Terry Ryder's Recent Hotspots 2011 ......

[annie lumen]

Terry Ryder is not a property spruiker. His respected newsletter is full of gems, most of which are low cost, well located and eminently affordable. I've found Ryder to be the most courteous and helpful of all the property gurus, even when I have questioned some of his opinions. He advocates buying at the cheaper end of the market, from what I understand of his musings. Here's an article by Ryder which may save you the price of a subscription to his newsletter:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-look-to-fringes/story-e6frg9gx-1226034773448

 

[Chippo]

Good article...

I also follow alot of Ryders stuff, really good un bias info...

 

[BV]

Nice article but watch out trolls about....

 

[owen9]

Interesting read...and good website too.

Thanks

 

[Jacque]

I read Terry's stuff too (and like the man himself- he's a well respected author and longtime property researcher) but even experts can get it wrong, despite the avalanche of research they use to hotspot or pinpoint future growth areas. I'm sure Terry himself would concede this. Terry refers to Blacktown in this article as:

"...one of the most promising growth areas in Sydney's west"

yet back in April 2008 in this article http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...ey-dont-go-there/story-e6frf7l6-1111116195528 he had a different tune:

The Australian reports today that housing hotspot specialist Terry Ryder says Parramatta, Bankstown and Blacktown have become the home repossession capitals of Sydney.

His website report says Bankstown offers "a smorgasbord" of reasons not to buy, and the Blacktown/Mt Druitt region is regularly held up as a symbol of society gone wrong...

Mr Ryder runs a website that attempts to identify property hotspots before they happen.

He says his list of worst places to invest is meant to help buyers avoid investment property where prices could fall.

The following stats tell the story:

CG rates for housing Blacktown
2009 5.5%
2010 9.7%

Bankstown
2009 7.5%
2010 13.4%

Parramatta
2009 10.6%
2010 5.6%

One of the Sydney suburbs he highlighted as a promising growth spot was Chippendale, in Inner Sydney in regards to new unit dvpts there.
CG rates for units Chippendale:

2009 0.8%
2010 -1.5%
(Source PDS)

The above demonstrates the following:

1. No one can predict and/or guarantee future growth despite their expertise.
2. We don't have control over external factors that are likely to affect growth eg: govt policy, council planning, planes crashing into buildings.
3. Don't believe everything you read- engage in your own research.


I certainly agree with some of Terry's musings, however, and in particular his opinions on affordability. There are far too many Sydneysiders who need to get out more

 

[devo76]

No different to getting advice with shares really. You get some right and you get some wrong. You just hope that he gets more right than wrong. Only problem is it's a little harder to spread the risk around with property. This is why you use what he says as part of your DD. Not your only DD.

I read Terry's stuff too (and like the man himself- he's a well respected author and longtime property researcher) but even experts can get it wrong, despite the avalanche of research they use to hotspot or pinpoint future growth areas. I'm sure Terry himself would concede this. Terry refers to Blacktown in this article as:

"...one of the most promising growth areas in Sydney's west"

yet back in April 2008 in this article http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...ey-dont-go-there/story-e6frf7l6-1111116195528 he had a different tune:

The Australian reports today that housing hotspot specialist Terry Ryder says Parramatta, Bankstown and Blacktown have become the home repossession capitals of Sydney.

His website report says Bankstown offers "a smorgasbord" of reasons not to buy, and the Blacktown/Mt Druitt region is regularly held up as a symbol of society gone wrong...

Mr Ryder runs a website that attempts to identify property hotspots before they happen.

He says his list of worst places to invest is meant to help buyers avoid investment property where prices could fall.

The following stats tell the story:

CG rates for housing Blacktown
2009 5.5%
2010 9.7%

Bankstown
2009 7.5%
2010 13.4%

Parramatta
2009 10.6%
2010 5.6%

One of the Sydney suburbs he highlighted as a promising growth spot was Chippendale, in Inner Sydney in regards to new unit dvpts there.
CG rates for units Chippendale:

2009 0.8%
2010 -1.5%
(Source PDS)

The above demonstrates the following:

1. No one can predict and/or guarantee future growth despite their expertise.
2. We don't have control over external factors that are likely to affect growth eg: govt policy, council planning, planes crashing into buildings.
3. Don't believe everything you read- engage in your own research.


I certainly agree with some of Terry's musings, however, and in particular his opinions on affordability. There are far too many Sydneysiders who need to get out more

 

[Ausprop]

uh oh... the "F' suburb was mentioned!

 

[Belbo]

Terry Ryder might even have used the expression 'politics of envy' I believe weren't he curtailed from making explicitly political commentary as a 'journalist'.

Here's his view on the 'affordability crisis' musings -

[T]he debate on affordability has drifted beyond emotion-charged into the area of lunatic fringe.

It confirms my long-held belief that Australia overrates the importance of first-home buyers in the overall scheme of things. In particular, first-home buyers overrate themselves.

We've turned renters who want to become buyers into a protected species, a section of society that dominates political thinking and obsesses our media.

Anyone who buys a home for the first time gets a handout from the federal government. They also get grants from state governments. Further, they'll get stamp-duty concessions.

If they're building a new home, they'll get more. If they're building it outside the capital city, they'll get an extra donation.

Why do we give this kind of reverence to first-time buyers?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-look-to-fringes/story-e6frg9gx-1226034773448

 

[IFBB]

How did i know this article was going to mention Frankston in its first sentence?

Proof OP is a REA in Frankston... enough with the threads dear

 

[hobo-jo]

It confirms my long-held belief that Australia overrates the importance of first-home buyers in the overall scheme of things. In particular, first-home buyers overrate themselves.

We've turned renters who want to become buyers into a protected species, a section of society that dominates political thinking and obsesses our media.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-look-to-fringes/story-e6frg9gx-1226034773448

No (or a reduced number of) buyers on the bottom rung has a flow on effect, without them the whole 'upgrade' market is thrown into disarray.

4 story building, if you demolish the ground floor without putting in any supports to hold up the rest of the structure... what happens?

Anyone else find it hypocritical that he takes a stab at the media obsession, yet his own article is feeding the same hype?

How did i know this article was going to mention Frankston in its first sentence?

+1

 

[Belbo]

Who's throwing out the bottom rung? Ryder points above to all the help they're being given, but still we are hearing unrelentingly that it's not enough!

Look, let's face it. Here's what I think the real problem is:

First home buyers have always had to buy on the outskirts, which was the only place starting out that they could afford. Our parents did, and their parents did, as did their parents, etc, etc.

The problem is, cities grow.

That was not a massive problem for our parents, nor for theirs, because our cities were still traversible. But, the simple problem is, they're not anymore.

Let's look at Sydney.

The perimeters of Sydney are what? 60 to 80km from the CBD, but transport infrastructure has not kept up at all. That distance is no longer functionally traversible by either car or train from the outskirts. Essentially, we have 19th century transport infrastructure simply unable to service 21st century mobility requirements.

Now, take a look at Toyko by contrast (the only global city I know well). Roughly 20 million people living in the same space as the greater Sydney area, all zipping around on a train system operating consistently to about a 1-minute accuracy. The population of inner Tokyo swells from 4 million to 12 million seemlessly over a 2-hour period every morning. And you could safely eat your dinner off the floor of these trains; they're kept spotlessly clean!

Of course, Tokyo's rail transport system is manned and operated by a huge workforce of dedicated, well-educated and highly-qualified professionals, whereas Sydney's is held to permanently anti-restructuring ransom by a strongly-unionised army of high school drop-outs, their dropbeat offspring, and a technologically-illiterate but thoroughly-entrenched public service bureaucracy headed of incompetent Labor Party-placed hacks.

The bigger the city in Australia, the louder the cries of unaffordability, so I expect that much the same could be said for elsewhere.

Look, I'd love it if first home buers could all snap up a pad in Balmain or Paddington, I really would, because theses places are nice and close to the most job opportunities, the best amenities, and most picturesque scenery.

But property investors aren't to blame for this, are they? And that is the subtext of your interventions, isn't it, Hobo? Isn't it?

Sure, investors compete for property with first home buyers, but only because they have positioned themselves to afford to do so. Or would you prefer to see legislation or regulation or so such to compel property investors to stick to buying property only on the outskirts of our cities, so as to open up 'room' for first home buyers where they'd much prefer to live?

 

[hobo-jo]

Who's throwing out the bottom rung? Ryder points above to all the help they're being given, but still we are hearing unrelentingly that it's not enough!

The answer is not to move 30-60km out from the CBD, especially in a world where oil production has likely peaked...

I get the whole FHBs should look to cheaper areas, but recent price growth is well beyond a larger population slowly pushing the cheaper areas further out.

I've given this example in another thread recently, but where I bought in 2006 is now 40% more expensive, where wages have perhaps only risen 15% over the same time. So if someone in a similar financial position as I was then wanted to buy they would have to move 5km further from the city than where I bought. That's over 5 years. Do you really think that's a reasonable price creep over such a short time frame?

The current price falls which will bring affordability will show up who was right and wrong in time. If prices aren't ridiculous/unaffordable then they shouldn't drop more than a few percent in a downturn right?? Let's wait and see.

 

[Belbo]

The answer is not to move 30-60km out from the CBD, especially in a world where oil production has likely peaked...

Hence the need for drammatically better transport infrastructure, in particular, efficient people movers like . . . trains, perhaps?

I get the whole FHBs should look to cheaper areas, but recent price growth is well beyond a larger population slowly pushing the cheaper areas further out.

Well that's never happened before, has it?

I've given this example in another thread recently, but where I bought in 2006 is now 40% more expensive, where wages have perhaps only risen 15% over the same time. So if someone in a similar financial position as I was then wanted to buy they would have to move 5km further from the city than where I bought. That's over 5 years. Do you really think that's a reasonable price creep over such a short time frame?

'Reasonable', or sustainable? Your choice of word here betrays an ideological agenda to me. Or is it just me?

The current price falls which will bring affordability will show up who was right and wrong in time. If prices aren't ridiculous/unaffordable then they shouldn't drop more than a few percent in a downturn right?? Let's wait and see.

Nope, it's you. You're pushing an ideological barrow. I don't need to wait and see that.

What I don't understand though is why you won't have the intellectual honesty to openly admit your revulsion of the effect of property investors on affordabilty, and so debate the matter openly, instead of smirkingly fortelling property market doom (and the consequent punishment therein implied for the wicked)?

 

[hobo-jo]

Hence the need for drammatically better transport infrastructure, in particular, efficient people movers like . . . trains, perhaps?

Or perhaps we would be better building up instead of out.

From 2012 to 2016 approximately 550,000 people intend to retire
From 2017 to 2021 approximately 480,500 people intend to retire
From 2022 to 2026 approximately 340,900 people intend to retire

Yet our houses continue to get bigger!

Should we concentrate on developing new suburbs 60km out of the city or should we concentrate on better developing areas closer to the CBD?

What I don't understand though is why you won't have the intellectual honesty to openly admit your revulsion of the effect of property investors on affordabilty

I don't know where your hostility comes from Belbo. Further to openly abusing me in other threads where I haven't so much as addressed you and now you try to put words in my mouth?

I have no problems with investors. If I'm repulsed by anything it's been the government intervention in the market with stimulus and grants which only exacerbate the problem.

 

[Belbo]

"Not a bear just a realist''; that's your tag line, isn't it, Hobo Jo?

By realist you believe you are presenting facts objectively and drawing conclusions logically, am I with you so far?

And all the facts point to the imminent collapse of the Australian housing market, as is the more or less unrelenting theme of the majority of your posts here, no?

But prices today are, after all, 'ridiculous' and beyond 'reasonable', right?

So it's a good thing the prophesied collapse is coming, you don't think?

But it's a bad thing that the government has delayed this collapse with the provision of first home buyer assistance, correct?

Well

You have got me wondering now though.

Will the collapse be a good thing because it redistributes opportunity from savers to spenders (the politics of envy speaking), or will it be a good thing because it vindicates your personal prophesying?

Either way, I find it simply incomprehensible that you present yourself as an objective realist in these discussions on the state of the property market.

And I hope by raising these questions I am perhaps helping to disabuse any other people reading your posts that you are even remotely objective or balanced in your views.

(I'm not objective either, but the thing is I've never claimed to be. I have a very real interest in the state of the property market. That's another thing I very strongly believe in: intellectual honesty.)

 

[hobo-jo]

I was objective enough to sell property I owned at the end of 2009. I guess I could have held and hoped, but I'd prefer to stick with what the numbers tell me. When the numbers say property is a buy then I'll be looking.

I have an interest in owning property again, but I don't see how that makes any of my points valid or invalid. If you have a problem with any particular points I make or figures I share then I'm open to reasonable debate.

What 'collapse' have I prophesied? Care to share a link to the opinion I've shared that you have a problem with rather than putting words in my mouth?

 

[Belbo]

Hobo Jo, not prophesying a housing market collapse? You have got to be kidding right? It's pretty much all you do!

http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?p=777972#post777972

 

[annie lumen]

Seeing you see no joy in property for quite some years Hobo, why then are you here on a property forum?

 

[hobo-jo]

Hobo Jo, not prophesying a housing market collapse? You have got to be kidding right? It's pretty much all you do!
http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?p=777972#post777972

You've gone off the deep end Beblo. That particular post you've linked has nothing to do with a housing market collapse.

Seeing you see no joy in property for quite some years Hobo, why then are you here on a property forum?

Someone has to keep the real estate agents in check that infiltrate forums and drop a particular suburbs name in every second post to try and drum up interest

 

[BV]

Seeing you see no joy in property for quite some years Hobo, why then are you here on a property forum?

He's hoping to see prices drop so he can buy properties while his gold is worth something....