Noel Whittaker 's comment re. NRAS
- Thread starter soyabean
- Start date
What's up his nose????
I agree the 100 unit NRAS devs are problematic, but all NRAS are not 100 units devs.
Picking the right one you'll be miles in front.
Two identical properties, one NRAS and the other not, you'll be making $5K pa with one and paying $3K pa with the other. Both with similar CG.
I know which one I'd chose.
I agree the 100 unit NRAS devs are problematic, but all NRAS are not 100 units devs.
Picking the right one you'll be miles in front.
Two identical properties, one NRAS and the other not, you'll be making $5K pa with one and paying $3K pa with the other. Both with similar CG.
I know which one I'd chose.
Hi All
I know very little abou this product.
I think NW is referring to the kickbacks, where investors have paid too much for these properties in the first instance.
also, this potentially could be the real killer
The only people who are ever going to buy them are investors, so if you wish to resell, you limit potential buyers. Also, the tax benefits last for 10 years only. Think 10 years forward when the properties, and probably the tenants, have deteriorated and there are no more tax benefits to offer the unsuspecting buyer. Who in their right mind is going to buy one of them?
MTR
I know very little abou this product.
I think NW is referring to the kickbacks, where investors have paid too much for these properties in the first instance.
also, this potentially could be the real killer
The only people who are ever going to buy them are investors, so if you wish to resell, you limit potential buyers. Also, the tax benefits last for 10 years only. Think 10 years forward when the properties, and probably the tenants, have deteriorated and there are no more tax benefits to offer the unsuspecting buyer. Who in their right mind is going to buy one of them?
MTR
Seems to be the unscrupulous calling the kettle black
"ferret around until you find an undervalued property in a prime location that you can buy at a bargain price because the vendor has a reason to sell in a hurry"
By all means rip some unsuspecting person off, just don't do that using NRAS.
"ferret around until you find an undervalued property in a prime location that you can buy at a bargain price because the vendor has a reason to sell in a hurry"
By all means rip some unsuspecting person off, just don't do that using NRAS.
Extremely poor Journalism & poor editorship from the top at NEWS
Coming from 27 years publishing background, objectively the article was very simply poor journalism. The primary focus was clearly to attack the 'unscrupulous sales efforts', targeting and trying to specifically tarnish the 'Gold Coast' sales activities. Unfortunately through completely mixed messages and poor (non-existant?) editing from the top, to keep articles laser focus, it completely misleads any would be interested party into thinking NRAS properties themselves are all questionable.
NRAS properties are nationwide. (why highlight Gold Coast re. NRAS)
Only approximately 30% of a development can be NRAS, (does that mean the indistinguishable 65-70% non-NRAS properties in the same development are poor investments too?)
Very poor research to in any way validate or discredit anything apart from asking people to question the intent of cold calling... Doh!
I suspect I will not get a reply email from Mr Whittaker...
Coming from 27 years publishing background, objectively the article was very simply poor journalism. The primary focus was clearly to attack the 'unscrupulous sales efforts', targeting and trying to specifically tarnish the 'Gold Coast' sales activities. Unfortunately through completely mixed messages and poor (non-existant?) editing from the top, to keep articles laser focus, it completely misleads any would be interested party into thinking NRAS properties themselves are all questionable.
NRAS properties are nationwide. (why highlight Gold Coast re. NRAS)
Only approximately 30% of a development can be NRAS, (does that mean the indistinguishable 65-70% non-NRAS properties in the same development are poor investments too?)
Very poor research to in any way validate or discredit anything apart from asking people to question the intent of cold calling... Doh!
I suspect I will not get a reply email from Mr Whittaker...
You're right journalism has a duty oif care for misinformation
If that is the case, all owner occupiers in the same areas and developments are even more foolish. if NRAS is there to remove the upward pressures of rent increase... what is driving that? Only one thing. The supply demand ratio is unbalanced and demand is growing quicker than availability. The tax benefits are equally applicable to non NRAS investment stock. Reporter presumably meant the NRAS contribution stopping in 10 years. By which time depending on the debt in 10 years, rental increases should comfortably be making the property profitable without NRAS
If that is the case, all owner occupiers in the same areas and developments are even more foolish. if NRAS is there to remove the upward pressures of rent increase... what is driving that? Only one thing. The supply demand ratio is unbalanced and demand is growing quicker than availability. The tax benefits are equally applicable to non NRAS investment stock. Reporter presumably meant the NRAS contribution stopping in 10 years. By which time depending on the debt in 10 years, rental increases should comfortably be making the property profitable without NRAS
This article isn't really about NRAS - it's about two-tiered marketing to unsuspecting purchasers who can't, or don't, do their own research.
Seems like the 2000's over again.
Seems like the 2000's over again.
Author isn't attacking the NRAS at all. He is only attacking the marketers. Even the title 'National Rental Affordability Scheme tainted by ruse' clearly says that. He is warning about the dangers and this isn't different to any other investment.
I'm not sure why few people are up in arms
I'm not sure why few people are up in arms
So in 10 years time if you want to sell a NRAS home, presumably the property value has also increased, perhaps doubled who knows, I would also assume the rental income would not cover the sale price, so why would an investor buy NRAS home if there were no benefits left unless you can purchase substantially cheaper? Perhaps I am missing something, but this is how I interpret what NW is saying???
not sure I follow your question Marisa.... in 10 years time the house will be exactly the same as any other house, except in the past 10 years the owner has collected about $100,000 of tax free subsidy.
there is so much misinformation regarding NRAS when really it is quite simple. this misleading article does nothing to help.
Author isn't attacking the NRAS at all. He is only attacking the marketers. Even the title 'National Rental Affordability Scheme tainted by ruse' clearly says that. He is warning about the dangers and this isn't different to any other investment.
I'm not sure why few people are up in arms
not attacking it?
-----------------------------
I described it as "a lousy deal for mum-and-dad investors"
-----------------------------
I got another email asking what I thought of NRAS schemes.
Luckily, the intended victims had not yet committed themselves and I warned them off.
------------------------------
the properties have some fundamental flaws
(really?? pray tell?)
------------------------------
The only people who are ever going to buy them are investors
(complete fiction)
------------------------------
if you wish to resell, you limit potential buyers
(really? interesting)
------------------------------
Who in their right mind is going to buy one of them
(probably the same person that would buy any other property. seriously what is his point here??)
------------------------------
there is an oversupply of rentals in some of the areas where these properties are being built
(fiction)
------------------------------
It's hard to see an NRAS property ever satisfying that criteria.
(clearly loves the product!!)
------------------------------
any tax benefits that go with it should be treated as the cream on the cake
(except its not a tax benefit, its a tax free credit and at $100k it's a serious amount of money to ignore, outrageously so for a financial planner)
true, but if you pay 50k for a 30k car, with the intention of selling it in 10years for a market % of the actual value, then its a bad deal
Hi matt, how is that 'ripping someone off'? The vendor has every right to decline any offer and if they accept a lowball offer, that is their prerogative.
then buy one for $30k
My thoughts exactly.
Can you though? I thought all NRAS had to be through a company, and these companies won't be doing them for free...
yeh there is plenty around at valuation, just doesn't make very exciting reading in the sunday paper.
OK, so I am obviously am getting confused or the article is just confusing, not sure what he is getting at then.
Cheers MTR
