build on the rock.

From reading many hundreds of postings I am impressed by the huge range of factors that individual members consider when determining what position to take in the market. Some rely on technical analysis,some cling to Company announcements,others look at demographic and/or economic trends. Some look closely at the projects,the skills of management,the partnerships and the banking arrangements, with their attached covenants. Articles from Gurus of every persuasion can influence sentiment of some, whist others act on their dreams.
From the postings it also seems to me that often personality styles superimpose over all the variables and dominate through shaping irrational, selective perception.(The utopian supreme optimist vs the depressed prophet of Armageddon)
To me,all of the above are legitimate variables that should be considered,even the dreaming!
However I suspect we all have dominant issues.
I certainly have mine.
I believe that the new management (and partnerships)have better assessed the market and structured a dynamic business plan positioning the company to capitalise on quick turnover of inner city accommodation, building on the solid foundations of the eastern seaboard, rather than the shifting western limestone sand.
It is, however, not without substantial risk.
Take the Annandale,'Bridgeview'Project.

On the positive side,from what I understand,the concept and construction plans have all been approved.
The location has some remarkable advantages (very close to transport and Sydney City,the harbour,with some views to the Bridge, adjoining the bi-centennial park etc.)

The negatives, however, could add very considerable costs to the construction and extend the finish date considerably. (This also pushes up prices, as salaries and management costs, interest on loans and building costs all accumulate with each month delay).
PBD bought into the project in April 2013, stating that there should be about a 2 year turn around for return on investments. That was 10 months ago and I have not been able to find reports on progress.
The building site has some very tricky aspects to it.Just one of which is that it is very narrow and parking will have to be at underground levels. Excavation will be considerable and must not compromise the integrity of the sandstone cliff-wall along the Bayview St.side, or risk disturbing the raised base upon which the light rail sits on its other long border. As a result the Govt. has imposed on the company building conditions that could be costly. Further,the Company has to build a derailment barrier and other structures to reduce pollution of the rail land and noise pollution for the residents. There are many other aspects to this site that add to the costs and have potential to throw up further challenges.When there is going to be only 23 units to share these costs, very tight management will be imperative to keep it profitable. (The Company's buy-in contribution and ongoing management costs need to be recouped before profit is realised)

One of my other concerns relate to a HC post titled 'Raging Boom' (13/1/2014).
Referring to this and other projects, the post says that 99% of apartments have been pre-sold before building commences,and that the company has learnt its lesson.
I am not so sure.
In 2007 Port Bouvard announced that they had made 44 pre-sales of the 67 apartments of Oceanique.We now know that even amongst the 44 sales,some were purchased by company directors,or their subsidiaries,some of which came back on the market privately.
Unfortunately 'pre-sales' do not equate to final sales. By the time titles were available, the GFC had burst the real estate bubble, prices had devalued dramatically and banks would not lend on the original valuation.(The risks of buying off the plan!)
The poor bastards who could not get out of their contacts had their asset further massively devalued by the Company when it reduced the prices of the remaining units by 40%.
The company then had to spend years expensively pursuing those who could not, or would not, pay up.
Coming back to Annandale (and Burwood).
A lot can happen in 2 years.
Whether you you believe the American economist Harry Dent that the property bubble in Australia and China could burst at any time,or whether you believe that there is no bubble and that, developments in Canada will result in thousands of cashed up Chinese migrating to Australia, the fact remains that the property market can be volatile.
Contrary to "learning their lesson", I believe that there is a possibility of the same mistakes being repeated. For example, such as buying into projects, and taking out loans to do so, well into a sustained (booming?) price growth market.
The former managing Director of Port Bouvard, Ross Neuman,in defence of the Company's 2011-2012 predicament said, on a number of occasions,when referring to the GFC that "no one saw it coming !"
GFC aside, there were many in the West who were saying that the property market at the time could not possibly keep growing at the rate it was. It was a topic of household discussion. Something had to give.
Company management may not have listened to,heard or believed responsible warnings. They continued to acquire property or commence projects at high points of the price cycle.

I have raised this issue because of the strength of some of the emotive responses when anyone suggests that there may be a property boom and,as such,it may bust.
In my opinion although much of the content of some of the responses have merit,they should not dismiss caution.
The company probably has exhausted its right to keep issuing more stock, and further dilute share value, should their costings blow out or their market shrink.
It can be a fine line between good profit and disasterous loss.
Timing is everything,and shareholders would be irresponsible not to keep an eye on progress and market volatility.