Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Reply
On China And The End Of The Commodity Super-Cycle; From ZeroHedge
Topic Started: 7 Mar 2012, 11:46 AM (5,088 Views)
Admin
Member Avatar
Administrator

Quote:
 
Why China Is Going Into A Hard Landing This Year

Patrick Chovanec, An American Perspective From China | Mar. 25, 2012, 8:42 AM | 1,904 | 10

This Thursday, March 22, The Guardian (of the UK) published a friendly email “debate” between Andrew Batson, of Gavekal Dragonomics, and me over whether China’s economy faces a “hard landing” in 2012 — with me arguing that it does, and Andrew that it doesn’t. You can read our exchange below, or access the original here.

Should China be bracing itself for a hard landing?

The China bears grow ever gloomier, while the bulls maintain their confidence. So will the world’s second largest economy see a hard landing in 2012 or can its leaders steer a steady course? Patrick Chovanec of Tsinghua University and Andrew Batson of Beijing-based consultancy Gavekal-Dragonomics debate.

Dear Andrew,

There really are two related but distinct things people have in mind when they talk about a “hard landing” for China. The first is a rapid deceleration of GDP growth – below, say, 7%. The second is some kind of financial crisis. I think we’re already seeing some signs of the first, and the second is a bigger risk than most people appreciate. For the past several years, most of China’s GDP growth has come from a massive investment boom fuelled by easy credit. Unless China sees a major increase in export demand – highly unlikely – or a huge shift towards domestic consumer spending – a lot easier said than done – the only way to hit 8-9% growth is to keep that investment boom going like gangbusters. The problem is, all that easy credit is generating bad debt and inflation.

The state banking system can brush bad debt under the rug, but the more bad debt gets rolled over, the less capital is available to fund new projects. The only way to keep the investment boom going is to dramatically expand credit. That would spark inflation and further distort the economy, which China’s leaders know they can’t do. They’ve painted themselves into a corner, and something has to give. Even though the money supply is expanding at a fairly generous rate it’s still not enough. That’s why real estate is collapsing and ambitious public works, like urban subways, are hobbled by lack of funds. Last year, out of China’s 9.2% real rate of GDP growth, five percentage points came from investment in fixed assets. If China builds all the roads, bridges, ports, airports, high-speed rail lines, condos, villas, etc this year that it built last year – an absolutely astounding amount of construction – but NO MORE, GDP growth would fall to just 4.2%. That’s a “hard landing” by anyone’s definition, and from what I can see, it’s already under way. Best, Patrick

Dear Patrick,

You are right to identify a crunch in investment as the main risk that could cause a sharp slowdown in GDP growth. It is true that about half of China’s economic output is investment, so if there is zero growth in investment then overall GDP growth will be cut sharply just as a matter of arithmetic.

The question is then whether investment growth in China is really going to go to zero, and here I do not think you have presented a convincing argument. Investment in China is not driven simply by the supply of loans from the state banking system, but also by the very strong demand for investment opportunities. China has an enormous urban housing shortage (on the order of 70m units), regional electricity shortages and one of the world’s most crowded railway systems – not to mention thousands of manufacturers busily automating to offset rising labour costs.

In short, there are plenty of things China can usefully invest in. Secondly, it is simply not true that investment is collapsing despite the best efforts of officials desperately trying to keep credit growth going. The investment cycle in China is clearly correcting after the huge stimulus in 2009-10: real growth in fixed asset investment slowed to 15% year-on-year in the last quarter of 2011, from a peak of over 40% growth in mid-2009. But this slowdown is happening precisely because the government is pulling back. The wave of new stimulus projects in 2009 was a one-time event that is not being repeated, and bank regulators have clamped down on credit growth because of worries about inflation and financial risk. Money supply growth has come down from a peak of nearly 30% year-on-year in mid-2009 to 12% in January 2011. In short, this looks to me like a cyclical downturn brought on by tighter monetary policy, and not a “hard landing” or crisis. Best, Andrew

Dear Andrew,

A developing country like China has plenty of things in which it could profitably invest. But I could name any number of countries, over the years, all at a lower development level than China, which nevertheless made wasteful investments and ended in trouble. We know already, from the collapse in the property market and the rising loan rollovers at banks, that many of the investments made over the past few years are not paying back. The last time China saw this kind of lending binge, in the 1990s, 35% of the loans ended up going bad. T

he problem isn’t China, it’s the inefficiency of its state-run banks and the state-run companies they lend to. I agree that some Chinese policymakers recognise this problem, and have tried to rein in runaway credit. But that led to two problems. First, the burden of tighter credit fell disproportionately on the private sector, the most productive part of the economy. Entrepreneurs paid exorbitant interest rates or got cut off entirely, while politically driven projects continued to get money on preferred terms.

Second, while Chinese regulators did succeed in reining in formal lending, banks and speculators – often working together – cooked up all kinds of ways around these constraints. Last year saw an explosion in off-the-books “shadow” banking, including the repackaging of questionable loans into risky investment products that were then marketed and sold to the general public. We’ve already seen people commit suicide or flee the country in a few cities, like Wenzhou, where this house of cards has taken a tumble, but the same practices are pervasive all across the country. There’s a greater risk of financial instability than most people realise. Best, Patrick

Dear Patrick,

Of course there are problems in the Chinese economy that need addressing. It is clearly true that China’s state-owned enterprises are less efficient than private-sector companies, and that private companies have real difficulty getting loans from the state banking system.

To the extent that China can fix this problem, it will only improve its prospects for future growth. While this inefficiency may well be a drag on China’s growth, is it such a burden that growth must come crashing to a halt this year? I think this is implausible. In the key industrial sector, corporate profit margins are now steady around 6%, the same level they have maintained for years. If Chinese companies were really burdened with lots of investments that “are not paying back,” shouldn’t they be losing money?

Similarly, housing sales are now falling mainly because the government has put in place policies that prevent many people from buying houses; this is hardly evidence that investments in housing are massively unprofitable. This does not mean there will not be bad loans resulting from the huge amount of stimulus lending. Clearly, China’s government has accepted some bad loans as a price it was willing to pay to keep growth going during the global financial crisis. (The “shadow” lending explosion took place in 2009 and 2010, and was curbed in 2011.) Banks and the government will have to work off the burden of these bad debts in coming years. All this is a good reason to expect China’s growth rate to be lower in the next few years than in the past few years. It is not a good reason to expect growth to collapse right now. Best, Andrew

Dear Andrew,

We both agree that China’s high rates of GDP growth, these past few years, have been mainly due to an investment boom and that an abrupt end to that boom could spell a sharp slowdown. We agree that the big surge in lending that propelled this boom has created a bad debt burden for banks. We also agree that Chinese regulators have now (as you put it) “clamped down on credit growth” and that investment growth has fallen off as a result. But while you see this as a deft (and ultimately successful) balancing act by Chinese policymakers, I see it more as a wild juggling act, an increasingly desperate effort to keep way too many balls in the air at once.

Real estate is a prime example. You credit the recent fall in the market to the government’s restrictions on multiple home purchases. If only it were that simple. Those curbs were put into place nearly two years ago and to the extent they worked at all, merely shifted speculative attention to (unrestricted) second and third tier cities. Developers kept expanding investment by 30% a year, piling up nearly a year’s worth of unsold inventory, confident that the government needed them – and would ultimately support them – to maintain growth. In the meantime, the central bank was reining in credit to counter rising inflation, including spiralling home prices. When developers finally ran out of financing options, they had to start dumping their unsold inventories to raise cash – and the market tanked.

Drop one ball and others follow. Land sales – which local governments are relying on to fund basic services, as well as repay their stimulus bank loans – are at a standstill, and some analysts expect private housing starts to fall by 20% this year. I wouldn’t take too much comfort in the reported profits of Chinese firms. Lehman, Bear Stearns, and AIG – not to mention Fannie and Freddie – were all rolling in profits as long as credit was cheap and property prices were rising. That’s the nature of boom/bust cycles: it’s easy to make money when they’re printing it, and nobody’s pressing to be paid back. But as Warren Buffett says, “It’s only when the tide goes out that you learn who’s been swimming naked.” Chinese companies I’ve been talking to, across many different industries, say they’ll count themselves lucky if they can just match last year’s sales in 2012. Sounds to me like the tide’s going out – and I’m betting there are a lot of folks in China who figured they’d never need a swimsuit. Best, Patrick

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-china-is-going-into-a-hard-landing-this-year-2012-3#ixzz1qASsY0PB
Follow OzPropertyForum on Twitter | Like APF on Facebook | Circle APF on Google+
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Pig Iron
Member Avatar
Bogan scum

Hi all,

I've watched this forum for a while now, but I just have to comment on this thread.
On this forum you have 2 very distinct competing sides - those that want a property crash so their dream of buying a house on the beach or over looking sydney harbor for a $200k can come true. These people typically lap up everything steve keen says, and don't own a house themselves and are always deluding themselves that they can pick the bottom of the market (the bottom is defined by some price point that suits them).
The other side is people who are invested in property, who believe recovery is just around the corner and that prices will go up on anything. they typically made a mint on the last boom and think they can do it again.

something both sides have in common is their predictions all revolve about the commodities boom. unfortunately from reading this and other threads, you all seem to have sweet f*ck all idea on how the mining industry works. I'll break it down for you in simple terms.

1. when investment is announced, expect 5 - 10years of delay before that money actually gets turned on. so that 124bil that wayne swan crows about all the time isn't going to do him any good - he'll be voted out before he see's a cent of it. like wise you haven't actually seen the real post GFC boom, companys are still getting their ducks in a row.
2. while commodity prices are fickle, companys usually have longer term supply contracts that don't actually follow these daily spot prices, so they are not as affected as some of you like to make out. The big boys like rio and bhp are a perfect example.
3. I noticed people comparing china to japan and talking about china running on debt fueled expansion - this is just pure bullshit. china has a massive stockpile of cash and other goodies to fuel their expansion, they are the ones lending money to other people not other way around. china's demand will slow it's true, but there are many other players demanding a huge range of resources that australia has, in fact china's own domestic demand alone will keep australia riding high.

My take on it is that you haven't seen the boom yet, however you have longer to wait than the so called bulls expect. people got a reality check on housing in recent years. this is nothing new or even dramatic. whatever you do don't listen to realestate groups or steve keen, they are just grinding their own axes and giving you nothing informative.

My personal situation is owning my own house and looking for tax advantages like negative gearing. I haven't moved on negative gearing yet as i still believe there is more capital to lose and NG doesn't make you money when capital is moving at a loss.
I expect i'll never pick the bottom and end up buying 6 months after things pickup. whinging about people over extending is pointless, there will always been expensive property to buy and idiots willing to buy it even when they can't really afford it. I purchased my house on a large mining income yet i still only pay 17% of my income on repayments, i simply purchased well within my means. the point is that people over extending is not a problem that developed from the mining boom.

So when do i think it'll pickup? not until the next generation comes into the market, too young to really grasp the GFC so they won't have the same jaded opinions. looking at 5 years for that though, so in the mean time i'll take whatever drops happen safe knowing I can easily ride it out even on a lower income.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
newjez
Member Avatar


The mining industry is wierd. I saw a gold mining company go bust once because the price of gold had increased. How weird is that.
Whenever you have an argument with someone, there comes a moment where you must ask yourself, whatever your political persuasion, 'am I the Nazi?'
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Rastus2
Member Avatar


newjez
27 Mar 2012, 05:54 AM
The mining industry is wierd. I saw a gold mining company go bust once because the price of gold had increased. How weird is that.
which one ?

I suspect there were other factors at play which meant the company was unviable.
Shadow - Defrauded his Bank ? 2015 I have 9 different loans and my bank had no idea which ones were personal and which were investment. They had half of them classed incorrectly. When this change came in they asked me to tell them if any personal loans were incorrectly classed as investment, which I did, and they switched them to personal for the lower rate. They also had a couple of investment loans incorrectly classed as personal. They didn't ask me about those. So they stay on the lower rate too. Worked out pretty well. :)
Shadow - 2008 Sydney Median House Price 1.25M by 2014-2015

Shadow : I think this boom has already begun in several cities. My prediction :
Peak of boom: 2014-2015. Sydney Median Price: $1,250,000 Bottom of bust: 2017-2018. Sydney Median Price: $1,100,000

Shadow's Original 2010 House Boom and Crash prediction http://s836.photobucket.com/user/rastus22/media/shady-orig-2010-chart.png.html?sort=3&o=0

Shadow's attempt to edit his 2010 chart in 2015 and replace it with one that does not show a crash in 2013 http://s836.photobucket.com/user/rastus22/media/Screen%20Shot%202015-06-06%20at%207.12.52%20pm_1.png.html
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Admin
Member Avatar
Administrator

Quote:
 
Even a soft landing will put squeeze on miners

March 27, 2012

The good news: China's government will engineer a soft landing. The bad news: even a soft landing is painful for industries that have become dependent on the world's fastest-growing economy as their main profit engine.

Analysts at Deutsche Bank, Nomura and Daiwa Capital raised forecasts this month for 2012 expansion to as high as 8.6 per cent, partly on expectation of looser monetary policy. The projections, still below last year's 9.2 per cent rate, offer little comfort for Australian mining company BHP Billiton, seeing slower steel production in China, or German auto maker Daimler, whose Mercedes dealers in the nation are offering record discounts.

"China's still going to be growing reasonably strongly," said Nicholas Lardy, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington. Even so, "the super commodity cycle that was driven by China is moderating, and exporters that have ridden the property boom over the last four or five years face a much tougher time".

Premier Wen Jiabao's curbs on property sales and his plan to tilt the economy towards consumption and away from a dependence on capital spending have reduced production of steel and cement and helped push iron-ore prices down more than 20 per cent from last year's high. At the same time, policy makers are ready to take any action necessary to avert a steep deceleration in a year when the Communist Party is hoping for a stable leadership transition, said Tim Condon of ING Financial Markets.

"The idea that commodities are just a one-way bet as an asset class is over," he said. "My view is that China will still do whatever it takes to keep growth going. If it slows too much, they will stimulate."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/even-a-soft-landing-will-put-squeeze-on-miners-20120326-1vuq6.html#ixzz1qGNCQuRI
Follow OzPropertyForum on Twitter | Like APF on Facebook | Circle APF on Google+
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Andrew
Default APF Avatar


I can't believe the CCP won't do everything in its power to support the economy of Perth. That is their primary goal, after all.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
newjez
Member Avatar


Rastus2
27 Mar 2012, 08:00 AM
which one ?

I suspect there were other factors at play which meant the company was unviable.
I'll have to dig it up Ras - it was a few years ago and it was African based. I was heavily invested in gold mining companies at the time, but you have to be careful, as some of them hedge by forward sell most of the stuff in the ground. The rising gold price forced the company to breach it's banking covenants. I didn't fully understand it at the time. I'll see if I can dig it up tonight.
Whenever you have an argument with someone, there comes a moment where you must ask yourself, whatever your political persuasion, 'am I the Nazi?'
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Admin
Member Avatar
Administrator

Quote:
 
The contemporary China resources boom

Ross Garnaut

Commodity prices are formed by the interaction of global economic growth and costs of expanding supply of commodities. They tend to be high for long periods when global average growth rates are high, and low for long periods when growth rates are low, and to fluctuate around these averages as short term demand departs from expectations. The growth of advanced developing countries is especially influential in determining global demand for resources. Exceptional growth and resource intensity of China have been the main determinants of high energy and metals prices since about 2003. Short term cyclical factors have pushed energy and metal prices higher still, because markets did not anticipate the strength of Chinese demand and supply takes time to catch up. The high resource intensity of Chinese growth has been the result of high investment rates and rapid increases in urban population and the export share of production. Strong growth is likely to continue although at slowly receding rates, but growth will become less resource intensive, leading to moderation of global commodity prices. Strong growth in China and the world are at risk if effective policies are not adopted to break the nexus between economic growth and pressure on the environment.

Australia is currently experiencing a resources boom of historical dimensions. Its immediate cause is sustained rapid resource-intensive growth in China. Australia’s terms of trade have reached heights unknown on a sustained basis in the historical record. Australian exports are now (although in the 21st century decreasingly) more diversified away from commodities than they were through most of its history, so relative prices of commodities had to move higher than in earlier times to take overall terms of trade above peak levels in the late nineteenth and most of the 20th century.

After several years in which investment in expanding supply capacity lagged behind the lift in prices, the rates of growth of investment in the resources sector have been rising strongly since about 2005. Since the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, resources have been overwhelmingly the main contributor to exceptional growth in Australian business investment in general. Minerals and energy production and investment together are now larger relative to other sectors in the Australian economy than at any time since Federation.

The rising and eventually exceptionally high terms of trade kept Australian incomes and public revenue growth well above the rate of expansion of production for several years from 2003 to 2008. Commodity prices receded temporarily with the Global Financial Crisis. Since then, the growth of public revenues has been moderated by the effects of the exceptionally large capital expenditure in resources on deductions against income and resource rent taxes.

The rising terms of trade from 2003 allowed Australia to avoid what would have been a painful and probably recessionary end to a virulent early 21st century housing and consumption boom. The high rates of business investment in the resources sector have been a major factor in the strong economic growth performance of Australia relative to other developed countries in the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis.

The resources boom has shifted the centre of gravity of national economic growth decisively to western and northern regions. This has challenged longstanding assumptions of Federal fiscal relations, which had been calibrated to redistribute public revenues from Victoria and New South Wales to the smaller states and the two territories.

The resources boom is global and not only national and so is changing fundamentally the environment for Australian international relations. Amongst our immediate neighbours, in Papua New Guinea, the China boom has provided the foundations from which the public finances have been rebuilt, economic stability restored and strong economic growth established after a decade of stagnation. Growth has been assisted in several Southeast Asian economies – although for a while less powerfully than might have been expected in Indonesia, as it grappled with the implications of the political decentralisation that accompanied the transition to democratic government at the beginning of the new century. Economic growth has been enhanced in Brazil, Chile and other resource-rich economies in Latin America (although not Mexico), which emerged from periods of difficulty in the 1990s into better economic times. Chinese investment and demand is incubating new projects and industries through many countries in Central Asia, the Middle East, Latin America and Africa. In Africa, a buoyant resources sector has been one element of a marked lift in economic growth trajectories in the early 21st century in all countries that are not experiencing high levels of political disorder. The boost from the new international resources environment has supported Russian economic performance and self-confidence, with implications running through domestic and international political arrangements. It has expanded the economic power of oil exporting countries in the Middle East.

For all of these reasons of national economic change and international relations, it is of great importance to Australian national policy to understand the origins and dynamics of the resources boom, its future dimensions, and its likely longevity and stability.

This paper focuses on the central cause of these changes rather than the wide-ranging implications. It begins with analysis of the economics of price determination in the resources sector. It examines the recent increases in prices for energy and metals and their origins in exceptional growth in Chinese demand. It shows that without China’s contribution, there may have been no growth in demand for many mineral resource products in the second half of the first decade of the 21st century. The paper examines the sources of especially strong growth of Chinese demand for resources. It discusses the prospects for continued growth and structural change in China, and how this will interact with wider developments in global supply and demand for resources to determine the longevity of the current Australian and global resources boom. In assessing possible future developments, the paper illustrates some possibilities from the experience of rapid economic growth in other Northeast Asian countries at earlier times, while noting differences between economies. It also analyses the implications for resources demand and prices of prospective structural change as China moves through the ‘turning point’ in economic development in which labour becomes relatively scarce and expensive (Lewis 1954; Ranis and Fei 1961, 1963; Minami 1973).

Read more: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2012.00581.x/full
Follow OzPropertyForum on Twitter | Like APF on Facebook | Circle APF on Google+
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
BubbleBoy
Member Avatar


Alex Barton
3 May 2012, 04:21 PM

The contemporary China resources boom

Ross Garnaut
The high resource intensity of Chinese growth has been the result of high investment rates and rapid increases in urban population and the export share of production. Strong growth is likely to continue although at slowly receding rates, but growth will become less resource intensive, leading to moderation of global commodity prices. Strong growth in China and the world are at risk if effective policies are not adopted to break the nexus between economic growth and pressure on the environment.
But Strindberg told us that as long as Chinese GDP doesn't go down - which includes a zero and low growth scenario - commodity demand will remain the same?

Who is right?????????????????????????????????????
Edited by BubbleBoy, 3 May 2012, 04:37 PM.
My name is based on a Seinfeld character, not on a belief of a housing bubble.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
newjez
Member Avatar


BubbleBoy
3 May 2012, 04:35 PM
But Strindberg told us that as long as Chinese GDP doesn't go down - which includes a zero and low growth scenario - commodity demand will remain the same?

Who is right?????????????????????????????????????
Who would you put your money on?

As China's economy shifts, commodity demand will reduce, (albeit more if the rate of growth also slows). As Supply of commodities increases, commodity prices, and the Oz dollar, will fall. By how much and over what time frame are the only variables we need worry about.
Whenever you have an argument with someone, there comes a moment where you must ask yourself, whatever your political persuasion, 'am I the Nazi?'
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Australian Property Forum · Next Topic »
Reply



Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.

Forum Rules: The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.

Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.

Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.

This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.

For more information go to Limitations on Exclusive Rights: Fair Use

Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ

Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy