-
Member
nz shares or property
Have been around looking at another investment rental. Cannot believe the numbers attending open homes, shortage of stock and the urgency created. Herd instinct concerns. Values are all moving up. Would I be better off gearing into a some NZ dividend growth stocks?
-
The average New Zealander because they have never experienced a property market collapse in the last 30 years or so (yes values went down by like 5 or 10% in 2008, but nothing massive), many New Zealanders "hate" shares, and wouldn't consider it an investment after the 1987 crash... because of this many have their money tied up in property, and many more "want there money tied up in property" as it is on a seemingly endless road to success with no downside/risk...
The next paragraph is mainly relating to Auckland... One leading economist described Auckland's property market as "a giant Ponzi scheme" as residents (and investors) pay each other to get in and drive prices up and up, once these new apartment buildings "come online" and unusually strong migration drops off, Auckland property may not have the big double digit increases it has enjoyed, on average, for decades (I am a bit wary of the medium term fundamentals...)
If you are going to do something, do it before the RBNZ new regulations come into affect 1 October (I think?) and this will require 30% gearing instead of the current minimum of 20%... be aware of the new regulations brought in by the government as well (not sure on these or when they are being implemented)
I am not sure either how NZ shares will go over the next year, but as always, on average shares generally make a better return than property, which shares will do better than others is always a better question.
Last edited by trader_jackson; 30-08-2015 at 08:06 PM.
-
Originally Posted by trader_jackson
The average New Zealander because they have never experienced a property market collapse in the last 30 years or so (yes values went down by like 5 or 10% in 2008, but nothing massive), many New Zealanders "hate" shares, and wouldn't consider it an investment after the 1987 crash... because of this many have their money tied up in property, and many more "want there money tied up in property" as it is on a seemingly endless road to success with no downside/risk...
The next paragraph is mainly relating to Auckland... One leading economist described Auckland's property market as "a giant Ponzi scheme" as residents (and investors) pay each other to get in and drive prices up and up, once these new apartment buildings "come online" and unusually strong migration drops off, Auckland property may not have the big double digit increases it has enjoyed, on average, for decades (I am a bit wary of the medium term fundamentals...)
If you are going to do something, do it before the RBNZ new regulations come into affect 1 October (I think?) and this will require 30% gearing instead of the current minimum of 20%... be aware of the new regulations brought in by the government as well (not sure on these or when they are being implemented)
I am not sure either how NZ shares will go over the next year, but as always, on average shares generally make a better return than property, which shares will do better than others is always a better question.
Im not so sure either would be a sure winner these days---im just wondering which share if I had put my $64000 in (1984) would be worth 1.3mil now--cant say the cash flow is great though(rent-expenses)---it will still be there in X years though and there is no executives with their noses in the trough
Last edited by skid; 01-09-2015 at 01:52 AM.
-
Originally Posted by skid
Im not so sure either would be a sure winner these days---im just wondering which share if I had put my $64000 in (1984) would be worth 1.3mil now--cant say the cash flow is great though(rent-expenses)---it will still be there in X years though and there is no executives with their noses in the trough
By my rough calculation it works out out at 20% compounding return/yr
Infratil is close to that
-
Member
Originally Posted by kiora
By my rough calculation it works out out at 20% compounding return/yr
Infratil is close to that
My historical past 5 yr return on sold shares is between 15 - 20% annualised depending on which market (UK, US or NZ). This does include the down years. Overall, as I run both property and shares, on a straight non-leveraged return my shares do better but as I am only leveraged for property, wealth comes from good property. I keep a portion of money in the sharemarkets and when I deem my investment to be over my fair value, I sell it and put it into property principal reduction.
-
Originally Posted by BeeBop
Overall, as I run both property and shares, on a straight non-leveraged return my shares do better but as I am only leveraged for property, wealth comes from good property.
Why are you allocating your debt against propety? Just because thats what it is secured over?
Consider it different way.
You have property worth $X, and shares worth $Y. Deduct from that portfolio debt of $Z (which just happens to be secured over property to give you a low interest rate).
My guess is you are probably overweight in Property yet your returns on an EBITDA basis are probably alot lower.
You could argue the counterfactual that without the property, you wouldn't be able to get debt, which is a far comment. Always compare like for like, while being mindful of the benefits of each.
-
If you're talking about Auckland property I suggest you have a look at my recent post in the AIR thread.
-
Originally Posted by voltage
Have been around looking at another investment rental. Cannot believe the numbers attending open homes, shortage of stock and the urgency created. Herd instinct concerns. Values are all moving up. Would I be better off gearing into a some NZ dividend growth stocks?
The billionaire Sir James Goldsmith had some very salient advice about a firm rule he had when investing .
" If you see a bandwagon never follow it, its simply too late."
As far as Auckland goes, SELL NOW.
Last edited by Sgt Pepper; 30-08-2015 at 11:39 PM.
-
Originally Posted by skid
Im not so sure either would be a sure winner these days---im just wondering which share if I had put my $64000 in (1984) would be worth 1.3mil now--cant say the cash flow is great though(rent-expenses)---it will still be there in X years though and there is no executives with their noses in the trough
That is a great return.
You have underlined why NZ has such a small proportion of wealth in financial investments (shares and bonds) compared with residential real estate. When people can get such good (mostly untaxed) returns from leveraged residential housing investment, it is natural that they will tend to park and accumulate their wealth there. It also helps explain why our stock exchange is small in proportion to our GDP and why our houses are expensive in relation to our incomes. NZ is going back to the future of a nation of wealthy landlord families (some absentee and foreign) and inter-generational tenants, who work for foreign-owned companies.
It would take a courageous government with vision to introduce a tax regime which increased the tax take from investment residential real estate, so that the proportion of total returns (capital profit and income) paid in tax equaled the proportion of returns(capital profit and income), from investment in shares, that are paid in tax. The ease at which investment in residential real estate can be leveraged enables large (currently untaxed) capital gains for the owner's equity.
Last edited by Bjauck; 01-09-2015 at 07:56 AM.
-
Originally Posted by Bjauck
That is a great return.
You have underlined why NZ has such a small proportion of wealth in financial investments (shares and bonds) compared with residential real estate. When people can get such good (mostly untaxed) returns from leveraged residential housing investment, it is natural that they will tend to park and accumulate their wealth there. It also helps explain why our stock exchange is small in proportion to our GDP and why our houses are expensive in relation to our incomes. NZ is going back to the future of a nation of wealthy landlord families (some absentee and foreign) and inter-generational tenants, who work for foreign-owned companies.
It would take a courageous government with vision to introduce a tax regime which increased the tax take from investment residential real estate, so that the proportion of total returns (capital profit and income) paid in tax equaled the proportion of returns(capital profit and income), from investment in shares, that are paid in tax. The ease at which investment in residential real estate can be leveraged enables large (currently untaxed) capital gains for the owner's equity.
Your right its a great return,although there has been no return,except managing tenants--It started out as our family home and something I could put my energy into--I didnt leverage as some do--and agree with some of your points,but so far Ive been taxed just like with shares--but the market HAS gone a bit crazy and it cant continue --Thats why at this point its a much harder decision(although at the time we didnt know this was going to happen with prices)--It could also crash as well..who knows.
I got lucky with prices ,but if you saw the house before ,you wouldnt recognize it --there are still places where houses are relatively cheap,but you would have to adjust your lifestyle to be in a different area....well..gotta go ..Ive just lost a tenant,and the other one doesnt knoiw how to change a light bulb.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks