Comments on: The story of a typical property investor

By: Kimble

Kimble — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 02:41:00 +0000

Jeez, if everyone is investing in property, it MUST be a good investment, right?

Hang on, the story of the taxi driver or shoe-shine giving investment advice is usually used as sign that it is time to SELL UP.

And FYI, when you buy a share you are buying into a business that provides goods and services. When you buy an investment property with the idea of renting it out, you are buying into something that will provide a service. There isnt as much difference between the two.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 00:43:33 +0000

Good grief – what a pathetic little bitter blog. How many of the moaners invested in rental property for the capital gain and not the income ? The majority ? Property investors of which i am one got off lightly. Lets get some honesty into this debate or better still, move on. I am staying in property for the same reasons i started with – i manage the investments and the net income is still comparatively worthwile.

By: Joe

Joe — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 00:28:40 +0000

If Private property investors are worried about the tax changes in the budget then it’s time to re-assess your portfolio as your finances must be on the edge. Get more equity back into your portfolio, sell a site and avoid the enevitable higher upcoming mortgage costs. Avoid mortgagee sales and be part of the solution by not fueling the private debt problem.
ps. get off your high horse about providing a serice to renters.. the house is going to exist in the market as a rental or owner occupide whether YOU own it or not.

By: chris

chris — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 23:06:22 +0000

I can’t stand people propagating that myth! Sorry for being slightly off topic.
Telecom’s share value was slashed due to Telecom’s behaviour, not the govt’s.
Telecom invested zip in the network for years, providing poorer and poorer service [why lay more capacity when you can just cap usage?], while distorting competition as much as they could, giving their shareholders [and CEO] high returns.
In the meantime, the govt warned them to behave better, and kiwis learned to hate them. T Gattung smuggly believed that they were untouchable at they made a large share of the NZX 50. Guess what, the chickens came home to roost, the govt belatedly took action, regulations were imposed, and the tax payer now has to fork out over $1b that Telecom gave to their shareholders instead of investing. Don’t count on me to pity said shareholders.
And back to topic, that’s why property investment has the appeal it has: fewer possibilities of tinkering by greedy corporations and global bankers, all eager to rake in private profits, plus to take public money when they screw up. A house is a house. A stock is whatever you trust it to be, and trust is gone, especially after the GFC.

By: Tony

Tony — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 02:13:23 +0000

Hi,
I will still invest in properties, after no deprieciation etc.
At least I have control of my investment, compared to a finance company. There will always be capital gains to be made, which I have benifited from when buying and selling rentals. If you are in for the long haul. you will make better gains than investing in the banks etc.

We are here to provide a service, as the goverment can not provide enough rental properties to meet demand, and they know this.
Lets face it, members of goverment are landlords as well.

By: darren

darren — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 09:10:44 +0000

Robert Kiosaki wrote in one of his first books that you should not invest in a property if for tax advantages only. In our country we have had that upside for some time now. Now it’s time to look very hard at our figures and make clear cut decisions as to how we invest and make adjustments accordingly.

By: Chad

Chad — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 05:36:28 +0000

It’s like anything the laws were put in place to incentivise people to invest in property. We are afterall suppliers of a service to those who cannot afford or choose not to own their own homes. Now everyman and his dog have got in on the game, with that comes those that are only there short term to take advantage of the incentives beyond their initial intent and purpose. So, the new changes are fair enough. I own five properties, have sold one and have another on the market but for different reasons. Those sold or for sale do not meet my initial investing criteria and in this environment its all about conserving cash.

By: aileen

aileen — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 03:44:06 +0000

Hello I have read with interest I am an investor who has lossed and gained with property ,if it was not the tenants in Rotorua pulling the carpet, blinds off the property to light the fires, it was the finance companies stealing from me, but know I will just sail along with my house(s) here and Aussie and hopefully keep my overheads at a minimum and get what I want in the long term. We need to keep positive about this all. Move on and keep smiling – you are not going to sell your properties at the first negative action from our lovely government – think about it, are you here for the long haul- well I am (pensioner)

By: anita

anita — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 03:06:49 +0000

Always in some equation 10% ratbags ruin it for the rest, with some legislation to sort us ALL out. The problem I see going forward is, how do we repay all those loans. The government debt is low but private debt is still hugh. Most of that debt to repay is just impossible, so the banks are going to have to oblige, otherwise the next wave of mortgagee sales is going to occur. Cutting depreciation will stop growth and we now hear how it is going to effect older buildings in Wellington. Fewer buildings will be built but still with high costs and they will not come down because of so much CC regulations/cost etc etc So the cost will remain and or be higher to make up for everyone else not purchasing. The economy needs to start moving again and quickly!!!!

By: Anna

Anna — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 02:41:49 +0000

How can the property sector think that they can continue to benefit from tax advantages. Sure, there may be property investors who weren’t trying to “rort” the system, but the thing is that unintentionally, they were. This was a completely fair tax change.