Desired Place to Live in Melbounre

DeeHwa said:
Pickle is asking 'what is your favourite suburb', in comparison with what I referred to in the Point Cook thread, being which house (and suburb) people want the most.

If you looked at the thread title, it states "Desired Place to Live in Melbourne". I didn't see any 'favourite' in there.

DeeHwa said:
If someone gave me a 1000sqm house + land and said I could choose any suburb I want, it would most certainly be Toorak or Brighton. People buy in Point Cook because it is affordable and for the majority of cases, houses are new and on decent sized blocks.

Pickle posed the hypothetical question, if all houses cost the same, where would SS forummers want to live? It is indeed comparing apples with apples. Same cost, same land, same house. Difference? Location.

DeeHwa said:
I can guarantee that 99.9% of people would rather own a like for like Point Cook house on a patch of Toorak, Brighton, East Melbourne land, than a Point Cook. That is my point!

And this thread proves that your 99.9% point has been unsuccessfully proven.

DeeHwa said:
Are you stupid or what?

You obviously either lack any sense of reality or treat the harsh truth as inherently arrogant.

You have definitely lost the plot.

because you are just a random clown simply defending against vested interests.

you incompetent underling

The fact that you have to sink to using personal attacks and name-calling really enhances your arguments. :)
 
You are just contradicting yourself. To treat desire and favourite as completely different is just beyond linguistic comprehension. Pickle also made no direct mention of cost, land etc... so I have no idea where you got that from. Also, if people prefer to own an exact replica of a house in Croydon, and not Toorak, than that is not rational! That is pure stupidity.

DeeHwa, you really have no idea. If you talked about which would I prefer for an IP, then my answer would differ compared to a PPOR. I personally like living near the beach and would prefer a nice place in Williamstown for my family situation. Some people like living in the country away from the hustle and bustle, and money isn't everything to everyone.

If I was given a place in Toorak, I'd sell it straight away and put the money elsewhere.
 
DeeHwa, you really have no idea. If you talked about which would I prefer for an IP, then my answer would differ compared to a PPOR. I personally like living near the beach and would prefer a nice place in Williamstown for my family situation. Some people like living in the country away from the hustle and bustle, and money isn't everything to everyone.

If I was given a place in Toorak, I'd sell it straight away and put the money elsewhere.

You don't make any sense. It makes no difference if it is an IP or a PPOR. I still pose the same question to you. If I was to give you a random 1000sqm house + land as an IP or PPOR, where would you want it to be? Obviously it'd be in Toorak or Brighton, and not places like Werribee/Hoppers, Frankston, Melton and the plethora of other suburbs peppered on SS. If you are so intent on hating Toorak, then you could SIMPLY sell it and do whatever you want.

You are also twisting the argument as well with your preference for Williamstown. You mentioned family situation, so this is a liability. If you had the choice (no strings attached) and was again, given a random 1000sqm house + land anywhere in Melbourne, you'd choose to have it in Brighton simply because it is worth more. Mate, I am obsessed with Taylor Swift a lot and trust me, if she ended up moving into Point Cook, I would go and buy the house next door and stalk her everyday, haha. Hence, your choice is invalid because of so called liabilities and personal limitations.

See, you'd rather be given a place in Toorak because it is worth more. My point proven.
 
See, you'd rather be given a place in Toorak because it is worth more. My point proven.

*feeds troll*

Ok, that makes perfect sense. It's like being asked whether you'd like to win a $100 note, or a $5 note instead. It's a different scale, clearly, but we'd all like to win the one that's worth more. Yes, I would rather be given a property in Toorak than Point Cook, solely because it's worth more. Like the $100 note, above, I would then exchange the Toorak property for something else, instead (perhaps twenty properties in Point Cook :p)

However;

If we are talking in absolute values, then I would rather own $x worth of property in other places. My preference for PPOR would be Warrandyte, and for investment... wherever I can make a profit. Location becomes irrelevant then but generally speaking we're finding more opportunities in outer suburbs than inner, recently.

I don't think that people are arguing over the same point here. You're telling us that property in Toorak is worth more than property in Point Cook (well known and widely reported, but thankyou for pointing it out); others are discussing preferred locations based on non-monetary factors. To each their own.
 
If you read my first post, you would have seen that I said assume that all house prices are the same value in Melbourne. From the sample we have and the fact most people knew that for the sake of this posting, price was not a factor in selecting a suburb, I think it's clear 99.9% of people do not want to live in Toorak. It looks like Brighton is a more desired place to live.

I don't see why you don't argue that generally people prefer to live in the well to do suburbs like Brighton, Kew and Toorak. That argument would have a lot more legs, than your 99.9% for Toorak.

Pricing is one of the factors to look at because with it comes stigma, prestige, your demographics and a whole host of other factors. Assuming that all prices are the same makes this poll a pointless exercise in the first place. You could discount a lot of things too including proximity to desired schools etc.
 
Deltaberry, Lived in Hawthorn so know toorak well, have also lived in Surrey Hills & St kilda - would STILL pick Moonee Ponds or Essendon any day of the week. Stop clutching at straws to try and validate your point, I think the group has completely discounted your 99.9% to more like 10%.

Cheers
AV

Good for you. I live near Hawthorn and have worked in Essendon before and would pick Hawthorn any day of the week. Each to his own. 10% is good enough for me, since that's a pretty good result when there're some 200+ choices out there
 
*feeds troll*


I don't think that people are arguing over the same point here. You're telling us that property in Toorak is worth more than property in Point Cook (well known and widely reported, but thankyou for pointing it out); others are discussing preferred locations based on non-monetary factors. To each their own.

To each their own indeed. Monetary factors are equally as important. You can't really discount one factor in bias of another.

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're a troll. This thread didn't have much real purpose in the first place other than to gauge personal preferences. When someone expresses one that's different to yours, that doesn't make them a troll. Try to restrain yourself because anyone is capable of making smart comments.

*feeds troll*
 
*feeds troll*

Ok, that makes perfect sense. It's like being asked whether you'd like to win a $100 note, or a $5 note instead. It's a different scale, clearly, but we'd all like to win the one that's worth more. Yes, I would rather be given a property in Toorak than Point Cook, solely because it's worth more. Like the $100 note, above, I would then exchange the Toorak property for something else, instead (perhaps twenty properties in Point Cook :p)

However;

If we are talking in absolute values, then I would rather own $x worth of property in other places. My preference for PPOR would be Warrandyte, and for investment... wherever I can make a profit. Location becomes irrelevant then but generally speaking we're finding more opportunities in outer suburbs than inner, recently.

I don't think that people are arguing over the same point here. You're telling us that property in Toorak is worth more than property in Point Cook (well known and widely reported, but thankyou for pointing it out); others are discussing preferred locations based on non-monetary factors. To each their own.

It all started in the other thread when someone said that there are lots of people that want to live in Point Cook, of which I said it is not true. It is because they have no other choice (my so called liability and personal limitation attribute) and used Toorak as a general example of the optimum preference. What that poster failed to understand (given solely on the basis of what he/she posted) is that where people live does not necessarily draw parallels with where they WANT to live. This is obvious in hindsight, but as so often when someone puts down suburbs like Point Cook, Werribee/Hoppers etc...people on SS feel the need to defend it at all costs because of vested interests (i.e living there or having IP's there).

This also leads to the very point of why I personally think places like Point Cook, Werribee/Hoppers are poor investments. I have been preaching this the whole time and I seem to be a rare bred on SS. This is not hard to understand because as you can see on most of the threads, it is about investment in essentially low median priced suburbs. We all know the greatest absolute growth (superior to % growth in my opinion) is best where it attracts both investors and owner-occupiers and works best when prospective purchasers have the least liabilities and limitations. We also recognise that the greatest absolute growth is achieved in suburbs and/or properties with no comparable price ceiling, this being one of the reasons why places like Toorak, Brighton, Canterbury, Armadale, East Melbourne etc...have achieved the phenomenal growths far outstripping places like Point Cook, Werribee/Hoppers. The most valuable assets, always, are those where the rich competes with the rich because value to them is so asymmetrical and often intangible. On the contrary, the worst assets, always, are those where people are trying to chase bargains. If you fail to understand this, then I pity you.

Using Toorak as an example (as I ever so often), the median house price was a bit over $700K in 1999 and it is close to $3mil today. That includes the GFC as well. Unless you can prove to me you could do better with $700K buying multiple houses in 1999 in places like Werribee/Hopper, it would be impossible to argue which is the superior investment.
 
You could expand this to the whole of Australia and you wouldn't get the majority agreeing. Some people like ultra-modern houses and would hate the maintainence issues that come with buying a big old mansion. Some people want acreage. Some people don't like gardening. Does this hypothetical house come with staff?

I don't like cities much. I'm very happy right where I am now - I like the weather and the community and the fact that it is comfortably distant from inlaws. My current house is too small but the kinds of house I do like cost $500k (big old 1910s mansions on 2000sqm but not quite big enough to need staff), so that might have to wait a couple of years :)
 
It all started in the other thread when someone said that there are lots of people that want to live in Point Cook, of which I said it is not true. It is because they have no other choice (my so called liability and personal limitation attribute) and used Toorak as a general example of the optimum preference. What that poster failed to understand (given solely on the basis of what he/she posted) is that where people live does not necessarily draw parallels with where they WANT to live.

How do you manage to look inside the heads of the 'posters' to decide if they are right or wrong in their choices or thinking. If someone says they would rather live in Point Cook then their must be a reason for that. For you to then jump in and start questioning those posters or their motivation is juvenile.

This also leads to the very point of why I personally think places like Point Cook, Werribee/Hoppers are poor investments. I have been preaching this the whole time

whole time...?? as in two and a half minutes that you have been on the forum for..!


and I seem to be a rare bred on SS.

No, definitely not. You are a rather common breed. There have been a few like you in the past who have since left after a few posts or been banned due to their constant negative posts and very intense 'shove-down-your-throat' type approach to otherwise useful and constructive debates.

This is not hard to understand because as you can see on most of the threads, it is about investment in essentially low median priced suburbs.

I dont know how long have you been investing and where you invest. I have invested in very blue chip suburbs, middle ring suburbs, outer metro, regional interstate and metro interstate. You sound new to the game. Dont know about Point Cook or Werribee but I have a very large chunk of properties in Frankston, Frankston North and Frankston South. This debate has been done to death in the forums over the last few years about blue chip suburbs vs outer suburbs. You should go and read some of those threads.

Can someone please find the link and paste here which included median values of the last 10 and 20 years of outer vs inner suburbs as well as the threads on inner vs outer ? I tried locating but couldnt find the threads.

Here are the facts:

On a % growth basis, from 2002 to 2010, my inner melbourne blue chip portfolio has come equal third along with my middle ring melbourne (east) portfolio whereas my interstate regional has appreciated by over twice the rate I got from suburbs in Kew and Mont Albert. Second in place is my portfolio in Frankston. On top of that, my yields have been the least in Kew and Mont Albert compared to any of my other purchases including regional or metro interstate, outer melbourne or middle ring melbourne.

The most valuable assets, always, are those where the rich competes with the rich because value to them is so asymmetrical and often intangible. On the contrary, the worst assets, always, are those where people are trying to chase bargains. If you fail to understand this, then I pity you.

I pity at your very simplistic approach to all things investing.. You dont have a remote understanding of the variables of investing over and above the simple 'asset competition'.

Here are some facts. On a % terms over the last 10 years, Frankston (thinking rich..???? I dont think so) has increased more in its median value than Toorak. Get the data and compare. Frankston North has increased more than Canterbury in % terms. Dandenong has achieved the same growth in % terms when compared with Brighton... On top of that the yields in all of those 'povvy' suburbs are almost twice you will get in inner. So in absolute terms, if you had X dollars to spend to fast-track property acqusition and equity growth, then owing to very high yield you would have more equity to play with if you invested in Franskton than if you did in Toorak. Infact, you can buy and hold 1.8 properties in Frankston/ Dandenong and Springvale than you can in Toorak or Kew (serviceability) and hence if the growth is same, you will be 1.8 times better off investing in those suburbs than investing in Toorak.

Using Toorak as an example (as I ever so often), the median house price was a bit over $700K in 1999 and it is close to $3mil today.

Toorak's median was $1m + in 1999. As of Jan 2010 it is $2.67m http://data1.reiv.com.au/trendchart/default.aspx

Now if the Frankston's median has increased 2.5 times in the last 10 years, Frankston's median has improved 3 times... Check the medians and come back :cool:
Have a look at Werribee, Craigieburn, Sprigvale and Dandenong and they have appreciated very close in % terms to Toorak and Brighton median in the last 10 years. Your argument does not hold water.

That includes the GFC as well. Unless you can prove to me you could do better with $700K buying multiple houses in 1999 in places like Werribee/Hopper, it would be impossible to argue which is the superior investment.

Add on the yield factor and your argument sounds more like an empty myth and one of the most frequently busted myths in the world of property investing..

Now tell us about your investment journey - When you started, where you invested and what else you do besides paddling myths on property investing..

Harris
 
Now tell us about your investment journey - When you started, where you invested and what else you do besides writing about myths on property investing..

Harris

I believe his mummy and daddy gave him some money to help him buy 1 house in Brunswick... or that might be Deltaberry, not 100% sure...

But I think his parents did well out of property, and by default, that makes him a success/expert too...
 
Hey Harris

Thanks for your awesome post. Hope to read more from you, it's people like you that I hope to learn from on forums such as this.

All the best & thanks again.
 
Can someone please find the link and paste here which included median values of the last 10 and 20 years of outer vs inner suburbs as well as the threads on inner vs outer ? I tried locating but couldnt find the threads.

Ok, Here are a few that I managed to dig up. 4th and 5th one's down are very relevant to the topic:



http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54291&highlight=Outer

http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54536&highlight=Outer

http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51940&highlight=Outer

http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55966&highlight=Outer

http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42375&highlight=Outer

http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31663&highlight=Outer

Regards Jason.
 
It all started in the other thread when someone said that there are lots of people that want to live in Point Cook, of which I said it is not true. It is because they have no other choice

Here's an example of a person who made a choice of living in Point Cook over Prahran.

Quoting from:
http://localvoices.realestate.com.au/victoria/point_cook/review/29977

We have lived in Point Cook for 6 years now, having built in a very quiet court on a large block of land....We love the quiet court we live in......we count our blessings that we have all this to offer our children......I drove down High Street Prahran not long ago and was so grateful to be living in Point Cook......There is a great community spirit in Point Cook.... you find the parents are friendly and more willing to lend a hand to get things up and running.....We love living in Point Cook and intend to live here til the kids move out!


Quoting from:
http://forums.vogue.com.au/showthread.php?t=108420

the whole altona meadows/sanctury lakes/point cook area is very nice and green and you have endless shops, etc

It's a gorgoeus place to live, ....The streets are very clean, obviously except the construction sites......My friends love living there, and have just had a baby (as have their neighbours), so it is good place to start a family if you are interested lol.

it's a really nice area...a man made lake...and depending where you are...you can even have a lake as your backyard...it gorgeous...had some frens who lived there but they move to an even better place...hidden valley!
 
Thanks Player, Jingo, Amazing Venice .

Here is the reproduction of some of the numbers and associated description from some of those posts in 2007 & 08:


Cover story in Aug 2007 edition of API

(courtesy of API)

"Ask anyone who makes a living advising people about property purchases and most of them will tell you the "better" suburbs always deliver and you are crazy to buy in outlying areas. Media has reported this mantra so often its become accepted as truth: the best value growth resides in the blue-chip areas.

The problem is, its bunkum. Its one of the great myths of real estate investment. Prime-located real estate does not always out-perform on capital growth.

The "experts" keep saying it, but the facts keep contradicting them. Indeed most data shows the top performers in our major cities are dominated by "ugly duckling" outer suburbs or mid-priced areas. Whether examined over one, five, ten or fifteen years, its difficult to find any examples of top end locations which have led the market......"

and so it goes providing real data from across australian cities to prove that point..."


This is the same point I have been trying to make in my multiple posts looking at the actual data comparing short, medium and long term capital growth for various Melbourne suburbs (both inner and outer) and not understanding the perseverance for this long standing myth.


And this:

Further down in the article..

"7 of Melbourne's top 10 suburbs for price growth over five years had median house price below $285,000. Lowly Frankston North, where typical house cost $175,000 (its moved up to $210k now) had the same growth rate as Toorak, where the average home costs close to $2 million.

Another report late in 2006 showed that cheaper, outer ring suburbs were achieving price growth two or three times more than city average. Suburbs such as Berwick, Craigieburn & Cranbourne had seen prices grow between 10 and 13% over two years while Melbourne prices overall had risen just 4%...."

(again courtesy of API)

These are the comparisons I made couple of years ago by using the latest median values then in relation to specific suburbs we discussed:

Brunswick:

03 median $375k
08 median $605k

161% growth in value

Berwick

03 median $275k
08 median $397.5k

144% growth in value

Brighton

03 median $823k
08 median $1.675mill

203% growth in value

Frankston


03 median $165k
08 median $318k

192% growth


Dandenong vs St Kilda


Dandenong

03 - $215k
08 - $327k

152% growth

St Kilda

03 - $560k
08- $800k

142% grwoth


Brighton East vs Altona

Brighton East

03 - $650k
08 - $1.2mil

182%

Altona


03 - $280k
08- $504k

180%.



Bentleigh vs Frankston North


Bentleigh
03 - $435k
08 - $732k

168%

Frankston North

03 - $121k
08- $238k

196%


Harris
 
Back
Top