Four Corners- Real Estate Gurus
- Thread starter geoffw
- Start date
Asy,Originally posted by asy
And I bet all of them get ABC.....
asy
Too True!
I just fitted out a 1BR as a furnished- with TV, DVD, VHS, Hifi.
Not only is the TV better than ours (by far- out main TV is a 34cm I won in a chook raffle)- but they can get all channels with just a rabbit ear aerial.
Four Corners
POSTED 2nd time, edited: Thought the show was interesting; at least the Hanna Bros were willing to be interviewed, unlike some others on the program. Why anyone would think that a bank has a responsibility to inform the borrowers that they are buying overpriced is beyond me - they are ripping us off in other ways anyhow, and it been a long time since most thought they were there to actually help us!
They are not moral police. However, I do think tho' they should be obliged to tell us the valuation on a property, especially when we pay for it! Any thoughts out there?
POSTED 2nd time, edited: Thought the show was interesting; at least the Hanna Bros were willing to be interviewed, unlike some others on the program. Why anyone would think that a bank has a responsibility to inform the borrowers that they are buying overpriced is beyond me - they are ripping us off in other ways anyhow, and it been a long time since most thought they were there to actually help us!
They are not moral police. However, I do think tho' they should be obliged to tell us the valuation on a property, especially when we pay for it! Any thoughts out there?
thanks for the original tip on this duncan m - i was able to see half of it at lunchtime today
one interesting point that has relevance to this forum, which i think jenman mentioned, is that anyone can give RE advice, unlike shares, managed trusts etc. At the moment the forum members are free to post on a range of subjects, give advice etc. This forum is unbeleivably well moderated and 'overseen' (i mean this in the most positive way), but still in the future if ASIC starts to get excited it may have implications for this site, and I assume others.
i accept that the nature of RE is considerably different to equities, managed funds etc, which can be influenced by rumour, however it would appear obvious that some sort of regulation must be coming, particularly when you see banks, lawyers, accountants and other implicated in the 4 corners story.
any other thoughts on this?
Ned
one interesting point that has relevance to this forum, which i think jenman mentioned, is that anyone can give RE advice, unlike shares, managed trusts etc. At the moment the forum members are free to post on a range of subjects, give advice etc. This forum is unbeleivably well moderated and 'overseen' (i mean this in the most positive way), but still in the future if ASIC starts to get excited it may have implications for this site, and I assume others.
i accept that the nature of RE is considerably different to equities, managed funds etc, which can be influenced by rumour, however it would appear obvious that some sort of regulation must be coming, particularly when you see banks, lawyers, accountants and other implicated in the 4 corners story.
any other thoughts on this?
Ned
Regulation
Regulation is a good concept, but what difference will it really make - look at the scams still being pulled in the heavily regulated financial planning industry. There are not enough resources to deal with this porblem. And all the poor sheep (ie. soon to be retired baby boomers with their retirement $$) walking right into the hands of the "experts". The problem should be tackled by education of the masses. RK is right in this sense.
Regulation is a good concept, but what difference will it really make - look at the scams still being pulled in the heavily regulated financial planning industry. There are not enough resources to deal with this porblem. And all the poor sheep (ie. soon to be retired baby boomers with their retirement $$) walking right into the hands of the "experts". The problem should be tackled by education of the masses. RK is right in this sense.
On reflection you may be right. At the end of the day we are all responsible for our own future and success. If you rely on someone else rather than doing the research yourselft and finding out what's really going on, then I guess you pay the consequences, good and bad.
And the more regulation, the more ways to get around it . It would be nice if the banks had a little moral responsibility tho!
Ned
And the more regulation, the more ways to get around it
. It would be nice if the banks had a little moral responsibility tho! Ned
I agree with Francoise, education is the only key to stopping
the rorts.. doesnt seem to make any difference how many laws
the regulators make in whatever area of investing --people still
let themselves get fleeced because they are trusting and
dont bother to do any DD, though there is so much free info
out there..
And perhaps they really do just want to believe.,
the rorts.. doesnt seem to make any difference how many laws
the regulators make in whatever area of investing --people still
let themselves get fleeced because they are trusting and
dont bother to do any DD, though there is so much free info
out there..
And perhaps they really do just want to believe.,
It's interesting to read some of the links from the Four Corners front page- http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/ -
Interview with Chris Connolly about two tier marketing- http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2003/20030421_tall_stories/int_connolly.htm
Terry Ryder and the inflated prices for units- http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2003/20030421_tall_stories/int_ryder.htm
Property seminar gurus- http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2003/20030421_tall_stories/ryder.htm
Interview with Chris Connolly about two tier marketing- http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2003/20030421_tall_stories/int_connolly.htm
Terry Ryder and the inflated prices for units- http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2003/20030421_tall_stories/int_ryder.htm
Property seminar gurus- http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2003/20030421_tall_stories/ryder.htm
I haven't seen the program, but my workmate told me about it.
I'm still to understand why a bank would lend on a property that it has discovered is overpriced. Surely this increases their level of risk?
I can only imagine we are talking about cross-collateralising deals or something here?
I'm still to understand why a bank would lend on a property that it has discovered is overpriced. Surely this increases their level of risk?
I can only imagine we are talking about cross-collateralising deals or something here?
The thing I got from the show was about value.
Value is subjective. Just because someone says something is worth $x does not mean that it is - even if they are a Valuer or a bank. Everyone in this world is out to make a dollar. No-one is truely objective or truely independant. Of course you will find valuers who "bend" a little here and there for many reasons. And especially, you will find banks who turn a blind eye to some valuations in the name of getting the loan through.
This does NOT excuse those who knowingly mislead others. That is fraud (or worse) and they should get it in the neck. But....I guess I'm saying there is no such thing as objective valuations. Only subjective ones and comparative ones. This means do your research and always ask "why?".
bagg
Value is subjective. Just because someone says something is worth $x does not mean that it is - even if they are a Valuer or a bank. Everyone in this world is out to make a dollar. No-one is truely objective or truely independant. Of course you will find valuers who "bend" a little here and there for many reasons. And especially, you will find banks who turn a blind eye to some valuations in the name of getting the loan through.
This does NOT excuse those who knowingly mislead others. That is fraud (or worse) and they should get it in the neck. But....I guess I'm saying there is no such thing as objective valuations. Only subjective ones and comparative ones. This means do your research and always ask "why?".
bagg
This is so very very true.
It doesn't matter how hard society legislates, there will always be people who, for whatever reason, will not bother to check things out for themselves.
Whether this is naivetee, or sheer stupidity is a moot point. The point really is, should we (as a society) HAVE to do their due dilligence for them?
The information was freely available, with respect to pricing, etc...
I knew a developer who had two price lists, one for the 'general public' and one for the 'Kay-ites'. He told me that he jacked the latter price list up by 50% (That's FIFTY PERCENT) and he could tell when they walked in that they'd just done the course...
He would present them with the price list, and allow them to offer him 20% under the listed price (of course he would!!!) and then he would barter with them, and eventually succumb to their fantastic bargaining skills... (I have posted about this before).
I didn't like what he was doing, although he was only a business associate of a friend of mine, I asked him how he managed to sleep (the SANF). He replied that, if they are so stupid not to even shop around, and they are happy to sign... Who am I to stop them?
I have to say, I thought long and hard about this point.
My question is... HOW would society have been able to stop this?
And, in fact, Should they have stopped this?
Don't misunderstand me, I think that HK et al.. are awful, and what they were promoting was so obviously going to be a problem that I couldn't understand how ANYONE could be taken in by them... nevertheless... people were.
Should we tell developers that they can only sell their apartments for a 'realistic value on completion'? What is that? How can we tell what the completion value will be? Also, how would you like it if you were selling your car (Blue book value 15k), and someone came along and offerred you 20k for it. Would you say, nah, mate, it's only worth 15k???? even worse, if your house was now worth 250k, but someone came and said I'll contract now, but settle in 2 years. I'll pay you 300k. What's it going to be worth in 3 years? It might be worth 300k, it might be worth 250k, but it might be worth 350k.
If you took the offer, and the property was subsequently found to be worth 250k at settlement, who's at 'fault'?
Conversely, if the property rises to 350k by settlement, who's going to be angry then?
HK's 'System' of "buy it now and when the property price increases before settlement, sell and make a profit" is FANTASTIC! It's Sound, in theory, and is all warm and toasty... Unfortunately the property market DOESN'T ALWAYS GO UP LINEARLY. (If this is not something you understand, don't buy property!)
I just thought I'd throw these thoughts in to stir discussion.
I agree, maybe some people DO just want to believe...
asy
N
New Dad Soon
Guest
Hi Asy
re your friend of a friend, there are always people who see an opportunity to make a buck...... and take advanatge of it. In this case, it's 'business' as opposed to seminars where it's 'wrong'.
(Interestingly enough, graduates were taught to do extreme research, not just buy because you got a discount.... a bit like QLD).
Anyone who HAD done their research would have quickly found out what your friend of a friend was doing and moved on. But then...... you can lead a horse to water..............
what I see from a lot of the naysayers, is that ANYONE offering an opinion based on their experience and charging for it (and I see by the Metropole thread that no matter what you do there is always a differing opinion) will put themselves up for criticism.
If you are selling a product, it will be judged by the market and quite rightly so. There will always be halfwits who don't know what they are talking about and others who just get on and do it.
Fair enough, vote with your feet and don't pay or attend.
What gets me about the whole subject, and really is highlighted by the 4C and forums such as this, is that the only reason people actually parted with their money in QLD in the first place was because they thought they'd scored. Presented with a seemingly feasible way to short cut their way to retirement and not have to take any responsibility for their own financial independence, they all fell for the properties through simple greed.
They now squeal about their losses and want all sorts of people to pay because they didn't actually get a discount (GASP!!!!)
Why do some people send account details to Nigeria? Same answer....something for nothing.
SO....... Seminars, I couldn't think of anything worse than putting yourself up on a stage and having every two bit expert or reporter who doesn't agree with what you say attacking you. What do you do? defend yourself and be accused of being thin skinned, overly bragging etc (eg Metropole), or ignore it and be accused of hiding, 'knowingly misleading others', a scoundrel etc.
Who says Ryder or Jenman or Hannas or HK or Jan Somers or Margaret Lomas or Spann or Kiyosaki are right or wrong. Is there actually ANYONE out there who knows it all and CAN PROVE all these people are wrong?
How stupid do you have to be to not realise that not every strategy suits YOUR circumstance? Or even your country?
I have seen people at seminars attend for 3 days 'just to copy the manual then leave and get a refund' . They then scream blue murder when they are thrown out...... ( I was there and saw it) and lo and behold, bitch about getting back their refund.
How can a consultant say the course doesn't work when he can't do it? Does that mean people like me are just lucky and our research and hours spent don't count?
Even comments here in this forum about the Hannas, they sure DO have a system, feeding clients into their developments, but how many people figured THAT out?
My Point is, there are many many sides to these issues, and what you see on TV, and even read here (many forumites who attended HK that only admit it privately) isn't always the FULL story.....whether it is +ve or -ve.......
So take a reality pill, and see the issues (and agendas) for what they are..........
re your friend of a friend, there are always people who see an opportunity to make a buck...... and take advanatge of it. In this case, it's 'business' as opposed to seminars where it's 'wrong'.
(Interestingly enough, graduates were taught to do extreme research, not just buy because you got a discount.... a bit like QLD).
Anyone who HAD done their research would have quickly found out what your friend of a friend was doing and moved on. But then...... you can lead a horse to water..............
what I see from a lot of the naysayers, is that ANYONE offering an opinion based on their experience and charging for it (and I see by the Metropole thread that no matter what you do there is always a differing opinion) will put themselves up for criticism.
If you are selling a product, it will be judged by the market and quite rightly so. There will always be halfwits who don't know what they are talking about and others who just get on and do it.
Fair enough, vote with your feet and don't pay or attend.
What gets me about the whole subject, and really is highlighted by the 4C and forums such as this, is that the only reason people actually parted with their money in QLD in the first place was because they thought they'd scored. Presented with a seemingly feasible way to short cut their way to retirement and not have to take any responsibility for their own financial independence, they all fell for the properties through simple greed.
They now squeal about their losses and want all sorts of people to pay because they didn't actually get a discount (GASP!!!!)
Why do some people send account details to Nigeria? Same answer....something for nothing.
SO....... Seminars, I couldn't think of anything worse than putting yourself up on a stage and having every two bit expert or reporter who doesn't agree with what you say attacking you. What do you do? defend yourself and be accused of being thin skinned, overly bragging etc (eg Metropole), or ignore it and be accused of hiding, 'knowingly misleading others', a scoundrel etc.
Who says Ryder or Jenman or Hannas or HK or Jan Somers or Margaret Lomas or Spann or Kiyosaki are right or wrong. Is there actually ANYONE out there who knows it all and CAN PROVE all these people are wrong?
How stupid do you have to be to not realise that not every strategy suits YOUR circumstance? Or even your country?
I have seen people at seminars attend for 3 days 'just to copy the manual then leave and get a refund' . They then scream blue murder when they are thrown out...... ( I was there and saw it) and lo and behold, bitch about getting back their refund.
How can a consultant say the course doesn't work when he can't do it? Does that mean people like me are just lucky and our research and hours spent don't count?
Even comments here in this forum about the Hannas, they sure DO have a system, feeding clients into their developments, but how many people figured THAT out?
My Point is, there are many many sides to these issues, and what you see on TV, and even read here (many forumites who attended HK that only admit it privately) isn't always the FULL story.....whether it is +ve or -ve.......
So take a reality pill, and see the issues (and agendas) for what they are..........
Hiya NDN...
that was my point.
There is nothing wrong with HK's theory.
Buy now, settle when the price has gone up and resell immediately for a profit. it's sound, I've done it a couple of times.
The point I was making was, how (and more importantly WHY) should 'we' legislate against these HK's (as a generic grouping). Society is becoming so overlegislated that now people are in danger of saying, well, it's not illegal, therefore it must be fine...
The only thing HK didn't seem to teach (and I'm not saying it was within his realm to do) was risk profiling. His method would probably have not caused too much damage even IF the graduates had bought one apartment at 50k too much. OK, so you have to work more hours and pay more per month... not a killer totally... The problem lies when you buy 3, 5, 10 or 12 (not kidding, have heard of one person who bought 12 of these) and have absolutely no way to settle them. You can't do anything BUT expect trouble.
Is it right to run off and say, what a bad man is HK? OK, I'll grant you that he has some finger in the rotten pie... but, you have to admit, this was sheer stupidity.
The problem is that people, as you said, wanted a quick fix. they wanted to get it all now and not do anything for it. Well, ****, if it was that easy, they wouldn't be there alone...
NDN, I'm not sure whether your line "So take a reality pill, and see the issues (and agendas) for what they are.........." Was directed at me, or in general. You and I seem to be arguing the same side of the fence!
asy
that was my point.
There is nothing wrong with HK's theory.
Buy now, settle when the price has gone up and resell immediately for a profit. it's sound, I've done it a couple of times.
The point I was making was, how (and more importantly WHY) should 'we' legislate against these HK's (as a generic grouping). Society is becoming so overlegislated that now people are in danger of saying, well, it's not illegal, therefore it must be fine...
The only thing HK didn't seem to teach (and I'm not saying it was within his realm to do) was risk profiling. His method would probably have not caused too much damage even IF the graduates had bought one apartment at 50k too much. OK, so you have to work more hours and pay more per month... not a killer totally... The problem lies when you buy 3, 5, 10 or 12 (not kidding, have heard of one person who bought 12 of these) and have absolutely no way to settle them. You can't do anything BUT expect trouble.
Is it right to run off and say, what a bad man is HK? OK, I'll grant you that he has some finger in the rotten pie... but, you have to admit, this was sheer stupidity.
The problem is that people, as you said, wanted a quick fix. they wanted to get it all now and not do anything for it. Well, ****, if it was that easy, they wouldn't be there alone...
NDN, I'm not sure whether your line "So take a reality pill, and see the issues (and agendas) for what they are.........." Was directed at me, or in general. You and I seem to be arguing the same side of the fence!
asy
N
New Dad Soon
Guest
Hi Ya Asy
Just re-read my post/rant. Nothing directed at you at all.... sorry, not very well worded was it?
How on earth would someone go out and buy 12 properties without giving any thought to settling them?
They WERE taught that you have to get pre-approval from your lender and the Deposit Bond company (if using a bond) and that if they could not afford to settle it, JV it so that they can keep it in the worst case.
Preparing a 'Due Diligence' file was for the Banks!
They were also taught to look at their worst case scenario every time..........
It's like Chinese whispers, everyone hears something different.....
and as said previously in this thread, own your success but blame failures on others.
It's an interesting point re regulation. ASIC looks closely at a lot of these seminars and sorts out anyone making false claims...... yet I attended one of their free seminars not so long ago where they kept repeating to all the elderly folks there that you should go and see an accredited financial advisor for the correct advice.
One elderly gentleman stood up and wanted to know why his super and recommended investments were getting hammered by 'accredited' advice and tax office audits.......
(SIGH) and so it goes..........
Just re-read my post/rant. Nothing directed at you at all.... sorry, not very well worded was it?
How on earth would someone go out and buy 12 properties without giving any thought to settling them?
They WERE taught that you have to get pre-approval from your lender and the Deposit Bond company (if using a bond) and that if they could not afford to settle it, JV it so that they can keep it in the worst case.
Preparing a 'Due Diligence' file was for the Banks!
They were also taught to look at their worst case scenario every time..........
It's like Chinese whispers, everyone hears something different.....
and as said previously in this thread, own your success but blame failures on others.
It's an interesting point re regulation. ASIC looks closely at a lot of these seminars and sorts out anyone making false claims...... yet I attended one of their free seminars not so long ago where they kept repeating to all the elderly folks there that you should go and see an accredited financial advisor for the correct advice.
One elderly gentleman stood up and wanted to know why his super and recommended investments were getting hammered by 'accredited' advice and tax office audits.......
(SIGH) and so it goes..........
In my opinion the ripoffs that happen routinely in the
Financial Services area are much worse than the current
scams in the real estate world, unethical but legal!
--more wolves in sheeps clothing there than in any
other area of investment that I can think of..
And Retirees with lump sums are their very favorite meal....
Cheers,
Financial Services area are much worse than the current
scams in the real estate world, unethical but legal!
--more wolves in sheeps clothing there than in any
other area of investment that I can think of..
And Retirees with lump sums are their very favorite meal....
Cheers,
N
New Dad Soon
Guest
Here's the transcript of the Hannas' interview.
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2003/20030421_tall_stories/hannas.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2003/20030421_tall_stories/hannas.htm
