True.
My point wasn't to pick on those in the mining industry (or negative versus positive cash flow) it was to highlight that having a high income and the servicing ability to buy 6 properties doesn't make someone a savvy property investor by default.
Sorry, but your anecdotal stories don't align with the data which shows investor activity often climaxes with price peaks.
You may think that every investor our there is a smart contrarian who doesn't get caught up in emotion and hype, but that's not the case.
If you are seeing more OO enquires, but investors are making a majority of purchases (which data would suggest is the case in NSW/Sydney), then perhaps that supports the suggestion from Wategos that investors are outbidding FHBs or OOs in general.
Note the major peak in investor finance at the same time prices peaked in Sydney (2003)...
http://petewargent.blogspot.com.au/2015/04/sydney-investor-loans-continue-to-power.html
When you said "Yet more baloney!" to Wategos, did you think his comment was only in reference to the lower priced suburbs of Western Sydney?
Rixter, this chart may interest you which shows both OOs & investors, but on a national scale (from http://www.theguardian.com/business...fuel-a-housing-bubble-on-the-edge-of-bursting).
You can see both buyer types are exuberant into price peaks at times e.g. 2003/2007. 2010 peak driven mostly by OOs due to increased FHOGs in period prior. This one is clearly being driven primarily be investors with their finance beating OOs for first time in history of the data series. OOs did contribute early in the run, but have flattened out now.
I doubt there is any data separating "professional" investors from others (what measure would you use to separate the two anyway), but just as there are savvy investors there are savvy OOs.
The chart I posted shows OOs vs Investors. Your article links refers to a problem that is specifically with First Home Buyer data, it doesn't affect the data in the chart I posted.
The 80K income figure is misleading and has been debunked, since it is AFTER their gross income has been reduced with property investment losses and depreciation. By far the biggest chunk of tax deductions is within higher income groups: the-myth-of-mum-and-dad-negative-gearers
This would be purely subjectiveRixter, this chart may interest you which shows both OOs & investors, but on a national scale (from http://www.theguardian.com/business...fuel-a-housing-bubble-on-the-edge-of-bursting).
You can see both buyer types are exuberant into price peaks at times e.g. 2003/2007. 2010 peak driven mostly by OOs due to increased FHOGs in period prior. This one is clearly being driven primarily be investors with their finance beating OOs for first time in history of the data series. OOs did contribute early in the run, but have flattened out now.
I doubt there is any data separating "professional" investors from others (what measure would you use to separate the two anyway), but just as there are savvy investors there are savvy OOs.
When you say "speculator" are you referring to those who do flips?
When there is investor activity in any one area, this does not also mean that all the O'O's miraculously disappear and stop buying completely.
Again, the link you posted has nothing to do with anything I've posted in this thread.
I only mentioned savvy OOs because some here were suggesting they were the only dumb money driving prices to an overvalued state, when it's obvious that investors buy heavily into peaks too. I agree that most OOs wouldn't measure up a property in the same way as an investor, but some would look for value and future growth potential, especially given the CGT free status and many of the facilities that an OO buyer look for would be the same as an investor (e.g. nearby schools, shopping, transport, etc).
I went to a property talk last night by Steve McKnight and he basically said anyone who buys a loss making property (i.e. negatively geared) is a speculator.
Well......if Steve McKnight says, it must be so.
