Should we just sell?

Cimbom, my frank opinion is that you should sell off a cashflow neutral property with all its attendant problem tenants and buy a property that is cashflow positive in an area where you can get great tenants and where there is prospect for good capital growth.

Wow you make it sound to so easy.
A property that ticks all 3 boxes isn't easy to come by... (I am assuming you are referring to capital cities when you say good tenants and good capital growth... just not sure about cash flow positive part).

Care to share any details of investments that meet this criteria?
 
I've looked at what's on the market for 4 bedders is Ashmont and there is a wide range of prices. Do you reckon your property is closer

to this price - 169,900
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-116759275

this price - 225k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-114770183

this price - 269k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-115414207

or this price - 329k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-116353287

Trying to get a feel of what your property is worth now and suggest a comparable area, closer to the city, with better yields and capital growth. But 150K is a good price if you can just get great tenants at a rental yield that will enable you to stay at a cash neutral position as wylie suggested.
 
Wow you make it sound to so easy.
A property that ticks all 3 boxes isn't easy to come by... (I am assuming you are referring to capital cities when you say good tenants and good capital growth... just not sure about cash flow positive part).

Care to share any details of investments that meet this criteria?

http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-qld-kingston-116751635

Sure, Nek, 31 Myra Street Kingston at 229k listed on Easter Sunday. I told my friend the day it was listed, he made very first offer but was subject to finance. In the end 8 offers were made for it, the offer that won out was not subject to finance
Contract still fell over, a friend of my friend picked it up.
Land size 660 m2
small aboveground pool
Rental $335 - great tenant, happy to stay
Dual living - 3 beds up, 1 down, bathroom up and down
All brick base downstairs
Needs some minor maintenance but no major repairs
Pool fencing safety certificate would be included in contract
19km to city
 
Is Mount Austin or Kooringal better suburbs to get decent tenants, you reckon?
Or is it much of the muchness in term of tenant calibre?
I am more familiar with the Logan suburbs in Brisbane.
Don't mind me asking, cimbom, how much did you pay for the Ashmont 4 bedder and how much are you getting in terms of rent for it?
I'm trying to see if I can suggest a Logan suburb in Brisbane of comparative value but better capital growth, better calibre of tenant and prospects.

Mount Austin & Kooringal are better suburbs from what I've been told. I was originally looking at properties in Ashmont and advised by a few PM's that they wouldn't take any more properties on in the area (some streets are worse then others).

So I ended up purchasing in Mount Austin, had the property just coming up 1 year now. Tenants were great for around 6 months, but then 1 lost his job so now they are playing catch up each month. They won't be offered a renewal and will be looking for new tenants. My PM has been very prompt on them in issuing notices so they have been paying be it late each month.

The property is cf+ as hasn't had much maintenance yield on purchase price was just under 8%.

So my question to OP is how is the property only CF Neutral when tenants are paying, my knowledge is that rent is higher in Ashmont.
 
sorry to hear that ... very unfortunate
bad tenants is every investor's nightmare
can you claim rent arrears on your landlord insurance?
 
I've looked at what's on the market for 4 bedders is Ashmont and there is a wide range of prices. Do you reckon your property is closer

to this price - 169,900
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-116759275

this price - 225k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-114770183

this price - 269k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-115414207

or this price - 329k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-116353287

Trying to get a feel of what your property is worth now and suggest a comparable area, closer to the city, with better yields and capital growth. But 150K is a good price if you can just get great tenants at a rental yield that will enable you to stay at a cash neutral position as wylie suggested.

Ashmont is a funny area, you really have to be in the mix to understand the local market

It's a sensitive area, so being in the next street can alter the market price by a huge amount.

Even a four bedder In original condition may only be worth as little as 130k depending on the area and timing
 
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-qld-kingston-116751635

Sure, Nek, 31 Myra Street Kingston at 229k listed on Easter Sunday. I told my friend the day it was listed, he made very first offer but was subject to finance. In the end 8 offers were made for it, the offer that won out was not subject to finance
Contract still fell over, a friend of my friend picked it up.
Land size 660 m2
small aboveground pool
Rental $335 - great tenant, happy to stay
Dual living - 3 beds up, 1 down, bathroom up and down
All brick base downstairs
Needs some minor maintenance but no major repairs
Pool fencing safety certificate would be included in contract
19km to city

Looks good, how much did it sell for?
 
Beanie Girl, it's closest to the first one you posted.

Brady, the yield is 8.3% but I consider it CF neutral because at this price range, it's a pretty fine line between that and CF+. I'd need a bit more of a buffer to consider something genuinely CF+
 
Looks good, how much did it sell for?

Not as cheap as the one you bought, TMNT! :p
Under contract for 235k.
My friend's friend almost cried when he saw the property....
not because of the state it was in, haha! :D
but because of the opportunity for a step towards financial freedom it represented
 
Last edited:
Beanie Girl, it's closest to the first one you posted.

Brady, the yield is 8.3% but I consider it CF neutral because at this price range, it's a pretty fine line between that and CF+. I'd need a bit more of a buffer to consider something genuinely CF+

Cimbom, I have the same gut feel as wylie - keep it
It's not easy to get a 4 bed house with land in an important regional centre like Wagga at that price point (agricultural, military and transport hub). How often do you get a University (Charles Sturt) in a regional area?
People are just going to need cheaper and cheaper housing as times get tougher and tougher and cost of living goes up and up.
Just need careful screening and good tenant selection.

Comparables are 2-3 bedroom townhouses in Logan (19-20km to city)
and Elizabeth suburbs in Adelaide (27km to city)

Brick 3 bedroom house on 769m land - Elizabeth Park - 165k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-sa-elizabeth+park-115789335
 
Beanie Girl, it's closest to the first one you posted.

Brady, the yield is 8.3% but I consider it CF neutral because at this price range, it's a pretty fine line between that and CF+. I'd need a bit more of a buffer to consider something genuinely CF+

I'm confused how you consider is neutral? If it's fully tented unless there is maintenance issue should be well CF+

Issue is the vacancies.
 
I've looked at what's on the market for 4 bedders is Ashmont and there is a wide range of prices. Do you reckon your property is closer

to this price - 169,900
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-116759275

this price - 225k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-114770183

this price - 269k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-115414207

or this price - 329k
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-ashmont-116353287

Trying to get a feel of what your property is worth now and suggest a comparable area, closer to the city, with better yields and capital growth. But 150K is a good price if you can just get great tenants at a rental yield that will enable you to stay at a cash neutral position as wylie suggested.

I'm trying to understand whats so special about Wagga Wagga and how is it different to other regional centres.
Will one pick up much capital growth in these places?


http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-qld-kingston-116751635

Sure, Nek, 31 Myra Street Kingston at 229k listed on Easter Sunday. I told my friend the day it was listed, he made very first offer but was subject to finance. In the end 8 offers were made for it, the offer that won out was not subject to finance
Contract still fell over, a friend of my friend picked it up.
Land size 660 m2
small aboveground pool
Rental $335 - great tenant, happy to stay
Dual living - 3 beds up, 1 down, bathroom up and down
All brick base downstairs
Needs some minor maintenance but no major repairs
Pool fencing safety certificate would be included in contract
19km to city

This one looks more interesting. I am not very educated about the QLD market and would like to understand more.

Is 19-26km from Brisbane CBD considered far away? (In Sydney, a place that far away is now considered the "inner west")

If its $335 per week rental income, why wouldnt the renter just buy it? Whats the catch?

I've always stood by the 3 options, pick any 2 rule (eg Good, Cheap, Fast - pick any two, for property it would be good tenants, cashflow positive and capital growth).

I associate good tenants with people who generally have a brain (ie those who can think beyond the next two hours to understand what effect their actions may have) (eg pay rent on time because they don't want to be blacklisted, don't damage the property they live because they have to live in it - real simple stuff).

Now wouldn't those people simply just buy @ $229k instead of renting for more? Doesn't make sense to me.

Other thing is, what is the predicted/estimated capital growth? Is it anything comparable to Sydney? (Eg. Properties 12-18 months ago rae now 15-20% more).
 
I say if you cant handle the down side of properties get rid of it....

Properties and Shares I seen it all the time ...people jump in thinking it is money for Jam...

You got to cater for the unexpected events, like time you don't have a job, tenant blow up your place or don't pay rent or rate jump a couple of % :D
 
Not paying rent by a tenant is not a valid reason to sell.

In this case, the first action I would take is to review the PM. A good PM should never let a tenant staying more than 6 months without paying rents.
 
I'm trying to understand whats so special about Wagga Wagga and how is it different to other regional centres.
Will one pick up much capital growth in these places?

Not all regionals are the same. Wagga has very diversed industrys with a growing population.

Here's a thread I started with my views on the area.

http://somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82148&page=2

Good cash flow so far, coming up 12 months from when I purchased haven't looked at compareable sales.
 
Brady, looking at the property you purchased in that thread you linked, I have to ask, why doesn't the person renting just buy something similar instead?

It really doesn't make sense to rent in that circumstance.
 
Brady, looking at the property you purchased in that thread you linked, I have to ask, why doesn't the person renting just buy something similar instead?

It really doesn't make sense to rent in that circumstance.

Same reason that many people don't bother.

No deposit, poor savings history, bad credit rating, more important uses of lump sums of money (booze, ciggies and Bali holidays), possibly have rent assistance so only paying a portion of rent.

The list goes on, generally people don't buy because they don't have themselves in a position to, not because they are making a conscious decision on which is the most affordable.
 
Pretty much what CJay said.

Same can be said for a whole heap of suburbs across Australia. Actually same for most where I have properties.

I put a deposit of ~$32k for that property don't think the tenants could save that, even on a higher LVR just doesn't happen.
 
Same reason that many people don't bother.

No deposit, poor savings history, bad credit rating, more important uses of lump sums of money (booze, ciggies and Bali holidays), possibly have rent assistance so only paying a portion of rent.

The list goes on, generally people don't buy because they don't have themselves in a position to, not because they are making a conscious decision on which is the most affordable.

Pretty much what i thought would be the case.

Which brings the question - how can such be people be good tenants - why would (or even how can) they look after your property if they can't even look after themselves?
 
Back
Top