SUM - Summerset Group

[Carpenterjoe]

Probably the wrong question and admittedly not the right discussion for this thread either. However interesting to note that most wealthy countries have much lower rates of home ownership than most poor countries. Switzerland: 43.4%, Germany: 51.9%, New Zealand: 64.8%, India 86.6%, Romania: 96.4%;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ownership_rate

Only exception I can see in this list is Singapore - they are reasonably wealthy and have still a very high home ownership rate, but this is due to the state selling every Singaporean couple at their wedding day a heavily subsidized flat.

Just saying - we might be in a dead end if we want to improve our wealth by keeping our homeownership rates up ... home ownership reduces flexibility.

Occupied dwellings are interesting, they change a lot and slowly.

Australia's % have gone from

52.6% Owner in 1947
72.5% Owner in 1966
71.6% Owner in 1980

to circa 31% Currently (i think)

(note) Switzerland in the 1970 was circa 28.5%

[Bjauck]

Occupied dwellings are interesting, they change a lot and slowly.

Australia's % have gone from

52.6% Owner in 1947
72.5% Owner in 1966
71.6% Owner in 1980

to circa 31% Currently (i think)

(note) Switzerland in the 1970 was circa 28.5%

67% were owner-occupiers in OZ in 2011 down from 68% in 2006
http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck...tralia/6442650

In the UK:
71% were owner occupiers in 2003
64% in 2016

Low interest rates and booming asset prices do seem to make home owning less affordable for more people in Oz and the UK too.

NZ's owner occupied homes as a percent of total
dwellings has dropped from 74% in 1991 to 64% in 2015 (and continuing to fall.)
http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_...5.aspx#renting

However taking into account the population increase, the total number of owner-occupiers (potential market for SUM) is increasing.(as per the graph in the linked item)

It would be nice to hope that those people who are being priced out or choosing not to become home owners are building up investments elsewhere, which they could eventually use to buy an ORA, should they so desire.

[dobby41]

It would be nice to hope that those people who are being priced out or choosing not to become home owners are building up investments elsewhere, which they could eventually use to buy an ORA, should they so desire.

What do you think the chances of that are?
Close to zero I'd suggest. We don't, as a country, have the financial literacy for that.

[Carpenterjoe]

67% were owner-occupiers in OZ in 2011

Whoops, the 30 odd percent i quoted is those whom own out right. Cheers for the correction.

[JeremyALD]

Will this finally cross $5 again. Been looking stronger of late.

[bull....]

could be good for retirement stocks , more kiwi retirees coming home maybe

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opi...ing-a-raw-deal

[winner69]

could be good for retirement stocks , more kiwi retirees coming home maybe

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opi...ing-a-raw-deal

I gather it's already happening to some extent - part of the 72,000 odd net migration number

Come home now ......inevitably a x% into retirement villages later

[Bjauck]

could be good for retirement stocks , more kiwi retirees coming home maybe

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opi...ing-a-raw-deal

Lets hope the health boards and system is funded adequately to cope too.

[mondograss]

I wonder who will get there first, Summerset, Ryman, Metlifecare or one of the others?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=11899951

[BlackPeter]

I wonder who will get there first, Summerset, Ryman, Metlifecare or one of the others?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=11899951

Interesting:

The trust's accounts show that it loss $1,176,526 in the latest period. Revenue fell from $14,267,471 in the September 30, 2015 year to $11,521,333 last year. Expenses rose from $18.1m in 2015 to $18.7m last year. That resulted in a deficit climbing from $3.1m in 2015 to $6.1m last year.

One industry expert today described the accounts as "dire" and revealing an extremely sorry situation. Such losses could not be sustained, he said.

However, he also noticed how the trust owned 48 per cent of Smith & Caughey Holdings, valued in the latest accounts as being worth $40,473,613, up from $36,989,766 in 2015. That showed the elderly rest home's relationship to the Queen St department store, he said.

So - actually - they made (as the other retirement providers) another fat paper gain. Asset rich but cash poor - as many of their residents.

Obviously - this situation is not sustainable. Clearly - for the government to just increase the pay rates without properly increasing the funding is a no go and will only kill off our age care sector.

I think however that the financial situation of the big four is different - given that they can capitalise their valuation gains (using the DMF) and not just sit on them (as this fund apparently did).