BIG Property Crash Predicted.

[perspective]

"Property investor and author Olly Newland believes an oversupply of cheap apartments will cause a crash, and predicted some investors would have to walk away from their deposits." June 2004

Listen to that bit of advice and you miss out on 3.5 years of property gains.

Listen to that bit of advice and you have to fork out at least $250,00 more for a nice house in a nice suburb in Auckland.

[67910241]

"Property investor and author Olly Newland believes an oversupply of cheap apartments will cause a crash, and predicted some investors would have to walk away from their deposits." June 2004

Listen to that bit of advice and you miss out on 3.5 years of property gains.

Listen to that bit of advice and you have to fork out at least $250,00 more for a nice house in a nice suburb in Auckland.

Listen to you and lose the same 250k by paying the jacked up overpimped nothing-can-hurt-me price right now

[67910241]

actually 50k already down

200k more to go. She'll be right.

[exnzpat]

My expectation, to my NZ portfolio, is a loss of about $200,000 over the next couple of years.

However, my buffer is my principal. I own more of my property than the bank does.

This will be key to my survival.

On top this; I intend to continue making my property more valuable by completing my ongoing home-improvement plans – regardless of the market forces at play.

[perspective]

Listen to you and lose the same 250k by paying the jacked up overpimped nothing-can-hurt-me price right now

Very revealing post from this poser - written like the true expert that you obviously think you are - like Olly Newland?

I have made no recommendation but you obviously have one?

It would be folly for anyone to buy a property now as there will properties coming to the market from distressed sellers. You wait.

But crash as was predicted by Olly Newland in June 2004? Not whilst there's full employment, a commodity boom underway, tourists flocking into Australasia from the Asian countries (from their economic boom) and Australia taking any redundant NZers with their labor shortage.

[PeterEmpowerEd]

Perhaps you should find a hobby

Mr/Ms/Dr perspective: Olly Newland's 2004 book The Day the Bubble Bursts did not predict a property crash would occur the moment it hit the bookshelves -- it's inaccurate to say, for instance, Olly predicted "a crash" would occur in June 2004 ... even in 2004.
Er, no. That's when the book came out. (I suggest you read it to find out what he actually said, don't rely on breathless media reports, gossip or a biased 'synopsis'.)

At the APIA meeting on Tuesday ANZ's Cameron Bagrie emphasised how the longevity of the latest boom confounded all the pundits and economic analysts -- including him. It went on about two years longer than it should have, he said. Other economists/commentators, including Olly, have said they got the timing wrong. Even the effervescent Keiran Trass ran seminars in 2004 called "Cash in on the Property Slump". The timing has been tricky.

Selective quoting from old newspaper articles doesn't make a very convincing case. (BTW, judging from 100% of your first 4 posts, you appear to have joined PT yesterday just to anonymously denigrate Olly. What's up?)

- Peter

[drelly]

Like expatnz, I'm expecting a large paper loss and have been doing the same thing. Battening down the hatche and doing renovations now for over a year.

[PeterEmpowerEd]

Like expatnz, I'm expecting a large paper loss and have been doing the same thing. Battening down the hatche and doing renovations now for over a year.

Ditto here too on some of that Dave. Good advice, good reminder. Paper equity is going to run out with the tide.
- Peter

[revdev]

Perspective,

Axe & Grind?

[Commercial Dan]

A Big Bank MUST Be In Trouble!

From The Times

March 13, 2008


Despite the Federal Reserve's efforts Wall Street fears a big US bank is in trouble




Siobhan Kennedy and Suzy Jagger


Global stock markets may have cheered the US Federal Reserve yesterday, but on Wall Street the Fed's unprecedented move to pump $280 billion (£140 billion) into global markets was seen as a sure sign that at least one financial institution was struggling to survive.
The name on most people's lips was Bear Stearns. Although the Fed billed the co-ordinated rescue as a way of improving liquidity across financial markets, economists and analysts said that the decision appeared to be driven by an urgent need to stave off the collapse of an American bank.
“The only reason the Fed would do this is if they knew one or more of their primary dealers actually wasn't flush with cash and needed funds in a hurry,” Simon Maughan, an analyst with MF Global in London, said.
Mr Maughan said that the most likely victim was Bear Stearns, the first bank to run into trouble in the sub-prime crisis and the one that, among all wholesale and investment banks, is most reliant upon the use of mortgage securities for raising funds in the money markets.


“The average financial institution was up 7.5 per cent yesterday after the Fed's actions, but Bear Stearns rose just 1 per cent on massive trading volume,” Mr Maughan said. “The market is telling you it's Bear Stearns.”
The Fed's intervention sparked fears of deeper underlying trouble because it came only days after it had made $200 billion (£99 billion) available in emergency funds. The nature of the financing was also unusual, bankers say, because it was the first time that the Fed had offered to lend Treasury securities in exchange for ordinary AAA-rated mortgage-backed securities as collateral.
Chris Whalen, of the financial consultancy Institutional Risk Analytics in New York, said: “The Fed move is confirmation that at least one of the banks is in trouble. A huge part of the banks' inventories are illiquid. If a broker-dealer is illiquid, it dies.”
Speculation has swirled for months about the collapse of an American bank as the credit crisis has escalated and spread from sub-prime to other mortgage-backed securities, treasuries and bonds. As well as Bear Stearns, attention has focused on UBS, the Swiss bank, which has been forced to make more than $18 billion in sub-prime writedowns, and Citigroup, the world's largest financial institution, which has turned to sovereign wealth funds to help to shore up its credit-stricken balance sheet.
Bankers say that mortgage lenders, such as Paragon, Alliance & Leicester and Bradford & Bingley, could also be teetering on the brink soon if they cannot raise enough money in the markets to continue to lend to customers. All the banks have denied that they are facing a cash crunch and each has said that its liquidity position is strong. Nonetheless, the speculation continues to mount. Alan Schwartz, the Bear Stearns chief executive, reiterated that stance yesterday after Punk Ziegel analysts gave warning that the bank could be forced to seek a merger partner.
“We don't see any pressure on our liquidity, let alone a liquidity crisis,” Mr Schwartz told CNBC yesterday. He said that Bear had finished fiscal 2007 with $17 billion of cash sitting as a“liquidity cushion”. He added: “That cushion has been virtually unchanged. We're in constant dialogue with all the major dealers, and I have not been made aware of anybody not taking our credit.”
Yet banking sources said yesterday that a collapse seemed inevitable. One senior banker in London said: “Someone will go under in this crisis, that's for sure. The question is whether they stay under or get rescued. Let's see whether this latest round of stabilisation helps, but if it doesn't, it's difficult to see what Plan B is. The Fed can't just keep on printing money.”
One problem with the credit crunch is that banks' solvency positions can change overnight. As banks force firesales of assets to recover their loans from hedge funds, the prices of those assets fall. But as the prices fall, the amount of capital that the banks need rises. Lena Komileva, a Tullett Prebon economist, said: “This is what is fuelling the vicious cycle. Things can deteriorate very rapidly and banks can reach insolvency almost overnight.”
Ms Komileva said it was clear that the Fed was reacting to address a “specific counterparty risk”, although she declined to comment on which bank might be in trouble. She said: “The speed and severity of their action appeared disproportionate to what had actually happened, so, consequently, it seems the Fed really reacted to prevent a Northern Rock-style problem in the US.”
She said that the Fed's moves amounted to window-dressing. “All the signs of stress that were there before are still here,” she said.


You can say what you like Perspective but what is happening seems to have been lost on you and those other donkeys!

[american_psycho]

"Property investor and author Olly Newland believes an oversupply of cheap apartments will cause a crash, and predicted some investors would have to walk away from their deposits." June 2004

Listen to that bit of advice and you miss out on 3.5 years of property gains.

Listen to that bit of advice and you have to fork out at least $250,00 more for a nice house in a nice suburb in Auckland.

To the original poster, I have criticised O Newland in another post about his theory of diversified investing but in his defense, the quote you are referencing does seem to refer to apartments... a subsector of the housing market that has indeed crashed, quite publicly, assisting the demise of a number of finance companies.

[67910241]

dear total Newbie

Very revealing post from this poser - written like the true expert that you obviously think you are - like Olly Newland?

I have made no recommendation but you obviously have one?

It would be folly for anyone to buy a property now as there will properties coming to the market from distressed sellers. You wait.

But crash as was predicted by Olly Newland in June 2004? Not whilst there's full employment, a commodity boom underway, tourists flocking into Australasia from the Asian countries (from their economic boom) and Australia taking any redundant NZers with their labor shortage.

If you took your time to read Olly's book, you'd full well know he never said "when". I don't have the book right next to me, but I remember he said it could start another day, month or year. What he did describe is a long list of symptoms that would point to an inevitable (or nearly inevitable) slump under way. Relatively few of them were present in late 2004 when the book came out. Almost all are present right now. Does that make it bad reading? I don't think so.

If you took more time to read the posts here, you'd also know I asked Olly why he published the book as early as he did. He responded simply that "he'd rather have it out too early than too late". It may be his generic response to this question, but I still find it hard to fault.

I studied his book as it was, a manual from a person far more experienced than I am and reasonably entertaining reading material, not a prophesy. Try taking the dates from the Bible literally and you become a fundamentalist. That doesn't make the Bible anything close to valueless does it? And lets not forget, Olly did not mention any specific dates in there.

You can regret we are such a small country that someone as "unimpressive" Olly becomes our biggest RE Guru. But that doesn't change the fact that's who he is.

[67910241]

You can regret we are such a small country that someone as "unimpressive" Olly becomes our biggest RE Guru. But that doesn't change the fact that's who he is.

My apologies to Sir Bob Jones and several others whose articles are "not bad either", as Bridget Jones would put it.

[perspective]

You made no recommendation because you're a sissy preferring to criticise others instead of offering something useful of your own.

If you took your time to read Olly's book, you'd full well know he never said "when". I don't have the book right next to me, but I remember he said it could start another day, month or year. What he did describe is a long list of symptoms that would point to an inevitable (or nearly inevitable) slump under way. Relatively few of them were present in late 2004 when the book came out. Almost all are present right now. Does that make it bad reading? I don't think so.

No - he was very specific. "We're in choppy waters, the peak has passed and there's conflicting advice," he said in Auckland yesterday of the market for residential and investment property. He said yesterday that his book's predictions were all coming true. Even before many others noticed a change, he said, he penned a checklist of what to watch out for when the market was turning."

If you took more time to read the posts here, you'd also know I asked Olly why he published the book as early as he did. He responded simply that "he'd rather have it out too early than too late". It may be his generic response to this question, but I still find it hard to fault.

I studied his book as it was, a manual from a person far more experienced than I am and reasonably entertaining reading material, not a prophesy. Try taking the dates from the Bible literally and you become a fundamentalist. That doesn't make the Bible anything close to valueless does it? And lets not forget, Olly did not mention any specific dates in there.

So someone who keep saying it is going to rain and the rain came 3.5 years later is correct? A 4 year old child can make the same prediction.

You can regret we are such a small country that someone as "unimpressive" Olly becomes our biggest RE Guru. But that doesn't change the fact that's who he is. To people like you Olly is obviously a RE guru - so follow him by all means. In the land of the blind, a one-eyed man is king.

I repeat what I wrote before so you cannot miss it - "It would be folly for anyone to buy a property now as there will properties coming to the market from distressed sellers. You wait."

[SuperDad]

Prediction!

I have a prediction.

There is a full moon on the way.

You know that there is a full moon on the way when the likes of persective come out of the woodwork.

Paul.