You do misunderstand..... I rarely use cash to buy property - only other peoples.
Exactly (I wasn't talking about you), first home buyers (eg. 'FHB'), either owner-occupiers or investors, usually DO need a cash deposit.
keithj said:
good value assets that are very close to costing me nothing to hold
Depends on what you consider 'good value', I could be watching very closely for inner city or bayside properties to become 'good value' the way you see it, though I suspect I'd be waiting a LONG time...
You're relying (on top of various 'fundamentals') largely on the yield (neutrally/positively geared) as your buy trigger, but I would argue that for the good, or let's say the 'best value' (ie. best potential for CG, which is why you'd invest in residential property of course) properties...this is very difficult to begin with.
I'd probably call your 'good value' properties 'average', and wouldn't want to tie up borrowed funds (or my 'equity' or cash if you're a first property buyer) in something that had lower growth prospects, even if it was neutral/positive at the start. Of course, you could always put a bigger cash deposit in and make it neutral/positive that way, but that doesn't make the investment any better in quality.
Difference of opinion really, or risk profiles.
Interestingly, in inner Melbourne, those who spotted 'good value' by different measures 2-3 years ago, have had enormous capital growth AND rental growth virtually at the same time, so previously negatively geared properties have become close to neutrally geared in the space of a few years, along with the creation of enormous equity.
keithj said:
Fair enough, that's what I thought.