Sydney Syndrome

[WattleIdo]

Seriously...

but then again I do have to look at the " view post " on your replys WID, as I've still got you on ignore ...

Cliff

haha oh dear.... what can I say, really? Up to you seech. Guess you've gotta take the good with the bad But trolling, no not for me. Like stalking - not my scene. Will report the next one.

strongy1986: Just seeing how expensive is in Sydney got me thinking why? I think it's just simple supply and demand - perfect storm there

True, definitely a storm. Thing is, when does the downpour stop and how long will Sydney be hung out to dry?
Young people who don't want to commute will start looking elsewhere for cheaper and easier options. Where do you think they'll go next? Melbourne keeps outperforming predictions. I reckon it's a dark horse. (IMO)

 

[see_change]

IMHO what made 2770 boom was a combination of things:

1) 2770 had the best yields in Sydney. Because of its demographic however it was off the radar to most gentile investors.

2) the negative gearing train derailed badly 2009-10. Sprinklers and the media needed a new tune and turned to positive gearing.

3) most of Sydney had quietly moved past $500,000 and very few areas were left where people could buy a 3 bedder for $250,000. One was 2770 the other was Liverpool and surrounds.

Combine these and you get the feeding frenzy to get positive cashflow investment at 2770.

I don't think it will happen again for these reasons.

What you're describing is the typical cycle , though the suburbs and values change .

Cash flow was the mantra in the last cycle . Robert kiyosaki even made it into a board game ! Though then you were meant to retire on the cash flow . What many worked out is the cash flow helps you hold more and it's the capital growth that makes the money .

cliff

 

[Moneyman_85]

Like seagulls to a handful of chips, get in before they're gone

 

[ellejay]

Ellajay

Anything that's been said on this thread is mild and I wouldn't have thought classifies as trolling . The trolls also tend not to belong term members .

The really nasty stuff , and at times it gets nasty , is quickly reported to and deleted by th moderators .

Cliff

Hi Cliff

Definitely never said that anyone was trolling, agree all comments were mild as were mine. Was merely expressing my appreciation of one of the website functions, think it has been mentioned previously on other threads! Hopefully all back on topic now. But I may not be around to find out if I'm reported and subsequently banned

 

[vaughan]

What you're describing is the typical cycle , though the suburbs and values change .

Cash flow was the mantra in the last cycle . Robert kiyosaki even made it into a board game ! Though then you were meant to retire on the cash flow . What many worked out is the cash flow helps you hold more and it's the capital growth that makes the money .

cliff

No it was different because of the rush to get cf+. Until then, the mantra was always yield OR capital growth, never the two together.

 

[strongy1986]

Why not ?

It has in the past . In the last cycle , Logan outperformed Mt Druitt .

We went from 65 to 240 and that wasn't from the bottom to the top .


Cliff

I'm talking about from current prices

Cliff I do think Brisbane will grow

I'm just not as confident that some areas like Logan and Ipswich will move as far as some people think

 

[strongy1986]

Strongy ... out of curiosity, have you ever driven through the suburbs of 2770, in particular Tregear
[by the way, congrats to all the SS'ers who invested in that area and rode the boom! awesome stuff!]

I think if you have, you would have a better appreciation of why others might be interested in Logan or Frankston.

Of course each city is different. But there are fundamentals which are comparable eg: population growth, access to infrastructure and public transport, houses on good sized blocks, affordability factors etc

For people who may prefer metro areas over rural ones, those which are deemed 2770 equivalents/comparables in other states offer a good option.

I don't think you have really understood my posts

Yes I can see why some make the comparisons as they may look similar

But the supply and demand equation is way different, so I don't think will have similar results in the short term

By the way I said I thought frankston is good buying up above

 

[Michael_X]

I'm just not as confident that some areas like Logan and Ipswich will move as far as some people think

I guess this depends on when you buy in Logan.

Spoken to a few investors who bought 2 years ago, houses around $200k, now pushing closer to $300k...not too shabby.

Another friend picked up a highset last year in May for $240k renting for $355 per week...next door inferior house on market for ~$290k.

Still growth left imo, how much left no one can say for sure. Enough for me to keep buying there though until the numbers stop working.

 

[WattleIdo]

I don't think you have really understood my posts

Yes I can see why some make the comparisons as they may look similar

But the supply and demand equation is way different, so I don't think will have similar results in the short term

By the way I said I thought frankston is good buying up above

I do agree that buying inner-city is still preferable to outer suburbs, if that's what you're implying. If the yield is there, that is. It's true that the other capital cities aren't where Sydney was before it took off. I would prefer to do DD and buy affordable with yield, as close to the city as I can get. Don't seem to have the time these days!

 

[see_change]

I'm just not as confident that some areas like Logan and Ipswich will move as far as some people think

Simple answer for you . Don't buy there

Cliff