QUOTE(flight @ Jul 6 2018, 10:06 PM)
Ur right. Not sure what is ur definition of low cost is. Low cost properties r riskier, specifically low cost flats.
But that is different from say an apartment launched at 400k and the price drops to say 250k. If 250k is low cost to u, then ur low cost is different from mine.
If the initial price of 400k cannot hold, and drop to 250k, this is beyond redemption, and is high risk unless the location becomes matured and sought after due to a strong factor that emerged thereafter.But that is different from say an apartment launched at 400k and the price drops to say 250k. If 250k is low cost to u, then ur low cost is different from mine.
QUOTE(Hevlaska @ Jul 6 2018, 10:10 PM)
I have to disagree with this, i find that the most lucrative properties, at least in my own portfolio, are low end properties(200-300k) and middle-high 1.5-2.5m value quantum. Anything in between is rather negligible or too much of a hassle to be managed.
There are occasionally middle/higher end properties on auction as well if you keep an eye. Rate of failure to service loan is spread out rather evenly, you are only seeing more low end on auction simply because there are more low end properties in the proportion to the market.
The 200-300k must have been bought a long time ago and prices should have appreciated a lot.There are occasionally middle/higher end properties on auction as well if you keep an eye. Rate of failure to service loan is spread out rather evenly, you are only seeing more low end on auction simply because there are more low end properties in the proportion to the market.