Running Commentary on the SP Movements., page-11623

Real properties are a secondary growth market and as such can loose a lot of capital. Look at places like holland etc say prior to 1970 and returns were minuscule and this is no5 isolated. We have seen a property bubble in Australia for a number of reasons. Changing demographics and the baby boomers. Increases in migration and whic( some say requires a certain high level to continue property support. We now have the embedded effects of CGT introduced on sept 19 1985 which Keating (I think) said would hardly raise so much but exceeded all expectations. Now the baby boomers are migrating to smaller housing and muc( housing inner city is now following other countries moves into higher density per sq metre. Apart from coastal properties, much of inland hardly is investment grade IMO. Coastal properties are then carrying a greater risk of down turn which has been discussed for a decade as Aussie real estate is amongst the dearest in the world. Why did I bother commenting.? I am not a strong property believer. All the property I own has to work outside of normal parameters and so I do I do get a good return. 18% on one and about 12 % on another but it’s hard to define as there is no land value and it supplied additional office space below.
Why did I bother? I just don’t see regular property as a hedge. You have to be very creative to gain above the low yields on offer that are not enticing and relying on a CG is just another prayer to hope for.