Hi Toni,
Thanks for your input, keep up the good work!
As for potential for frankston, north, south and centre as suburbs, I have already made my mind up on what I think of them and I am happy with them so no need to try and convince me
anyways, seeing you own more then one in this area, can you please give us your feedback on a few Qs (its going to be long...sorry)
it almost seems that properties selling for $210-$230k in North and renting for about $190-$210 which yields about 4.8% while $250-$280k in South are also reneting for about $200-$220 per week which is a about 4%.
Firstly I am finding the yields to be a bit low for my liking, other bluechip suburbs are yielding 4-4.2% so hence with an area that is a bit further out the yields to be quite poor. I often see other people here, purchase properties for say $285k and rent them out for $320 per week, so this low yield is bothering me at the moment, I think there is more potential in North and still lots of potential for South but South would be safer!
also, the median of the north is something like $230k, while the median for South is about $410k, so obviously buying a good property well under the median is a good sign as the property is always catching up! so hence why I dont understand why a property for $230k in north vs $280k in the south would rent basically the same,
I understand that most of the cheaper ones in the South are newer neater 2 -3 bdr units (the odd house) that require not much work, while the North ones are all usually much older 3 bdr houses, (some require work, some require lots of work, some require not much/nil work), but I would have expected someone would prefer to rent in a nicer suburb with newer housing for the same price even though the land is smaller and with a smaller garden, just as the argument someone put through that a person who is going to rent out an old house in north won't pay extra for a slightly bigger garden.
also, in regards to subdividing, when I went through the other day through the north, I didn't see many properties that had been or were being subdivided, so do you think there is anything that is holding it back???
also, this leads to my next question ,suppose you found a property with a big land component with a shabby house on it with land division potential, if no-one is doing it then yes, you might become an innovator, however, there are more risks associated with being a trend setter, so if you found a good one, lets say the average price was $230k and you found one with a big chunk of land for $275k, however it might have development potential but if you aren't going to do it immediately, then the house is shabbier, you have paid extra for it, however, your rent will be the same or lower compared to other properties so your yields drop, hence it costs more to hold on to it, so I think buying a potential sub division and not doing anything to it might be the wrong strategy, what do you think, I ve been looking at 3bdr houses, which mind you look all similar, but the larger land components are asking for more..... so I'm a bit unsure what to do.
and finally, you mentioned frankston central, Im not too sure yet of what the differences between central and north are? maybe central slightly dearer and a bit more closer, very similar to the north but just closer, and completetly different to the South
and finally x2, you seem to be aware of Seaford as well, I only drove through it and I thought wow, nice, closer to the city, this area must be $500k+ but re.com.au reveals its only in the $300ks, can you tell me what you think of this area, I'd buy in all of them if I could but it just seems that Seaford might have a bigger chance of booming, I know that Frankston has better infrastructure at the moment though....
thanks for reading my looong post everyone!
