对房市几点想法, 抛砖引玉

HNREN

需要注意的是以上增长是移民增长为主, 不知道自然出生率怎么样. 澳洲一但收紧移民政策, 还能否达到这个增长数字就未知了. 感觉房市跟人口增长的关系不是非常密切, 西欧一些人口负增长的国家房价也很高, 房价受经济大环境的影响更大一些.

villa

原帖由 HNREN 于 2007-3-24 22:58 发表
需要注意的是以上增长是移民增长为主, 不知道自然出生率怎么样. 澳洲一但收紧移民政策, 还能否达到这个增长数字就未知了. 感觉房市跟人口增长的关系不是非常密切, 西欧一些人口负增长的国家房价也很高, 房价受经济 ...

我在第3页82楼已经提到过自然出生率，再贴一遍：


经济势头强政府增育儿津贴 澳大利亚迎来婴儿潮


http://www.chinanews.com.cn/gj/yt/news/2006/09-25/795818.shtml



经济势头强政府增育儿津贴 澳大利亚迎来婴儿潮



2006年09月25日 18:44

　　
中新社悉尼九月二十五日电　近年来澳大利亚经济发展势头强劲，政府又提升了育儿津贴，由此引发了近三十五年来的新一轮婴儿潮。

澳大利亚统计局今天公布的数字说，去年共有二十六万五千名婴儿出生，为一九七一年以来的新高。
曾向全国夫妇建议每对夫妻生三个孩子的联邦财政部长高德乐高兴地表示，出生率上升反映澳大利亚人对于澳洲未来的信心，并且家庭经济状况稳定。

澳洲国立大学人口学家麦克唐纳预测出生率将企稳。他说，由于经济状况良好，出生率将会等目前出生的新生儿进入学龄方会回落。

目前澳大利亚夫妇生孩子可以申请一笔育儿津贴。官方数字表明，二〇〇五至二〇〇六财年，共有超过二十六万名家长申请育儿津贴。

据测算，澳大利亚目前平均每名育龄妇女有一点七九个孩子，远高于大部分发达国家。




http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/ ... 0456931-948,00.html




:si12

[ 本帖最后由 villa 于 2007-3-24 23:04 编辑 ]

astina

IF YOU'RE one of the many Melbourne investors disappointed in the performance of your residential portfolio over the past few years, you can hardly be blamed for wondering when your luck will turn for the better.

According to figures from the Real Estate Institute of Victoria, the local market grew by an average of just 2.9 per cent a year between 2003 and 2006 — not exactly something to shout about.

However, a deeper analysis of the institute's figures reveals a more accurate and positive scenario.

From 1980 to 2000, the Melbourne residential property market rose by an average of 9.4 per cent per annum. To test this over a more useful time frame (10 years, which is usually the maximum length of a property cycle) we looked at several 10-year periods between 1980 and 2006. No matter which time frame, the average annual growth was always 7 to 10 per cent.

Even in the period 1985 to 1995, during which the nation's economy took a battering in the "recession

we had to have", the average growth for Melbourne residential property was still 7 per cent per year.

In the decade from 1996 to 2006, the market's average annual increase was 8.7 per cent. As previously mentioned, the increase was just 2.9 per cent per year for four of those years (2003 to 2006). During the latter period, the average compound increase underperformed the 10-year average by more than half.

If the residential property market is to remain true to its historical performance and retain its 7 to 10 per cent annual increase for the 10 years from 2003 to 2013 — and we don't see any reason why it wouldn't — compound growth over the next six years must beat the 10-year average by 4 to 7 per cent per year. This means total growth of 11 to 17 per cent per annum.

Can the market deliver? We believe it can.

The residential market is a bit like a rubber band — the longer and more firmly you hold the band back, the further and faster it will move forward when you release the restraint.

In historical terms, four years is a relatively long lay-off time for Melbourne's residential market. We are now seeing signs the market has been held down as far as it can go, and is beginning to rebound.

Melbourne's inner suburbs, where auctions predominate, are a good barometer of market trends. Auctions depend on competition, so the higher the clearance rate, the greater the level of competition.

During February, auction clearance rates were more than 80 per cent; substantially higher than the 60 to 65 per cent in the same month last year.

If this trend continues, it is only a matter of time before the increased competition fuels price rises.

Who is driving this activity? We believe it is two distinct groups — baby boomers downsizing from large family homes, and generation Y DINKS (double income/no kids) focusing on establishing careers and sowing the seeds of financial security before they start their families.

The intriguing thing about the increased competition is that, on the demand side, the Melbourne market is still only flying at half-mast. While second and subsequent home buyers such as the boomers and gen Y are very active, investors are yet to come back into the fray on a large scale.

Once these investors begin to move — most likely in the second half of 2007 and into 2008 — the market will return to full strength and the level of competition will move up another gear.

In this scenario, it's quite feasible that our predictions of 11 to 17 per cent average annual growth will come to pass; generating long-anticipated equity for investors and complementing other asset classes in their portfolio.

Mark Armstrong and David Johnston are directors of Property Planning Australia, which advises on property and finance strategies.


http://www.theage.com.au/news/bu ... /1174597889124.html

villa

原帖由 HNREN 于 2007-3-24 22:58 发表
需要注意的是以上增长是移民增长为主, 不知道自然出生率怎么样. 澳洲一但收紧移民政策, 还能否达到这个增长数字就未知了. 感觉房市跟人口增长的关系不是非常密切, 西欧一些人口负增长的国家房价也很高,
房价受经济大环境的影响更大一些...   

原帖由 astina 于 2007-3-24 23:03 发表
  
Even in the period 1985 to 1995, during which the nation's economy took a battering in the "recession

we had to have", the average growth for Melbourne residential property was still 7 per cent per year.

谢谢as转的这篇今天《The  Age》上的文章，分析透彻，而且基于“数据”，有道理。


:si111

HNREN

那是不是可以做这样的推断, 随着时间的推移, 房产(带土地所有权)一定是升值的? 不过也有人说过房地产市场也是有周期的.

西边雨

在很大程度上和澳洲的税务制度有关系~~

clickle

分析的有效性要看专家系统的响应速度的快慢。

而有些相关的计量模型往往是事后合理化+被利益集团诱导的产物。少考虑一个局限变量结论就完全相反。

彼岸

原帖由 astina 于 2007-3-24 23:03 发表
IF YOU'RE one of the many Melbourne investors disappointed in the performance of your residential portfolio over the past few years, you can hardly be blamed for wondering when your luck will turn  ...

Thanks for joining us.

The writers' argument does make sense if the assumption for this scenario is reliable and realizable.

I notice a figure of 7-10% increase per year if the time frame is one decade. I would like to give another scenario, if the worst case happens---7% increase only, it is still possible that the price will decline.  The main            reason is  that it  increased  at 8.7 %  annually during 1996-2006. If we pick up another time frame , i.e. 1998- 2008, and the lowest increase of 7% per year for a decade, it should be a different story.

Another interesting thing is downsizing, I believe downsizing has a positive effect to supply, esp. the supply of land, but does not surge demand because these people own at least one big propery before they move to a small one.

Any commemnts don't hesitate.

villa

原帖由 彼岸 于 2007-3-24 22:50 发表


谢谢数子.


昨天我估算了给1.5%, 比维州实际的增长幅度还高了点.

吃喝...TZ的2030规划中提到MELBOURNE 0.8% 的增长率.

还要注意目前的增长是有条件的, 希望政府鼓励生育的奖金还回增加.

After July 1 2004, every family, regardless of income, will receive $3,000 for each new child.

That will rise to $4,000 in 2006 and $5,000 in 2008.


http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2004/s1106258.htm

HNREN

等待ＡＳ的感想:si20

villa

对于墨尔本的房产市场，‘涨’还是‘跌’，见仁见智。:si170

这种争论其实蛮有意思，大家看涨看跌，各抒己见，但都改变不了事实，让市场来做最后的检验吧。



:si30

austeps_join

我认识一对夫妇开杂货店的，10年前就有20多万的存款,他们听投资专家说买基金是最好的投资,全剖买了基金,他们也看房超过200间.因为他们租的店是上居下店,因此对买房自住没紧迫感,当房价上去了,他们觉得太贵了,肯定会回落的。现在他看着别人住house,心里很不是味道.

彼岸

原帖由 austeps_join 于 2007-3-25 10:35 发表
我认识一对夫妇开杂货店的，10年前就有20多万的存款,他们听投资专家说买基金是最好的投资,全剖买了基金,他们也看房超过200间.因为他们租的店是上居下店,因此对买房自住没紧迫感,当房价上去了,他们觉得太贵了,肯定 ...

献身说法, 珍贵.

从长线讲,投资房产是值得的,有点妇孺皆知. 但问题是现在是不是好时机?

需更多的美玉,欢迎更多的人参与. 尤其是近几年买房的网友.

还有,基金的回报怎样? 昨天AS的文章里,8.2% 的回报 1996-2006,MELBOURNE.当然,买到好区,可能是两位数; 区没选好, 低于8.2%. 如果是细腻,有是另一个故事.

语阁

原帖由 austeps_join 于 2007-3-25 10:35 发表
我认识一对夫妇开杂货店的，10年前就有20多万的存款,他们听投资专家说买基金是最好的投资,全剖买了基金,他们也看房超过200间.因为他们租的店是上居下店,因此对买房自住没紧迫感,当房价上去了,他们觉得太贵了,肯定 ...

倒，开杂货店的，这１０年多，应该赚了几个２０W了吧，呵呵，买房子还愁什么？:si63

彼岸

原帖由 villa 于 2007-3-25 00:08 发表
对于墨尔本的房产市场，‘涨’还是‘跌’，见仁见智。:si170

这种争论其实蛮有意思，大家看涨看跌，各抒己见，但都改变不了事实，让市场来做最后的检验吧。



:si30

精辟.

关注此周末的拍卖结果.这是最新的市场动向了.

建议足迹住房版升格为澳大利亚房地产论坛.哈哈

villa

原帖由 彼岸 于 2007-3-25 10:56 发表


精辟.

关注此周末的拍卖结果.这是最新的市场动向了.

建议足迹住房版升格为澳大利亚房地产论坛.哈哈

谢谢彼岸筒子的鼓励！:si44

要关注墨尔本每个周末房产的拍卖结果，可以参考：


http://www.homepriceguide.com.au ... sults/melbourne.pdf

http://www.domain.com.au/public/ ... /default.aspx?mode=


更详尽的可以翻翻每周日（或周一）墨市两大报纸《The Age》和《Melbourne Herald Sun》都有本周六墨尔本所有区域拍卖成交的结果和近期部分Private Sale的成交纪录；《The Age》的地产版拍卖结果版首一般还会有一篇当周一些热门地区拍卖情况的报道。

当然自己亲自去Auction现场看看当时的气氛可以获得最直接的感受。

吃喝拉撒睡

我来占地盘咯！

原帖由 astina 于 2007-3-24 23:03 发表
The residential market is a bit like a rubber band — the longer and more firmly you hold the band back, the further and faster it will move forward when you release the restraint.

这句话很形象。确实，现在melbourne市场的房子，12KMZ范围内的已经take off，不需要多说，从去年年中开始价格是一个月比一个月高。加息的现实影响，其实就是pull the buyers off the market 3~5个月左右，之后又会涌入市场，价格接着往上走。我认为现在稍远一点的区域，是一种“蠢蠢欲动”的状态。需要的就是一个right timing导火索，其实也就是买家信心的导火索。

一般来说，在一个cycle中，好区的房子先涨，但也先掉。我认为cycle 的第一阶段已经快要结束了，马上距离CBD20KMZ之内的房子都会有显著的升值。根报道说的一样，我估计这会在今年下半年更加明显的体现出来，水涨船高。

原帖由 彼岸 于 2007-3-25 10:51 发表


从长线讲,投资房产是值得的,有点妇孺皆知. 但问题是现在是不是好时机?

需更多的美玉,欢迎更多的人参与. 尤其是近几年买房的网友.

还有,基金的回报怎样? 昨天AS的文章里,8.2% 的回报 1996-2006,MELBOURNE.当然,买到好区,可能是两位数; 区没选好, 低于8.2%. 如果是细腻,有是另一个故事.

Affordability其实不是market concern，而是government concern，前提是pick up a right area。这是短线，5年内的考虑。

5年以上的考虑，就是随便哪里都可以，只要不出了metropolitan就可以，只要买的时候不被ripe off就可以。Canterbury 7年升100%和Sunshine 7年升100%都是一样的。其实长线投资看的就是数量。虽然我个人相信局部区域会constantly on demand more than others，但是作为长线投资，这种区域性回报上的差别其实是很小的。

很多时候会看到这个区去年涨了30%什么的。其实，我一看到这个消息我就有两点想法：
1，这个30%在10年内其实没什么大不了的。可能最后也就是2%不到的差别。
2，我在澳洲呆的时间不长，连一个cycle都没有完整的经历过。当亲身经历过后，看问题本身会更加简单明朗，中心明确。

原帖由 villa 于 2007-3-25 00:08 发表
对于墨尔本的房产市场，‘涨’还是‘跌’，见仁见智。:si170

这种争论其实蛮有意思，大家看涨看跌，各抒己见，但都改变不了事实，让市场来做最后的检验吧。

:si30

各大小媒体都说要涨，这对市场的影响还是很大的。其实时间差就是信心差，很难想象2002年的时候房产投资者会hold back to buy shares。可是2004年就不一样了。

我其实是个很aggressive的investor，呵呵，因为还没有输过。希望我的预测根市场的走向一样。毕竟房产比股票道理容易多了。




占用了一个dual occupancy的版面。哈哈。

austeps_join

原帖由 语阁 于 2007-3-25 10:53 发表

倒，开杂货店的，这１０年多，应该赚了几个２０W了吧，呵呵，买房子还愁什么？:si63

这几年竟争太大,没以前好兼,都是辛苦钱,若果当年买50万的房子,今天是1m了.由于基金的分红是要上税,有一年股灾,基金是负增长,现在他们手头的总财产也就50万左右.到现在还在看房,想想当年不买房,气就不打一处出.

villa

经济势头强政府增育儿津贴 澳大利亚迎来婴儿潮



2006年09月25日 18:44

　　
中新社悉尼九月二十五日电　近年来澳大利亚经济发展势头强劲，政府又提升了育儿津贴，由此引发了近三十五年来的新一轮婴儿潮。

澳大利亚统计局今天公布的数字说，去年共有二十六万五千名婴儿出生，为一九七一年以来的新高。

曾向全国夫妇建议每对夫妻生三个孩子的联邦财政部长高德乐高兴地表示，出生率上升反映澳大利亚人对于澳洲未来的信心，并且家庭经济状况稳定。.

为因应澳洲人口老化问题，4月3日本地媒体报道，澳洲政府将继续致力于提高人口出生率。

远的不说，就看看我们的坛子，2007年也将迎来足迹第二轮婴儿潮 。:)




Costello aims to boost baby numbers



April 03, 2007 12:00am


PETER Costello has flagged new policies to lift the fertility rate and keep ageing baby-boomers working as Australia confronts a less-secure economic future.

But the Federal Treasurer has been forced to revise an earlier doomsday scenario, after a new forecast sliced $15 billion from the projected annual deficit in 40 years time.

Unveiling the second Intergenerational Report, Mr Costello said yesterday a series of government initiatives had reined in health spending during the past five years.

Australia was at a demographic "sweet spot" because the baby-boom generation was fully engaged in the workforce, he said.

He said lifting the fertility rate remained an important goal, and he signalled additional policies "which make it easier for families to have children".

Calling for vigilance and tighter fiscal policy, Mr Costello said the ageing of the population still presented a huge challenge over coming decades.

"Demography is working against us," Mr Costello told the National Press Club, in a speech designed to reinforce the Government's economic credentials.

Treasury now forecasts a fiscal gap of $35 billion a year by 2047 - down from an estimated $50 billion, from the first IGR - as the number of retirees overwhelms the size of the workforce.

"Still unsustainable, still unfundable - but a significant improvement on where we were five years ago," he said.

Among the improvements, the Treasurer cited a slight increase in the fertility rate and improved participation by older workers.

The projected growth of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme has also been pared back, reducing its future impost on the budget. But there will also be much higher costs as people live longer.

Life expectancy for women is forecast to reach 90 by 2047, while men will live to 86.

A higher immigration intake will see the population reach 28.5 million within 40 years - 10 per cent more than expected five years ago.

With Kevin Rudd urging a new productivity agenda, Treasury expects no improvement in this important indicator.

Treasury has sharply changed its 40-year forecasts from five years ago, but Mr Costello defended their accuracy.

"A lot can happen between now and 2046, I'll be the first to concede that," he said.

Mr Costello said the ageing population problem would get worse from 2010.

"After 2010, the dependency ratio, the ratio of children and older people to people of working age, is expected to increase more rapidly as the baby boomers reach age pension," he said.

One month before announcing his 12th budget on May 8, Mr Costello said the challenge was to "maintain discipline" and continue the reform agenda.

But Labor said Mr Costello should stop patting himself on the back and said the improved fiscal outlook came from an improved world economy - not the Government's hard work.

"We need to understand this one important point - most of this growth comes from the mining boom," Opposition treasury spokesman Wayne Swan said.

"Most of this comes from the rivers of gold flowing from the mining boom. The Treasurer can't pat himself on the back. He should be patting the miners of Australia on the back when he's presenting the results of this report."



http://www.news.com.au/business/ ... 1494832-462,00.html

courier

我也来说

长期来说,如果社会财富不发生大的转移或者变动,投资房地产并不能增殖.房产也和大白菜一样,维持着和收入的一定的比例关系.如果这个比例关系被长期的,持续的破坏,财富就发生了转移.结果就是,财富向有房子的人,更多房子的人转移.新进入社会的年轻人,就要付出更多.最后,最糟糕的结果就是年轻人破产.从这个角度看,房子也不会背离收入无限制的上涨.所以房子就是昂贵的大白菜,可白菜终究还是白菜

courier

那天听一个房地产顾问讲,她说俄罗斯经济解体那段时间,货币贬值了四千分之一,可是房子却相对上涨四千倍,结论就是房子能升值.

可是那个时候,就是苹果也上涨了四千倍的,本质不在于房产保值,而在于货币游戏.如果苹果不腐烂,并且容易保存的话,苹果也保值,呵呵

Portal

原帖由 courier 于 2007-4-3 14:55 发表
我也来说

长期来说,如果社会财富不发生大的转移或者变动,投资房地产并不能增殖.房产也和大白菜一样,维持着和收入的一定的比例关系.如果这个比例关系被长期的,持续的破坏,财富就发生了转移.结果就是,财富向有房 ...

看不懂, 呵呵

courier

通俗说,就是二十年后,我们的孩子长大了,房子涨了4倍,而收入只增加了1倍,这些年轻人造反吗?

原帖由 Portal 于 2007-4-3 15:02 发表


看不懂, 呵呵

彼岸

一个心理因素是: 没有房子就没有家的感觉, 流浪者的感觉.非常同意居者应有其家, 即使将来不增值.

第二个心理因素,大多数的人都认为会升值,甚至上面网友举的前苏联的例子里把通货膨胀都算成房子升值了. 但要仔细算一下以下几个负方面(例如投资房):

1.首付的机会成本
2.贷款的成本
3.维护成本
4.土地税,保险,BODY CORPORATE
5.空置时租金的损失

算的结果,众说纷纭,但不一定是最好成绩的投资. 有一种情况可能是: 低谷买进,高峰时售出.

所以,开本帖的中心思想是, 想探讨现在是不是好的时机? 不是人民应该不应该买住房?

继续抛砖引玉.

villa

“宁信书，不如无书”

astina

原帖由 villa 于 2007-7-17 15:52 发表
“宁信书，不如无书”

好象应该是"尽信书,不如无书?"

月亮

我也刚想说好像是尽信书

villa

原帖由 astina 于 2007-7-17 15:53 发表


好象应该是"尽信书,不如无书?"

可能“尽信书”更符合愿意。呵呵。

发帖前我还特意google了一下，也有“宁信书”一说，呵呵。:si71



http://www.google.com/search?hl= ... 9C%E7%B4%A2&lr=

astina

同,看来说法真多啊

knox

"尽信书,不如无书"  

说得好！