This again huh?! All I know of one day 'free' seminars is 'Upsell'
Property Options
- Thread starter AndrewScottMusi
- Start date
Sure. it's upsell, but at least it's "try before you buy" In this case it was anyway, because I learned a few things. Plus it was highly entertaining.
No I'm not posting on anyone's behalf - just my off the top of the head ideas. Ironically I would do Mark Rolton's course if I could afford it. Maybe the reason I can't afford it is because I haven't done his course!? - ha ha.
Maybe if I could afford his course I wouldn't need it.
Yes, and where the owner is not interested in or able to realise that value.
That would be the gist of it, but I'm sure it wouldn't be the only sentence uttered by the buyer during negotiation.
I'd prefer to present the seller with the idea of
" I'd like to buy your property, but I need time to check out all my costs before I can decide whether it's worthwhile for me to go ahead. Meanwhile i don't want you to sell it to someone else..."
What's an o/a?
Adding lengthened conditions to a standard contract still sounds feasible to my ear, even though Mark Rolton soundly rejected the idea when I asked him at the freebie seminar. I wasn't satisfied with his answer, but figured that if a contract with a whole bunch of conditions was an alternative, he would probably be using it.
Maybe it's just too tedious to list all the conditions.
Eg, I'll buy your property, if
*the sewerage connections costs less than..
*the elecrricity connection costs less than..
*council takes no more than x months to approve..
*I can get bank finance at x%..
*I can find a joint venture partner..
*etc, etc..
Why would a seller be interested in a unit trust?
"Training" mines seem to be worth going for too.
What's a "Training" mine?
Councils in my area - Adelaide - are quite willing to reveal contact details for free. The catch is you have to go to their office and look up the address in their register.Hi Andrew, welcome to the forum.
With regards to names of owners of properties - Councils charge something along the lines of $4.50 for this info. That will give you their name, mailing address and contact details if I remember correctly. Unless you're spamming (100's) of letters, it's a drop in the ocean compared to the profit potential of scoring a deal.
Very time consuming.
It's frustrating that such a simple task is so time-consuming.
RPdata gives you the name of the person who last registered a phone at the address in question. Not helpful if you have spied a block of land that's been vacant for years and is crying out for development.
Maybe the $4.50 option is worth considering more.
Perhaps I could hire someone from Odesk to submit requests to Councils.
But if I need 20 per week, that's still $90 per week, and it's still only a long shot that someone will be interested in a creative offer like an option.
Maybe there's an opportunity here for you to offer "mum and dads on large valuable lots" a better deal. Eg, don't sign that offer, I've got a better one. Of course, you should seek independent legal advice...
Maybe there's an opportunity here for you to offer "mum and dads on large valuable lots" a better deal. Eg, don't sign that offer, I've got a better one. Of course, you should seek independent legal advice...
I think you will find that it is imperative for any up and coming option guru that there be no competition and that the property never hits the open market, The great thing about tying the property up with an option is that when it is under option you as option holder can freeze out the open market when the owner realizes they have undersold- at least for the duration of the option.
Theoretically you could offer a better deal but most of the oldies are signed up by that nice young agent without contacting even their own solicitor.
Yes, it seems that way.
But I was referring to you personally. When your clients come to you for advice about whether or not they should sell an option, surely they're not signed up at that stage?
But I was referring to you personally. When your clients come to you for advice about whether or not they should sell an option, surely they're not signed up at that stage?
Property options are, in my view, a theoretical way to 'get rich quick with no/little money down'. Theory, of course, is different to the practical aspects of why this doesn't work.
Commercial clients- never signed up.
Ma and Pa clients- always signed up- too late. I have seen Rolton's name on a few of these hence my cynicism.
Bit like a sell conveyance I did the other day. Client had come in with a sold contract at $371 k for a 2 bedroom qlder on a main road 4kms from the CBD on 405m. -slight flood issue but not above floorboards during Jan 11. I would have bought the place myself for $385k and it still would have been a bargain. Buyer tries to get another 5k off the old lady for building inspection. I told her no- I may have someone else who will buy it for more. Agent smells a lost commission (weekend telephone calls when no lawyer around) and suddenly buyer backs down- he's on a good thing and knows it.
Smooth talking agents slide it under the radar and the damage is done. No cooling off period for sellers regrettably.
Last edited:
Some wise words from CU@thetop. If you want my advice never fall for the expensive courses being offered by MR or any of the other so called property spruikers. They are making huge money out of this using some very cunning marketing ploys to appeal to the naive. And it's the inexperienced that I see parroting what they get told by these spruikers.......things like "you will make many times the amount of this course on your first deal".
Hundreds have found that they never put together a 'first deal', not for want of trying, but it is never as easy as people like Rolton make it out to be. Secondly many forget that Rolton (and others) have taught hundreds of people how to all go out and search for the same deals. So they have a lot of competition looking for the same properties in the hope of making a fast buck. Those that have been through the process have often found that they made far less than they hoped if they haven't gone broke!
Owing to the type of work I do, I hear all the horror stories about these things, many of which are cunningly covered up by the spruikers themselves.
The common theme by these spruikers is to threaten their critics with defamation. Most of the time they are bluffing, especially if the truth has been stated, but this strategy definitely works and scares most off.
Another is to post a lot of positive material about themselves to drop the negative material down to a page that you are unlikely to find under a google search. But here's a hint. If you google the name of the spruiker (or their company) with the word 'scam' or 'ripoff' or 'exposed' after it, and discover that some links have been removed with a 'chilling effects' notice posted in their place, you can bet your boots that this is because the spruiker has threatened google to remove it. Some spruikers names google searched in this way, have dozens of 'chilling effects' notices pending. It's a clear sign that people are posting information about them that they don't want you to see or know about.
Instead, try a "Bing" search with the same words. You'll find that will work and you will find things that have been hidden by google under threat of litigation. I tend to use "BING" a lot more these days for this reason. Of course the spruikers all claim the criticism is posted by jealous competitors and cry 'tall poppy syndrome.' Don't believe a word of it.
Sorry to have gone a little off topic but reading some of these threads it is obvious that many inexperienced posters are far to gullible when it comes to the wealth gurus and just parrot their lines. You really have to understand that many of these wealth gurus are masters of deception and it is very easy to deceive large groups of people, because people can be like sheep!
A final quote from Mitchell Zuckoff: "Every swindle is driven by a desire for easy money; it's the one thing the swindler and the swindled have in common."
Hundreds have found that they never put together a 'first deal', not for want of trying, but it is never as easy as people like Rolton make it out to be. Secondly many forget that Rolton (and others) have taught hundreds of people how to all go out and search for the same deals. So they have a lot of competition looking for the same properties in the hope of making a fast buck. Those that have been through the process have often found that they made far less than they hoped if they haven't gone broke!
Owing to the type of work I do, I hear all the horror stories about these things, many of which are cunningly covered up by the spruikers themselves.
The common theme by these spruikers is to threaten their critics with defamation. Most of the time they are bluffing, especially if the truth has been stated, but this strategy definitely works and scares most off.
Another is to post a lot of positive material about themselves to drop the negative material down to a page that you are unlikely to find under a google search. But here's a hint. If you google the name of the spruiker (or their company) with the word 'scam' or 'ripoff' or 'exposed' after it, and discover that some links have been removed with a 'chilling effects' notice posted in their place, you can bet your boots that this is because the spruiker has threatened google to remove it. Some spruikers names google searched in this way, have dozens of 'chilling effects' notices pending. It's a clear sign that people are posting information about them that they don't want you to see or know about.
Instead, try a "Bing" search with the same words. You'll find that will work and you will find things that have been hidden by google under threat of litigation. I tend to use "BING" a lot more these days for this reason. Of course the spruikers all claim the criticism is posted by jealous competitors and cry 'tall poppy syndrome.' Don't believe a word of it.
Sorry to have gone a little off topic but reading some of these threads it is obvious that many inexperienced posters are far to gullible when it comes to the wealth gurus and just parrot their lines. You really have to understand that many of these wealth gurus are masters of deception and it is very easy to deceive large groups of people, because people can be like sheep!
A final quote from Mitchell Zuckoff: "Every swindle is driven by a desire for easy money; it's the one thing the swindler and the swindled have in common."
I really disagree with this approach. You can have 2 agents with a non-exclusive arrangement, where you can pay all the commission to the successful agent. You still get access to both their distribution lists, but only the keen agents that actually promote your product get paid. The lazy agent doesn't get paid for doing nothing. The 70/30 commission deal just adds complexity and adds nothing to the deal.
This is a good point, Mattnz.
Theoretically, one of the agents could just put their feet on the desk knowing that they were going to get 30% regardless.
Even cowboys get the options blues
Well Broncos do anyway:
http://www.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2013/QSC/148
Not a final decision but a complex one where even the big commercial boys have ended up arguing. If they have to roll out the Big Gun Barristers then what hope for Ma and Pa ?
Well Broncos do anyway:
http://www.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2013/QSC/148
Not a final decision but a complex one where even the big commercial boys have ended up arguing. If they have to roll out the Big Gun Barristers then what hope for Ma and Pa ?
Surely this dispute could have been averted by wording the option agreement so that the grantor is obliged to approve the lodgement of any application by the grantee for a DA.
I didn't read the whole case, but it seems that the Broncos woke up to the potential value of their land after entering the option agreement and decided to prevent the option grantee from exploiting that value by withholding consent for lodgement of a DA.
If the option agreement explicitly lays out what the option grantee expects of the grantor, it may lead to no agreement being signed at all, but this would work out more profitable in the long run than going to court. The time and money the grantee wastes in fighting a legal battle would be better spent in looking for the next opportunity.
I'm not affiliated with Mark Rolton in any way, and he certainly has never heard of me.
I admire people who exhibit artistry and flair, and who are performing at the top of their game. Mark's game is property development via options trading and salesmanship. It's rare to find someone who's as good as he is at both.
Marketing is a valuable skill that every business person needs. When we know we're being skilfully marketed to, it protects us from exploitation. And it enriches our enjoyment of life to appreciate people who do it well, even if we never end up buying anything from them.
hahaha that's gold!
writing out conditions is more onerous than getting a lawyer to draw up a watertight options contract.
whatever.
good luck with the upsell.
writing out conditions is more onerous than getting a lawyer to draw up a watertight options contract.
whatever.
good luck with the upsell.
