have any beach! , and most shopkeepers in bayside shopping centre would agree that frankston north is better than central frankston.

sure frankston north was a hoooooooooooooorrrrriible place 50 years ago.... but again look at Richmond! every day i look at Richmond from the train and it looks terrible! but because its sooo inner city some people like to live there.

50 years ago no one wanted to live south of the yarra.... who knows what will happen in the next 50 years? ... or even 10! .... will the median break the $1mill mark? , for the people who cant afford it ... they will move to where they can afford it - also called the ring effect....

now go back to trolling somewhere else , and leave me with my 43% growth over 4 years.

GordonGekko Jr.
 
Though I have a vested interest in the area, the truth of the matter is it's not just the shortage of police presence in Frankston, it's the lack of police presence in Carrum Downs that is stretching the police force. Enter the Carrum Downs police station in August and the problem will move closer to being solved.
 
You are funny....
And the best bit is that you dont get it.

Frankston increased more than Toorak in the last 5 and 10 years.

Frankston gets double the yield compared to majority of inner suburbs.

2 x Frankston North properties I bought side by side for $144,000 each in 2006 on 800 sqm each have permit for 6 units with 6% + yield at the time of purchase. Even if sold without permits, I get over 80% growth in 3.5 years whilst the properties were cash flow neutral - almost. Which inner suburb property you can get that would cost you only a couple of hundred a month to hold and gives you 80% growth...?? I have addresses of all of my properties on Franskton threads. The permits and construction balloons the increase to well over 120%. Tell me a single example where an inner melbourne property can do that.

8 Frankston / Frankston central properties have given me an average of over 35% growth with 6.5% average yield at the time of purchase.

Please refer to the main Frankston thread.

Properties in Frankston South have gone up by over 35% in 3 years and I sold 2 there with 45% gain last year..

My properties in Kew , Mont Albert, Doncaster have grew the least compared to Frankston in the last 4 years -They are close though but yield is not remotely close.

This is absolute growth , before you throw another furfy in there about absolute vs percent.

I understand the game much better than you - I have a very diversified inner, outer, middle, interstate metro and interstate regional and I have had a particular interest in analysing growth Australia wide - I was like you when I started and bought my first property in Kew, second in Mont Albert.. Then I realised the power of cash flow.

Some of the interstate regionals have given me over 260% growth like Rockhampton and Cairns whilst others that I bought off the back of RP Data reports that had Hervey Bay (Eli Waters) as the best performing suburb for 5 year growth in 2006 having failed to give me any growth in the last 4 years..!

I dont have anything against inner suburbs, but the myth has been busted many times however some of the over excited ones just keep on keeping on paddling those myths.

Even if inner grew faster than outer, knowing what I know now, I would still buy outer because of the yield factor. Yield allows me to borrow more and keep buying.

You have a long way to go....

Take it easy and learn from others whilst you get there.

Harris

You are not alone in that department.

Advocates of Frankston and surrounding areas have been preaching this 'potential buy' and 'undervalued suburb' for years yet has achieved very little in my opinion. The problem always resonates with the fact that people say Frankston has done well, but under the illustion of % growth off a low base.

If you really think about it, no suburb that far from the Melbourne CBD has ever boomed (and most likely never will) and this goes from all around the clock from Werribee to Melton to Broady to Lilydale to Pakenham and to Frankston. People these days often confuse cheap with value. Hence why so many people on SS find 'value' with places like Werribee and Melton and of course, it is no coincidence to find very little discussed about buying property in premium suburbs like Kew/Hawthorn/Camberwell because they believe it is overpriced yet have always been proven wrong over the years with the greatest absolute growth achieved in these very suburbs they shun.
 
You are funny....
And the best bit is that you dont get it.

Frankston increased more than Toorak in the last 5 and 10 years.

Harris mate, you have obviously lost the plot. Have a play around with the median property prices here

http://data1.reiv.com.au/trendchart/default.aspx

Now tell me how on Earth did you come up with the fact Frankston > Toorak.

Feel free to show/prove with some other method. I anticipate you will be thoroughly disappointed.

Frankston gets double the yield compared to majority of inner suburbs.

Can't disagree with you there but arguably the greatest wealth generated is from absolute capital growth. You don't see the super wealthy buying properties in Frankston do you? All buy a multitude of properties in premium suburbs and when they sell, it is often millions of dollars of capital growth. You also don't see rich Mainland Chinese people buying in Frankston as well. They simply buy in places like Toorak and Brighton, land bank (so 0% yield) because they know it will probably increase $1mil each and every year anyway.

2 x Frankston North properties I bought side by side for $144,000 each in 2006 on 800 sqm each have permit for 6 units with 6% + yield at the time of purchase. Even if sold without permits, I get over 80% growth in 3.5 years whilst the properties were cash flow neutral - almost. Which inner suburb property you can get that would cost you only a couple of hundred a month to hold and gives you 80% growth...?? I have addresses of all of my properties on Franskton threads. The permits and construction balloons the increase to well over 120%. Tell me a single example where an inner melbourne property can do that.

80% in 3.5 years? pfft, nothing special mate.

You ask for a single example, and I will give you 3 and these are recent as one.

1. 327 Montague St, Albert Park

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/m-property-boom-hits-home/story-e6frf7kx-1225804948615

This went for over 70% above reserve and don't forget the vendor's reserve would also enjoy substantial capital growth. In other words, this house went for 70% growth in 1 day. Not to mention it is a piece of crap inside as well so there is immense value-adding potential.

2. 13 Loch St, Camberwell

http://www.domain.com.au/Public/Art...ng start to 2010 as bidders come out in force

$890K reserve and sold for $1.34mil

That is like over 50% above reserve.

3. 135 Clark St, Port Melbourne

Vendor's bought it last year for $1.3mil and never touched it. Went on the market last month and sold for $1.9mil. $600K for doing nothing in a year.

I can go and talk about the numerous other properties that go for 20-50% above reserve but there are too many!

8 Frankston / Frankston central properties have given me an average of over 35% growth with 6.5% average yield at the time of purchase.

Please refer to the main Frankston thread.

Properties in Frankston South have gone up by over 35% in 3 years and I sold 2 there with 45% gain last year..

You are caught in a double whammy my friend. Firstly, I just showed you some inner city suburbs that have done better in both % and absolute terms and in a shorter time frame. Also, just by a rough guess, your 45% gain is what? $200K? Mate, every second house inner city has been going for $200K above reserve, which in other words, could also mean a capital growth of $200K in one day.

My properties in Kew , Mont Albert, Doncaster have grew the least compared to Frankston in the last 4 years -They are close though but yield is not remotely close.

This is absolute growth , before you throw another furfy in there about absolute vs percent.

You must have bought really crappy properties in those suburbs.

I understand the game much better than you - I have a very diversified inner, outer, middle, interstate metro and interstate regional and I have had a particular interest in analysing growth Australia wide - I was like you when I started and bought my first property in Kew, second in Mont Albert.. Then I realised the power of cash flow.

With your arguments, it is obvious you do not understand the game better than I do. I am not saying I know everything but I know more than you judging by the jargon you conjured up in your post. Also, diversified doesn't mean anything. For all I know, all your properties could be worth about $200K each just like our good friend Sash & Crash.

Some of the interstate regionals have given me over 260% growth like Rockhampton and Cairns whilst others that I bought off the back of RP Data reports that had Hervey Bay (Eli Waters) as the best performing suburb for 5 year growth in 2006 having failed to give me any growth in the last 4 years..!

260% growth is impressive in anyone's language but you are starting on a low base, so in absolute terms, it could mean only about $200K. Also, you didn't give a timeline and you may also have renovated and/or improved it in some shape or form of which you need to price into it as well. People often forget this, which is why the 3 examples I gave were unrenovated.

I dont have anything against inner suburbs, but the myth has been busted many times however some of the over excited ones just keep on keeping on paddling those myths.

Even if inner grew faster than outer, knowing what I know now, I would still buy outer because of the yield factor. Yield allows me to borrow more and keep buying.

That is such an immature statement. And capital growth and equity does not allow you to borrow more or keep buying?

You have a long way to go....

Take it easy and learn from others whilst you get there.

Harris

Yes, I do have a long way to go....
 
Frankston North - $176k to $257.5k (46.3% growth)
Toorak $1.82m to $2.675m (46.9%)

Pretty similar DeeHwa. the question in terms of practicality is how many millions in toorak property can you hold vs Frankston property.

if you can do it then go for it.
 
Frankston North - $176k to $257.5k (46.3% growth)
Toorak $1.82m to $2.675m (46.9%)

Pretty similar DeeHwa. the question in terms of practicality is how many millions in toorak property can you hold vs Frankston property.

if you can do it then go for it.

DeeHwa can't even afford the front yard on ONE Toorak property, he can only just get himself into ONE house in relatively crappy Brunswick, and that's only with the help of his parents... :D

It's all relative!!!
 
You are funny....
And the best bit is that you dont get it.

Frankston increased more than Toorak in the last 5 and 10 years.

Frankston gets double the yield compared to majority of inner suburbs.

2 x Frankston North properties I bought side by side for $144,000 each in 2006 on 800 sqm each have permit for 6 units with 6% + yield at the time of purchase. Even if sold without permits, I get over 80% growth in 3.5 years whilst the properties were cash flow neutral - almost. Which inner suburb property you can get that would cost you only a couple of hundred a month to hold and gives you 80% growth...?? I have addresses of all of my properties on Franskton threads. The permits and construction balloons the increase to well over 120%. Tell me a single example where an inner melbourne property can do that.

8 Frankston / Frankston central properties have given me an average of over 35% growth with 6.5% average yield at the time of purchase.

Please refer to the main Frankston thread.

Properties in Frankston South have gone up by over 35% in 3 years and I sold 2 there with 45% gain last year..

My properties in Kew , Mont Albert, Doncaster have grew the least compared to Frankston in the last 4 years -They are close though but yield is not remotely close.

This is absolute growth , before you throw another furfy in there about absolute vs percent.

I understand the game much better than you - I have a very diversified inner, outer, middle, interstate metro and interstate regional and I have had a particular interest in analysing growth Australia wide - I was like you when I started and bought my first property in Kew, second in Mont Albert.. Then I realised the power of cash flow.

Some of the interstate regionals have given me over 260% growth like Rockhampton and Cairns whilst others that I bought off the back of RP Data reports that had Hervey Bay (Eli Waters) as the best performing suburb for 5 year growth in 2006 having failed to give me any growth in the last 4 years..!

I dont have anything against inner suburbs, but the myth has been busted many times however some of the over excited ones just keep on keeping on paddling those myths.

Even if inner grew faster than outer, knowing what I know now, I would still buy outer because of the yield factor. Yield allows me to borrow more and keep buying.

You have a long way to go....

Take it easy and learn from others whilst you get there.

Harris

Harris, I too find it amusing......

I also love the way Broady gets bagged, obviously no idea that the last 18 months has been a goldmine all you had to do was find a development site and put together a DA and presto $200K profit within 12 months.
If you did nothing growth was 34% but hey some people just don't want to make money, too interested in getting caught up with the same old argument.

Cheers, MTR
 
What does the ''price above the reserve'' have to do with growth rates??

It has everything to do with growth rates. In fact, growth rates are based on sold prices and not Valuer's valuation.

In fact, the real capital growth is even more because on argument terms, if every house was sold at vendor's reserve price, then you'd expect the real capital growth would be close to 0 because everything else has gone up by roughly the same amount so you are no better off, although many people are under the false illusion that you are. This often applies to people who buy in places like Frankston, Werribee etc...they say they have enjoyed immense capital growth (like what Harris said) but if anything, they can only buy back in Frankston because they have matched the performance there. They would not be able to upgrade and buy in say, Albert Park as to do so would mean attaining growth up and above. This is where 'price above the reserve' comes into play. In argument's terms and assuming vendor's price is fair and reasonable and a reflection of the market, the extra capital growth can be seen as 'beating' the market substantially and thus defines real capital growth.
 
Frankston North - $176k to $257.5k (46.3% growth)
Toorak $1.82m to $2.675m (46.9%)

Pretty similar DeeHwa. the question in terms of practicality is how many millions in toorak property can you hold vs Frankston property.

if you can do it then go for it.

To put this into context, many people on SS (so they claimed) started investing in property in the late 1980's and early 1990's. Houses in Balwyn in the early 1990's were about $80K (my mum's friend bought one then for this price) whilst another family friend bought a house at the same time in St Albans for around $60K. You'd expect most of these SS guys that were investing in these days to have a fair bit of money considering all my parent's friends were Vietnamese boat people working $4 an hour in factories, yet still were able to afford these houses.

Toorak median house prices in 1999 (as I identified in another thread) was around $770K so perhaps in late 1980's and early 1990's it was $350-400K. My parents said that even this was very much affordable but property back in those days was not as hyped up as now. The emphasis on prestige, proximity to CBD etc...is not the same as today.

Moving forward to today, it is not a matter of whether you can hold or not, but the fact is judging by history and assuming property rises indefinitely (which I hope it does) the gap will widen even more from current unaffordability in buying a Toorak house to 'you are dreaming' styles. I have never said Frankston is a bad investment. Sure, it will give you good yields and capital growth like every place on Earth. However, what I am saying is that there are better investments out there, albeit these cost more, but you have to ask yourself firstly why you can't afford a Toorak mansion in the first place and secondly, think carefully about whether your investment is as good as you think or wish it was.
 
DeeHwa can't even afford the front yard on ONE Toorak property, he can only just get himself into ONE house in relatively crappy Brunswick, and that's only with the help of his parents... :D

It's all relative!!!

Yes, you are right that I can't afford the front yard on ONE Toorak property and have to resort to 100th place crappy Brunswick. However, at least I can admit it and aspire to (hopefully) one day. At least I don't go and say stupid crap like 'Oh, I don't want to live in Toorak, or Brighton or Canterbury because it is so snoobish' like so many people here on SS.

And I know for certain that buying properties in Frankston, Melton, Werribee etc...ain't going to get me there, haha.
 
Top