Toorak, you've done it again

And imagine the % of population that has access to this sort of money :rolleyes::rolleyes: to invest in a house

I say around 0.001% or less.

Nothing to worry about for Jan's fans here Deewha & Deltaberry (probably brothers or sit next to each other at work). The fans with average incomes and lifestyles want enough to be comfortable - Some of us are more comfortable than others but this constant Toorak examples does not serve the purpose other than to demonstrate that someone richer will pay another $10m for this property.

You guys are like a broken record....:mad:
 
And imagine the % of population that has access to this sort of money :rolleyes::rolleyes: to invest in a house

I say around 0.001% or less.

Nothing to worry about for Jan's fans here Deewha & Deltaberry (probably brothers or sit next to each other at work). The fans with average incomes and lifestyles want enough to be comfortable - Some of us are more comfortable than others but this constant Toorak examples does not serve the purpose other than to demonstrate that someone richer will pay another $10m for this property.

You guys are like a broken record....:mad:

There's quite a few people that can get together so they can afford to buy it, and do stuff like subdivide, build apartments, etc.

What do you think the site will be worth then?

Are you going to say that no one will buy or rent the apartments?
 
There's quite a few people that can get together so they can afford to buy it, and do stuff like subdivide, build apartments, etc.

What do you think the site will be worth then?

Are you going to say that no one will buy or rent the apartments?

no apartments there - only one house to be built - see news reports.

and how many can afford that one house - less than 1/100th of 1% of the population so effectively a zero sum argument really..
 
You guys are like a broken record....:mad:

Ehh... I'm just posting a news article on a suburb. There's threads on Frankston, Werribee, Bayside etc and I see nothing wrong with having one on Toorak. Why so angry... Stop taking past fights into new threads. It's not very mature.
 
Ehh... I'm just posting a news article on a suburb. There's threads on Frankston, Werribee, Bayside etc and I see nothing wrong with having one on Toorak. Why so angry...

ummmm .. I was referring to the jibe at SS fans in the post somehow implying that those that follow Jan Somers' approach got it all wrong and that all of us should have bought in toorak. But your obsession with toorak has me very worried.. :eek:
 
Very unlikely to get apartments there............for now; who knows in 20, or 30 or 40 years.

It is land gold in a premier location. Quite an estate to build a sprawling resort mansion or even as a land bank. Stamoulis has enough capital behind him to keep it vacant if he so desires.
 
ummmm .. I was referring to the jibe at SS fans in the post somehow implying that those that follow Jan Somers' approach got it all wrong and that all of us should have bought in toorak. But your obsession with toorak has me very worried.. :eek:

My reference to Jan Somers was actually about her advice on living at the place as a PPOR and then selling it, which was what I said in the opening post. I thought it was pretty clear.

But it's easy to misunderstand when you come in with a biased view about the thread and the post and the suburb and the poster. Clouded judgment is the expression I'm looking for.
 
The interesting thing about this is that it was originally sold by the Ballieu's who if you know melbourne are a very large and successful clan in the business, legal and I think property world. e.g. Opposition leader Ted Ballieu is but one of many from his generation and he's worth $100M+ by all estimates.

The surprise is that they would have mistimed the market when selling. Note that the family owns half a dozen or more of this type of Toorak region estates.
 
in a strictly hypothetical world.... lets make it a dream world,

if you had some kind of crystal ball, and could forsee a huge increase like that,

would it be possible to get 10 mates at $1m each and buy it for $11m, and then sell it for $25m 2 years later???

putting aside the possible problems of who is going to live in it, or who wants to get out when,

does this sort of stuff happen with people who cannot simply afford $11m,

I read an article a few months back which basically said the usual "first home buyers stuffed out of the market" and 2 families with kids decided to buy a big house and live in it together...

so on a larger scale then this???
 
He's mistimed his house. Imagine if he was running the state.

Perhaps he's used the proceeds to leverage into another opportunity which might return more than the mere $10m that holding onto the property would have otherwise provided?

Investing strategies are circumstantial to the individual investor. The guy's worth $100m; I'd hazard a guess that he might know a thing or two about what he's doing.
 
Maybe. Another way to look at it is, the guy's 'inherited' $100m. Perhaps he's got the 'genetic advantage'.

But meh... $10m is like a drop in the ocean to him. His breakfast probably cost him that much
 
in a strictly hypothetical world.... lets make it a dream world,

if you had some kind of crystal ball, and could forsee a huge increase like that,

would it be possible to get 10 mates at $1m each and buy it for $11m, and then sell it for $25m 2 years later???

putting aside the possible problems of who is going to live in it, or who wants to get out when,

does this sort of stuff happen with people who cannot simply afford $11m,

I read an article a few months back which basically said the usual "first home buyers stuffed out of the market" and 2 families with kids decided to buy a big house and live in it together...

so on a larger scale then this???

Absolutely possible. I don't see why not. Check out the commercial property thread. Dazz has gone into a syndicate to get a $5m property.

All big things grow from many little things. Listed companies are made up of many small shareholders giving them money (eg Myers!). But mehhh Toorak's not for most people as several posters have pointed out to me.
 
The guy's worth $100m; I'd hazard a guess that he might know a thing or two about what he's doing.

Umm....Baillieu may be worth $100m but not via his own devices: most of it is old money passed down the line.

His efforts in being ineffective and invisible even though he's opposed to a smug, condescending State government would indicate that he doesn't know a thing about what he's doing and selling up at the bottom of the market is par for his course.
 
Absolutely possible. I don't see why not. Check out the commercial property thread. Dazz has gone into a syndicate to get a $5m property.

All big things grow from many little things. Listed companies are made up of many small shareholders giving them money (eg Myers!). But mehhh Toorak's not for most people as several posters have pointed out to me.

hmm interesting,

is a syndicate the same as a fund??

ive got a friend who does development full time and did say he was going to set up a development fund, thats a few years ago now though
 
You mean property trust funds?

I guess syndicates that have been thought through are often structured that way due to tax reasons (companies do not enjoy 50% CGT discount and you potentially pay more land tax). Usually the unitholders are not big enough to vote down the trustee though, although in smaller developments some are able to. Depends a lot on the circumstances.

I was approached by a friend a few months ago to invest in some of the 20 units (I mean units in a trust, not the type of units you live in) in a development that was leased out to a AAA tenant a long-term lease, yielding some 8% return net. The investment wasn't very hefty, from memory I think the asking price was $500k per unit. Didn't go ahead though because I rarely knew the developers and they had traction elsewhere anyway.
 
no apartments there - only one house to be built - see news reports.

Generally speaking, people can get together and buy places that expensive, and do stuff such as build apartments.

and how many can afford that one house - less than 1/100th of 1% of the population so effectively a zero sum argument really..

Only 0.00000005% of the population needs to be able to afford that one house :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top