Herron Todd White November 2009 report
- Thread starter Ajax
- Start date
Thank you, as always
I think I'm going to stop bothering to read these reports.
Sydney has clearly been in a rising market for the last 8 months or so - having put on about 8 - 10% or more....and yet this report has labelled Sydney houses in the cycle at "bottom of market". What the?
Sydney has clearly been in a rising market for the last 8 months or so - having put on about 8 - 10% or more....and yet this report has labelled Sydney houses in the cycle at "bottom of market". What the?
Darwin houses had been at top of market for quite a few months...but is now a rising market.
Start of recovery is below bottom of the market in their methodology...which I think is akin to a sine curve...as rate of decline slows HTW call it start of recovery (even if prices are still falling). Bottom of market is when prices are flat but over time prices are showing increases.
Start of recovery is below bottom of the market in their methodology...which I think is akin to a sine curve...as rate of decline slows HTW call it start of recovery (even if prices are still falling). Bottom of market is when prices are flat but over time prices are showing increases.
I have stopped reading HTW reports altogether.
The degree of inconsistency, the quality and integrity of the information and the level of depth in their analysis speaks volumes about the very average content it contains.
The property cycles in their monthly reports change from rising to peak to bottom within a couple of months so if anyone was to use those as a guide to gauge the cycle, then it will be a very poor indicator. Sometimes those indicators are not remotely close to the actual activity status on the ground.
As a general guide its ok to have a read if you have some time - I think the template appears to give the indication that it is a very high quality report but in essence it is quite average.
Harris
The degree of inconsistency, the quality and integrity of the information and the level of depth in their analysis speaks volumes about the very average content it contains.
The property cycles in their monthly reports change from rising to peak to bottom within a couple of months so if anyone was to use those as a guide to gauge the cycle, then it will be a very poor indicator. Sometimes those indicators are not remotely close to the actual activity status on the ground.
As a general guide its ok to have a read if you have some time - I think the template appears to give the indication that it is a very high quality report but in essence it is quite average.
Harris
As with all sources of informational reports one source should not be relied upon as the be all and end all. Its just one source of many and its up to the individual to analyse there own conclusions.
As Harris has pointed out there will be inconsistencies identified in all sources because at the end of the day the information gleaned is just an interpretation same as yours is an interpretation.
As another example, residex's and rpdata's median prices do not reflect the same median price as the various states real estate institute's medians. Same basic source statistics being analysed but varying interpretations being applied.
Last edited:
Whilst I like looking at the stats, they seem to constantly repeat that infrastructure = growth which is a load of crock and shows how ignorant HTW researchers are.
But of course this type of stuff is great for noobs who read it and then become instant experts as well. Makes them feel good and pay fees to HTW.
Why is it that nobody has yet spoken about let alone "picked" the type of RE in Sydney's SW that went up >70% 2001-2005 and slowly increased till now while all the others have lost?
The REAs tell you not to buy it, the RE mags have never mentioned it, and the BAs ignore it.
All this "buy quality, buy infrastructure" and follow the herd bs may make people feel like experts and those reading it pay more fees (and experts too by repeating it), but it's hogwash.
Infrastructure being built means nothing. There was plenty being built in the 90's on SEQ.
Real independent research does not exist unless you do it yourself.
Reading and agreeing or not isnt research nor is it analysis.
The numbers are all there loud and clear for those willing to do their own.
As always "Know thy fishing pond".
But of course this type of stuff is great for noobs who read it and then become instant experts as well. Makes them feel good and pay fees to HTW.
Why is it that nobody has yet spoken about let alone "picked" the type of RE in Sydney's SW that went up >70% 2001-2005 and slowly increased till now while all the others have lost?
The REAs tell you not to buy it, the RE mags have never mentioned it, and the BAs ignore it.
All this "buy quality, buy infrastructure" and follow the herd bs may make people feel like experts and those reading it pay more fees (and experts too by repeating it), but it's hogwash.
Infrastructure being built means nothing. There was plenty being built in the 90's on SEQ.
Real independent research does not exist unless you do it yourself.
Reading and agreeing or not isnt research nor is it analysis.
The numbers are all there loud and clear for those willing to do their own.
As always "Know thy fishing pond".
valuations
I have had an incorrect valuation done on my property before by these guys-(out by about 20-25% once)
So am not sure if i could trust these reports?!!
I have had an incorrect valuation done on my property before by these guys-(out by about 20-25% once)
So am not sure if i could trust these reports?!!
Last edited:
