Real Estate Market

<html><body>
Sydney’s real estate prices were the sturdiest in March, with prices in most capital cities subdued and heading towards decline, according to the latest quarterly analysis from Domain.
According to the report, Sydney house prices rose 13.1%, to $1,168,806, in the year ending March 2020. 
There was 2.6% in the March quarter.
<div data-sticky-id="0">Melbourne’s median house price is expected to fall after it reached a record high of $918,350 in the March quarter.</div>
<div data-sticky-id="0"> </div>
<div data-sticky-id="0">Sydney, Hobart and Melbourne saw the largest price increases for the March quarter, the Domain House Price Report calculated. </div>
<div data-sticky-id="0">
<div>
<div id="adspot-1x1-pos-5" data-google-query-id="CMLesM-8_egCFUyDcAodNrYAQA">
<div id="google_ads_iframe_/31694718/domain.com.au/news/national_3__container__"><iframe title="3rd party ad content" name="google_ads_iframe_/31694718/domain.com.au/news/national_3" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" width="1" height="1" data-google-container-id="4" data-integralas-id-a73f0d96-8a5a-4636-76da-5b5e87cd399b="" data-load-complete="true"></iframe></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>Darwin, Canberra and Brisbane recorded house price gains between 0.3 and 1.2 per cent.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Prices in Perth and Adelaide were flat.</div>
</div>
The unravelling coronavirus crisis, however, has taken its toll on the market, with a shutdown of non-essential services, and a temporary ban on onsite auctions and open inspections, taking effect in late March and early April.
The number of homes on the market fell.
Between March 23 and April 10 new sale listings dropped 12 per cent compared to the same period last year, Domain’s figures show.
More than 14 per cent of vendors have since revised their price expectations, reducing them by an average of 4.36%.
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2020/4/23/house%20prices.png" alt="">
In the March quarter Sydney maintained its status as Australia's most expensive capital city for residential real estate, with a median house price of $1,168,806 and a median unit price of $744,672.
Melbourne and Canberra rounded out the top three - Melbourne holding a median house price of $918,350 and a median unit price of $554,306, and Canberra holding a median house price of $779,050 and a median unit price of $441,055.
Canberra, however, saw significantly weaker growth quarter-on-quarter than Sydney or Melbourne. The nation's capital saw house prices grow just 0.3% (compared to Sydney's 2.6% Melbourne's 2%), and saw unit prices drop a substantial 5.2% (compared to a growth of 2.7% in Sydney and a 0.4% contraction in Melbourne).
In Darwin house prices grew by a respectable 1.2%, however the value of units plummeted by  8.1% - The highest margin in the nation.
The drop is part of a massive 16.2% year-on-year nosedive in Darwin's unit market.
Sydney saw the most quarterly grows in houses at 2.6%, however Adelaide topped the list for units with a growth of 4.2%.
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2020/4/23/unit%20prices.png" alt="">
In Domain’s February forecast for the year ahead, a combined average growth of 8% was predicted for houses in Australian capital cities during 2020, with a further 5-7% growth projected in 2021.
Sydney topped this list, with a projected 10% growth in 2020 (and 6-8% in 2021), while Hobart and Adelaide were at the bottom of the list with a projected growth of just 3% in 2020 (and 2-4% in 2021).
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2020/4/23/feb%20forcast%20house.png" alt="">
For units, a combined average growth of 6% was predicted across Australian capital cities during 2020, with a further 3-5% growth projected for 2021.
Sydney had the highest projected growth in 2020, at 8% (with 3-5% predicted for 2021).
Hobart saw the least expected growth, at just 2% (with 1-3% predicted for 2021).
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2020/4/23/feb%20forcast%20unit.png" alt="">
The rapid development of the coronavirus and the ensuing economic fallout, however, have thrown these projections into uncertainty. 
Dr Nicola Powell, the senior research analyst at Domain, said that the pandemic was weighing heavily on sellers’ minds.
“Those who have to sell are editing their price to achieve the timely sale in fear of what could be ahead economically,” Dr Powell told Domain.
“The recovery was well on its way before coronavirus. Houses had regained the majority of the $165,000 loss in the downturn. Units had regained about $62,000 of the $103,000 lost in the downturn.
“When the market is moving and moving rapidly, those asking prices need to meet the market. We’ve seen the market flip in March.
“It’s almost a given we’re going to see fewer transactions. The fact we’ve got wage subsidies, mortgage repayment holidays and low interest rates will help support prices.”
Dr Powell said it was unclear how far prices would drop in months to come.
</body></html>

wdavis-8cCN98p7xp

Real estate recovery stopped in its tracks amid March shutdown; Domain quarterly analysis

<html><body>
Remuneration in the property industry has grown better than the general workforce, according to a recent report by remuneration consultant Avdiev.
The latest Avdiev Remuneration Report 2017 is a product of a formal Australia-wide survey of property, investment, development and construction employers and design and building consulting companies, finds that junior staff have been the winners in the pay stakes again.
It also reflects improving business conditions. There has been a significant expansion of pay rise ranges, with salary rises in the Property Investment and Funds Management market sector ranging from 1.8% to 12% and 1.5% to 16% in Property Development. Even the Retail sector, enduring challenging times, had to give rises to its productive and successful staff, especially in leasing.
This is in contrast with the 1.8% increase for the year to May 2017 (ABS) for the general workforce and a CPI uplift of 1.9% to June 2017.
“You can’t keep a busy property industry down” said Rita Avdiev, managing director of The Avdiev Group, remuneration consultants.  
“It’s getting better all the time, but good times bring with them talent shortages, headhunter attacks on desirable recruits with outrageous offers to move. Both old and young are targets. Loyalty flies out the window when you’ve been left behind and a 20% pay rise is on offer with a rival.”
The benign business conditions are industry wide. Only 3% of subscribers reveal doing very badly, and only 5% worse than last year. 
The others report ongoing stable business conditions doing well.
The median annual pay rises have varied since last year by seniority of staff. 
Juniors are ahead, being tech savvy, energetic, open to new ideas, systems and processes.
Following the push for gender equity in the industry women are at last being recognized as valuable employees with contributions and skills to match and complement their team members. There is a shortage of women recruits, and companies are going to great lengths to get them on board. But gender pay equity and early promotion are still scarce.
“What comes next?” asks Rita Avdiev. Every year the forecast for the next pay review remains modest and subdued.
But reality bites with the prospect of team dislocation and continuity disruption. NSW building and construction staff are prime targets. “Sourcing young talent from competitors has become a blood sport” she says. 
“When you are faced with making counter offers to staff being lured away by headhunters with promises of mega rises in salaries and ready or not promotions, the threat loosens purse strings and the pay goes up.” 
All sectors are targeted. Companies with foresight have already raised salaries and bonded their staff into competent and productive teams where the sense of achievement is a significant part of the reward.
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

Property industry remuneration grew at strong pace: Avdiev

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Office occupiers and their employees have a wide variety of locations to choose from.
We examine 12 of the most important real estate markets in the region. Discover the performance and prospects for the big ‘Global Powerhouses’ like London and Paris, fast-growing ‘Urban Accelerators’ like Stockholm, Berlin and Dublin, through to small but high profile ‘Contenders’ like Amsterdam, Frankfurt and Warsaw.
KEY FINDINGS
European cities have many of the characteristics of highly successful world cities that make them very attractive to workers looking for ‘urban buzz’ and a high quality city lifestyle. Their authentic environments, varied cultural experience and high quality of living makes the European cities in this study attractive not only to employees but also to employers.
New digital industries disrupt working practices and are growing at a faster rate than conventional finance and business services. Companies are searching globally for the Human Resources they need to win in this environment. This means that companies’ location choices will increasingly be made by the HR rather than premises departments. The questions they will ask are “which cities will help attract human capital?” rather than “where will property costs help save financial capital?”
Europe does contain some of the world’s global powerhouses: the top ranking cities which continue to attract people as well as global investment. Often, they act as hubs to wider, dispersed city networks. They are unlikely to lose this status in the foreseeable future and are adapting well to the digital age. London, Paris and Madrid now employ more people in their information and communication sectors than in their financial and insurance sectors.
London and Paris are the two most global cities in Europe and accommodation costs in these cities reflect that success. Large workforces result in high demand for space in the city which pushes up rents and land values in old cities where space is limited.
There is a big fall-off in annual accommodation costs per worker to the next tier of European cities. Milan, Dublin, Amsterdam, Moscow and Brussels are around half the cost of London at present.
The cheapest cities in Europe in which to accommodate staff are Warsaw, Berlin. Frankfurt, Madrid and Stockholm. Warsaw is just over a quarter of the cost of London.
In some cities, this expense ranking is likely to change. Workspace rents are forecast to rise over the next year in Amsterdam, Dublin, Paris, Madrid, Milan and Stockholm. They are broadly stable in Brussels, Frankfurt, London and Warsaw, giving occupiers more certainty on real estate costs.
Where real estate costs are scrutinised, it is becoming as important to look at residential affordability as well as commercial property costs. Young creative workers are increasingly attracted to good, small cities offering cheaper accommodation as they are priced out of the big global financial centres. This is part of the reason why some very small European cities like Berlin, Dublin and Amsterdam are hugely successful and punching above their weight economically. Their worldwide fame belies their size.
Brexit has raised questions on London’s future as a financial centre and speculation is rife as to which European city might win London’s business. The evidence of this report suggests that no single city will take London’s crown but rather the EU passporting functions of many institutions will be dispersed throughout Europe to a variety of cities for different reasons.
Some small cities, especially those in which it is easy for multinationals to do business, those with favourable tax regimes and strong English language capabilities could do well in attracting global companies but few of these cities have the stock capacity to accommodate many large relocations from London – or elsewhere, especially in the short term. Some cities which larger levels of office supply may find their corporate and personal tax regimes discourage some companies.
Taking a combination of measures into account, London still stands out as the most attractive European city for the finance sector. We think it will continue to serve as a global finance centre but in partnership with some smaller European cities for passporting functions.
Overall, there are good reasons to expect further growth in both the economies and real estate markets of many European cities. Often the strength of the city will buck the trend of the country in which it sits so national comparisons are less useful than city comparisons.
The strength of occupier markets should continue to attract global investment in many European cities and to start attracting it in others. The attractiveness of these cities to investors is important for occupiers in the long run as it will determine whether they can find sufficient workspace of the right type in the right place and whether housing is affordable for their key workers.
The economic and demographic strength of most of the European cities in this report is such that both occupier and investor demand should be assured.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/03/16/pages-4-5-figure11.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/03/16/pages-4-5-figure11.png" target="_blank"><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/03/16/pages-4-5-figure11.png" width="600" height="315"></a>
Source: Savills World Research
 
Yolande Barnes is director, World Research at Savills and can be contacted <a href="https://www.savills.com/" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Euro cities punching above their weight economically: Yolande Barnes

<html><body>
China became the Asia Pacific region’s largest investment market for income-earning real estate for the first time in 2016.
Analysis by Real Capital Analytics (RCA) showed that an increasing number of transactions in its second tier cities, plus strong inflows from regional and global investors, powered China to the top spot over Japan and Australia by transaction volumes.
A total of US$14.0 billion (RMB 95.2 billion) in value of real estate, excluding development sites, changed hands in China in the fourth quarter, RCA data revealed.
This was a 32% increase from the same period a year earlier and lifted total investment value for all of 2016 in China by 10% to US$36.5 billion (RMB 243.3 billion).
Deals in existing properties more than doubled in Chongqing, Tianjin and Hangzhou, propelling these three cities into Asia Pacific’s 25 top investment destinations, some for the first time.
Petra Blazkova, RCA’s Senior Director of Analytics for Asia Pacific, said: “This is a watershed moment for China’s commercial real estate market, heralding the next phase of its transformation into one of the world’s major destinations for global property investors.
While development of new sites remains a prominent feature of its property market, higher deal volumes for standing assets in cities other than Shanghai, Beijing and Shenzhen are a sign of the growing maturity and depth of China’s investment market.”
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/02/08/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-08%20at%208.58.27%20am.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/02/08/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-08%20at%208.58.27%20am.jpg" alt="">
China also claimed another record first in 2016 as Asia Pacific’s top destination for foreign investors, who completed US$10.2 billion (RMB 68.0 billion) of property deals there last year.
The total value of transactions by foreign investors has tripled since the 2009 Global Financial Crisis.
The largest foreign investment in China in 2016 was the US$3.0 billion (RMB 20.0 billion) sale of Shanghai Century Link to ARA Asset Management.
In Hong Kong, a market highly influenced by Mainland Chinese investments, overall investment volumes reached US$13.5 billion (HKD 105.2 billion) in 2016, a 15% increase year-on-year (YoY).
Notable transactions that drove this increase included the sale of Mass Mutual Tower and Dah Sing Financial Centre, both for over US$1.0 billion.
In spite of the stronger performance by China and most other Asian markets in 2016, overall investment in the Asia Pacific region fell by 14% YoY to US$132.5 billion on the weakness of the Japanese and Australian markets.
Overall investment volumes in Japan stood at US$29.0 billion (JPY 3.2 trillion) for 2016, a decline of 37% YoY that meant it slipped into second place behind China for the first time.
Third-ranked Australia suffered a drop of 32% YoY in the value of completed transactions to US$22.8 billion (AUD 30.6 billion) last year.
RCA’s analysis showed that listed real estate investment trusts (REITs), a traditional driver of transactions in these two markets, slowed their investments significantly after several years of domestic domination due to their access to cheaper capital.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/02/08/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-08%20at%208.58.54%20am.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/02/08/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-08%20at%208.58.54%20am.jpg" alt="">
RCA’s Blazkova commented: “Pricing in both Japan and Australia seems sharp by historical comparison causing these two markets to slow considerably.
A heavy weight of capital continues to search for opportunities, with a strong focus on the safest and largest markets and a buy-and-hold attitude. This combination has created a highly competitive environment for the best assets.”
Barring Japan and Australia, a number of key markets in the region continued to do well.
One such bright spot was South Korea, where investment volumes in the country rose 15% YoY to US$12.0 billion (KRW 13.7 trillion), driven by healthy domestic and foreign demand.
Last year was also the second strongest year for cross-border investment in South Korea recorded by RCA, with the most notable deal being the purchase of Seoul IFC by Brookfield Asset Management in a joint venture with China Investment Corporation (CIC) for US$2.2 billion (KRW 2.5 trillion).
Singapore also had a strong showing in 2016, posting a 38% year-on-year increase in investment volumes last year to US$8.0 billion (SGD 11.0 billion).
This was mainly due to the US$2.6 billion (SGD 3.4 billion) sale of Asia Square Tower 1.
The transaction boosted confidence, as investors returned to the market in the fourth quarter of 2016 in anticipation of rental growth and rising property values.
Blazkova from RCA said: “There has been much talk about investors turning to smaller markets in Asia Pacific as a source of value-for-money opportunities.
Our analysis suggests, however, that for so-called frontier markets like the Philippines, Indonesia and Vietnam, there is still a stand-off in pricing expectations that is preventing investment from really taking off.”
The Asia Pacific Capital Trends report also revealed:
<ul>
<li>The largest single transaction in 2016 was the US$3.0 billion (RMB 20.0 billion) purchase of Shanghai Century Link in China by ARA Asset Management.  </li>
<li>A new peak was reached in terms of the number of megadeals (over US$1.0 billion) done in Asia Pacific last year at 51, with the continued deployment and abundance of capital.  </li>
<li>In terms of market activity by cities, Seoul was the biggest surprise of 2016, having jumped from 10th position in 2015 to 4th last year on record high investment activity, especially in the office and hotel sectors.</li>
</ul>
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

China leapfrogs Japan and Australia to become APAC’s largest commercial real estate investment market

<html><body>
<div>
Online agency iBuyNew has acquired Melbourne-based property research advisers Nyko Property. 
IBuyNew ‘s operator, ASX-listed Disruptive Investment Group Limited (DVI), said Nyko, which was established in 2008, will complement IBN’s online platform and operational infrastructure. 
Mark Mendel, chief executive officer iBuyNew said the acquisition of Nyko positions the business to business (B2B) offering with wider breadth through established partners, well-developed systems and processes.
“The Nyko business is very complimentary to IBN and will play a key role in the success of our corporate partnerships network channels," he said. 
Bill Nikolouzakis, Nyko founder and managing director, will remain with Nyko as director of corporate partnerships. He said the acquisition provides Nyko with additional resources, exposure and technology to rapidly scale and enter new markets previously not available.
"The consolidation of both businesses will allow us to maximise the benefits and create greater value to our partners in a way not available to us otherwise," he said.
</div>
 
</body></html>

iBuyNew expands with Nyko Property acquistion

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/64794/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
There is much debate about which groups of people have played the greatest role in creating the increasingly unaffordable housing markets in Australian cities. Baby boomers and foreign investors are two popular targets.
But in my new book, The Geopolitics of Real Estate, I show it is a mistake to blame particular domestic or foreign investor groups for affordability problems over a short timeline.
One way to think about housing affordability is to reverse-engineer the problem back to the birth of Australia’s property-owning democracy. History shows the problem was created in five key steps.
Step 1: Aboriginal peoples were dispossessed of their land
When you open up the timeline for an analysis of housing affordability, the question quickly becomes: whose land are domestic and foreign real estate investors trading?
Go back a couple of centuries and you arrive at what RMIT academic Libby Porter calls the original dispossession: the point when the land was stolen from Aboriginal peoples.
But Aboriginal land dispossession is not only a series of historical events that occurred in the past. Such acts established the social and legal conditions that allow land and real estate to be traded today.
This throws statements by domestic real estate investors about invading foreigners into sharp relief.
Step 2: foreigners and capital were moved onto the land
The early British colonial settlements set trade and migration as their objectives.
In the early 19th century, Edward Wakefield, a leading force in South Australia’s colonisation, argued land should be sold rather than given away. This would incentivise the new landowners to pay the emigration costs associated with transporting immigrants to supply labour for the colony.
Wakefield argued the immigrants would sell their labour and, with their incomes, would buy land. He called this systematic colonisation, and later championed these ideas in New Zealand and Canada.
These ideas about globalising the scale at which foreigners could be moved through local colonial land opened up new ways of thinking about the global market for land and sources of labour.
Contemporary governments continue to use the movement of people and capital through their land and real estate markets to underwrite their economies and labour markets.
Step 3: a property-owning democracy was built
A property-owning democracy is a society in which between 65% and 85% of households own or are purchasing the home they live in.
After the second world war the Australian government set about building a property-owning democracy. To build it required two interrelated tasks.
<ul>
<li>The first involved claiming, measuring, quantifying and distributing the land ready for the sale of real estate.</li>
<li>The second involved creating a way of thinking about real estate that would function within the property-owning democracy.</li>
</ul>
After the war the government increasingly regulated the movement of people and their money across Australian borders. It introduced a raft of economic and social policies that were firmly aimed at shaping how Australians thought about real estate – the Great Australian Dream.
Post-war housing and economic policies, ideas about nationhood and citizenship, and the responsibility to be a suburban consumer of a home and household goods were worked deeply into the minds of baby boomers.
Step 4: land and real estate was constituted as private property
What emerged in the second half of the 20th century was a suite of crises in land and real estate.
Aboriginal land rights rose to the surface as the settler politics of claiming and defending the land and real estate was called into question.
As the populations grew and the effects of the property-owning democracy took hold in major Australian cities, a crisis in housing affordability emerged.
When compared with the experience of their parents, by the early 21st century it was harder for the children of the baby boomers to buy into urban real estate markets. As the baby boomers were busy buying real estate in the second half of the 20th century, a land revolution was under way in China.
The collectivisation of land had effectively removed the land from the private property market in China in the mid-20th century. It was radically reinserted a few decades later.
The geopolitical rise of China at the end of the 20th century changed the way people and money circulated around the world.
Step 5: global movements of people and capital followed the geopolitics
Strong private property land and real estate ideals emerged from the other side of the Cultural Revolution. The commodification of land and real estate became a key tactic for building wealth in China.
The surplus Chinese capital broke free of the national border by the end of the century. The newly enfranchised middle class and super-rich Chinese were looking for foreign real estate opportunities.
At the turn of the century, the baby boomer real estate dream was becoming harder to realise for their children. But the Chinese local and foreign real estate dreams were still in their infancy.
The history of foreign investment in land and real estate shows the global movement of people and capital is closely linked to the prevailing geopolitics.
Dallas Rogers is lecturer in Urban Studies, Western Sydney University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/dallas-rogers-5269" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Property 101: Australia’s housing affordability problem explained in five historical steps

<html><body>
SPONSORED POST
Australians have always had an affinity with property ownership and investment, and when you look at the statistics, it’s not hard to see why.
<a href="/images/2016/09/14/10yearreal%201%201.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/09/14/10yearreal%201%201.png" alt="">
These statistics support the common marketing thread we see in the media around the positives of property investment.  But as an existing property investor the real challenge lies in diversification. 
Diversification in property has traditionally been quite challenging. This isn’t simply due to the outlay of capital needed per purchase, it takes time, the need for investigation, viewings, auctions and then post purchase, there’s the upkeep, maintenance and management of the asset to factor in.
Obviously you can avoid most of this with a REIT or other managed fund structure but with those options you tend to sacrifice transparency and control.
Suffice to say property investment can be frustrating to say the very least. How much easier would it be to have access to an online platform that listed a variety of properties, across different states that you could easily flick through and buy a share in when it suited you?
And it wouldn’t stop there, once purchased your shares would offer monthly returns from any net rental income and regular valuations that would allow you to monitor your capital returns performance.
Undoubtedly, access and transparency would make property investment diversification far easier for both sophisticated and first time investors. And the good news is there is now a solution that offers both of these, it’s called BRICKX.
<a href="https://www.brickx.com/how-it-works?utm_source=propertyobserver&amp;utm_medium=paid&amp;utm_term=brickxoffers&amp;utm_content=article&amp;utm_campaign=launch" target="_blank">BRICKX offers</a> every Australian access to residential property for under $100. As a BRICKX investor you can benefit from monthly rental income and/or capital returns of your investment properties without being concerned with the hassle of leasing and managing them.
Investors also have access to regular valuation updates and to each property’s historical and suburb data, and investment cases.
Learn more about BRICKX at <a href="https://www.brickx.com/how-it-works?utm_source=propertyobserver&amp;utm_medium=paid&amp;utm_term=learnmore&amp;utm_content=article&amp;utm_campaign=launch" target="_blank">www.brickx.com</a>.
BRICKX products are issued by Theta Asset Management Limited (AFSL 230920). You should read the product disclosure statement at <a href="https://www.brickx.com/how-it-works?utm_source=propertyobserver&amp;utm_medium=paid&amp;utm_term=disclaimer&amp;utm_content=article&amp;utm_campaign=launch" target="_blank">www.brickx.com</a> and consider whether BRICKX is right for you.  
 
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

Frustrated in your hunt for your next property investment?

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
There is a simplistic thought pattern that rising property markets are good and falling markets are bad.
Supporting the point, transaction volumes historically increase in rising markets and decrease in falling markets. These fluctuations in volumes are sentiment based as much as they are practical decisions by the respective buyers and sellers. Rising markets feel good whilst falling markets don’t. Whilst there may be more winners in a rising market and vice versa, it is not a universal principal. 
When you understand how a rising market can actually work against your best interests and a falling market can be used to your advantage, the property market takes on a whole new persona.
Depending on what your goal and objective for trading real estate is, you will be better positioned to act decisively or remain patient when you are conscious of the winners and losers in all market conditions.
First homebuyers – rising and/or fully priced markets benefit those at the top and disadvantage those look to enter the market. First home buyers find the level of entry difficult in booming markets and are best served looking to enter the market when real estate is flat. Many people think that first home buyers are permanently locked out of the market which is an overstatement. There is no doubt that current conditions are difficult in Sydney for them, but an opportune time will come again. Indeed it was first home buyers that created the post GFC boom as they took advantage of declining prices (and Government grants). First home buyers who were brave enough to venture into the market in 2008 are now on the property ladder and climbing. 
Upgraders – if you own a property and intend to sell it to purchase another one in the same market, you are more likely to sell in a rising market. But you are quite possibly better off upgrading in a falling market. If you sell a $1 million home and intend on upgrading to a $2 million home, a 10% rise in the market will provide an extra $100,000 on the sale but take $200,000 more on the purchase.  Conversely, a 10% market decline on the same transaction wipes $100,000 off the sale but a whopping $200,000 off the purchase. 
When you consider that a lot of fees and services such as stamp duty (&amp; agent’s fees) are based on percentages, the lower the price the better when upgrading.
Transitioning into a different market – if you are selling out of a booming Sydney market to buy into a sleepy sea side village with flat to declining property prices, you win on both sides of the ledger. You sell high and buy low. The Perth market for example is severely depressed at the moment. If you were to sell in Perth and move into Sydney or Melbourne, you will sell low and buy high. As important as it is to sell at the right time, if you are transitioning into a different market, picking the right time to buy is equally important.
Negative geared investors – creating a deliberate weekly loss to gain some tax advantages may seem like a sound and plausible strategy whilst prices are rising. When prices are flat or declining, the investor loses twice – a weekly loss plus declining asset value. Investors who are negatively geared need a market that rises faster than the accumulated losses through the negative gearing, to stay in front on the investment. Sharing a profit with the tax man is preferable to keeping a loss to yourself. Many property investors have lost sight of this one. If you get yourself into a position where you are positively geared, capital growth is yours to keep rather than compensation for carrying a weekly loss over a number of years.
Investors – it is possible for investors to benefit in both flat markets and booming markets. The key is to transact accordingly. There are two types of investors, incoming and outgoing. Savvy investors know there is a right time to enter a property market and equally an appropriate time to exit. 
A crude yet timeless real estate cliché such as ‘when rates are high it’s time to buy and when rates are low it’s time to go’ are worth keeping in mind. This should not be your sole guiding light but it is worth keeping in mind. Sure, every expert says ‘sell high, buy low’ but how many actually act on this advice? Prices are currently high in Sydney and low in Perth. How many investors are brave enough to buy in Perth at present? Yet in 2011/12 when interest rates were much higher and the mining boom was ticking along, Perth was fully priced and Sydney was in a severe lull. Sure, hindsight is 20/20, but so is research coupled with long term planning. 
Last time sellers – if first home buyers are the losers of a boom, then last time sellers are the recipients and vice versa in both instances. From a demographic perspective, there are a lot of last time sellers coming through the system in the next 15 years as baby boomers sell down their assets to fund their retirement. The family home will be increasingly sold down by baby boomers whom are looking to unlock equity and move into smaller more manageable properties in lifestyle locations. 
Baby boomers in Perth feel hard done by given the market has crashed there whilst last time sellers in Sydney feel as though they have won lotto. Particularly if they selling up to leave town. Just as first home buyers could be well advised to hold off on purchasing at present, last time sellers should give considered thought to exiting the market whilst times are good. We may not be in the midst of a full boom as we were in 2015, but is anyone going to really suggesting that house prices are currently anything but high?
Knowing what you now know, you may decide to act ahead of time or delay transacting until the market environment suits your agenda. There are winners and losers in all markets. If you plan intelligently and sensibly, you increase the chances of being on the right side of the ledger.
Peter O’Malley is author of Real Estate Uncovered and can be contacted <a href="https://realestateuncovered.com.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Real Estate Market

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Real Estate Market

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News