"That statement "Shares have always outperformed property over the long term too" is not correct, it can be argued vigorously as I am sure it will be now that pandoras box has been opened."
Of course shares will not ALWAYS out perform property if you are going to selectively pick property investor "A" who has done well and compare the results to a selectively picked share investor "B" who has not done so well
It will nearly always be possible to find someone who has made more money (or even lost less) in one form of investment than some one in some other form of investment.
BUT
if you take a wider view of average returns of the whole or a large portion of the market or even the returns of a those that have achieved the higher returns
SHARES WILL ALWAYS OVER A PERIOD 10-15 YEARS PLUS OUT PERFORM PROPERTY.
That is a fact and to argue anything different just proves how much of a blinkered property perma bull a person is.
Some people are clearly following types of investments be it property or some spec share foolishly like they were following a football team, their investment is the best regardless of reality and that their investment must out compete all other investments
Any first year finance student will be able to tell you that the higher the risk the higher return. If there is not a potential for a greater return from the exposure of greater risk either investor will not enter that area of investment or the investment will be re-priced accordingly and thereby reducing the risk.
Shares = higher return + higher risk
Property = lower return + lower risk.
Simple (though it may not be simple enough for some)
